why do feminists think we don't teach men not to rape?

Post Reply New Topic

We do. A lot. Every day of our lives. What's weird is that I've heard a lot of feminists repeat ask, "why do we always tell women how not to get raped, instead of telling men not to rape." Every college orientation presentation I've seen did BOTH. How can you notice one, without noticing the other? There's also these weird claims that teaching women how not to get raped is the MRA's side of the argument. MRAs want this type of college orientations to be done away with completely.

Well if the advice of how not to get raped involves, always dress modest and never wear anything revealing then yeah I could see that being problematic, because how you dress has no bearing...if someone says 'well she shouldn't have worn that' in response to finding out she was raped, then that is pretty much excusing sexual assault/rape.

If a rapist is looking for somewhere to stick his dick it doesn't matter what the potential victim is wearing. But I don't think most people take issue with advice like be careful if you go out late at night and stick to more lighted areas instead of like wandering dark alleyways, don't leave your drink unattended and things a person can do to help minimize the risk of getting in a situation they could be assaulted.

I also don't like the 'teach men not to rape' catch phrase, I mean it is important younger people learn about sexual assault and especially not to do it to each other. But 'teach men not to rape' seems to imply men who rape just don't know any better, which I think is a load of B.S...so yeah don't really get that one either.

Maybe because Rape-ublicans spend so much time fantasizing about rape that they just can't stop themselves from constantly talking about it.
The Republican Rape Advisory Chart

Or is it perhaps all of those who voted for Donald Trump with full knowledge of and despite his extensive and well-documented history of bragging about forcibly grabbing women by the crotch and forcibly kissing them with a Tic Tac (16, by last count), leering at 12 year olds; calling them "hot", sexualizing 1 year old infants; speculating about their breasts and legs, and of course repeatedly fantasizing about shagging his own daughter?

Or maybe it's how he endorsed Roy Moore?
Or how the Trump administration repealed campus sexual assault policy?

We live in a rape-friendly culture.
In 2016, there were 95,730 reported cases of rape (only 1/3 are ever reported). Meanwhile, law enforcement couldn't be bothered to process over 70,000 rape evidence kits; out of every 1,000 rapes, only 6 result in conviction. One in four women will be assaulted at some time in their life; one in five will be raped.
Clearly, college orientation pep talks encouraging men to act like gentlemen ISN'T f*****g WORKING!

https://www.census.gov/popclock/

So there are 160,000,000 women in the US, but only 100,000 are raped. Looks like only 1/1600 women are victims of rape.

that's still too much no matter how you look at it.

Being European, American culture freaks me out a bit... Here, we get to drink and have our first sexual encounters at a much younger age, so by the time we go to college, we have learned certain things. For example, that alcohol makes us do things we may regret.

As a 16 year old, a boy is much less capable of doing damage, and the social ties are much tighter.
I'll never understand why Americans think it's a good idea to have young people learn all that "unsupervised".

Even if one woman is raped, it's much worse than if no woman is raped.

I would be at the forefront of the movement to "teach men not to rape."

Your point being?

Still not anywhere close to 1/4 women.

Last edited by Aaendi on 06 Feb 2018, 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

By the time one woman is raped, she has probably raped over 100 men by then.

College orientations cover the concept of rape and consent because feminists and concerned women started raising the issue and parents began to worry about their daughters being raped at college and their sons being accused of rape at college and the colleges started to worry about liability. In the old days, men would often teach their sons how to be a gentleman, but this didn't explicitly talk about rape and sexual assault and what constitutes it, and men got a pass on a lot of sexual assaults and rapes.

There seems to be a willful ignorance to the notion that criminals are doing things knowing full well that they're wrong. If one treats every guy who never would have been a rapist as a potential rapist then all one does is proliferate rocky relationships, confuse both normal men and women on how to socialize, add men to the ranks of MGTOW, and the guys who were going to be rapists still end up raping.

I'm wondering why this same dialog isn't going on about giving men excessive and caring attention in teaching them not to car-jack, teaching them that arson is bad, or that murder ends lives and saddens relatives. That's something people really need to hold up next to this dialog.

As to why they want to do this? They clearly don't know what most men are morally about and, perhaps worse, may prefer not to for their own ends.

From the standpoint of the college, rapes and sexual assault happen on their campus and they will take the minimum amount of effort to absolve themselves of legal liability and convince parents the school is a safe place to send their children. The orientations I've seen are not about "teaching men not to rape" but teaching people to respect others and what does and does not constitute consent.

That being said, a shocking number of men, while they are not pathological rapists, do not understand what consent is and what constitutes rape or sexual assault and they do not understand when it is not ok for them to proceed sexually with another person. I've had men argue with me about what is and isn't rape and I didn't go looking for these men. They are sprinkled throughout the male population and are not rare by any means.

These talks prevent these men from committing rape and sexual assault by telling them what society will and will not tolerate of their behavior, even if they themselves don't agree. If you would like to see some examples of the type of men these ideas targets, scroll through the comments in this youtube video.

Raymond Gates rape confession

A girl in her late teens and a friend went to his house. He and the girl were both intoxicated but you can see from his recall that he wasn't particularly so. The girl gets naked in his bed and consents to sex. However before they begin, she revokes consent. He holds her down and continues anyway, which is rape, while the girl's "friend" live streams it. The girl is crying and telling him it hurts and to stop but he continues, pulling out momentarily only to penetrate her again and continue. Then when he is finished, he spoons the girl as she cries. That is not a detailed account but a summary. He was convicted based on the video the girl's "friend" live streamed which showed the rape.

Here are some comments to the video. You will notice that some of these commenters mistakenly think she consented and then said no once he was inside of her when she had revoked consent before he penetrated her, but it's irrelevant because if someone says stop and the person doesn't stop, the act becomes an assault at that point, morally, and in most states, legally. In fact it would have met the legal definition of rape in all states because he went back in without consent after he briefly pulled out. I apologize for being graphic but good men need to know how an "ordinary guy" becomes a rapist. It's because of mentalities like these below.



You will see that most of the comments under the video condemn him but those with the mentalities showcased above are not particularly rare.

There does not seem to be a particularly strong biological aversion to rape among humans as a species, as there is to, say, incest...this is apparent from historical texts and also possibly the "thigh gap" many females have. The aversion to rape on the part of men that we see seems to be a matter of individual personality (many men naturally don't like the idea of infringing on another person), and cultural attitudes concerning ideas on what entitles a man to sex, and how masculinity is defined, social conformity, and men's beliefs on how women signal they want sex, and their belief about what constitutes rape. One researcher who has researched the phenomena of rape (is a man, by the way) has pitched the controversial idea that men have a "rape switch". I'm sure many of you find that idea insulting, as you should. I'm not fond of the idea myself because I think it overgeneralizes and I do not like to think my male relatives could be capable of rape. I think it would be counter to who they are as people. But the theory was an attempt by this researcher to explain why mass rapes and gang rapes are so prominent in our history, and still occur today, and how seemingly normal men from varied walks off life often become perpetrators of these things when thrown together under pretense of war. A recently example of this is Mahmudiyah rape and killings These men were not come together of their own accord. It's not as if they were like zebras with a natural tendency to band together or who were even brought together at a watering hole. They were assembled by random chance via some remote military logistics office. What are the odds that the military would manage to assemble a group of six random men and have four of them be rapists and two of them of such character that they would be accessories to it? How prevalent would these men need to be in the general population of men for this to happen? The answer to that would make most people uncomfortable.

Last edited by Chronos on 06 Feb 2018, 9:46 pm, edited 3 times in total.

If there's any risk of mediation turning me this hyper-partisan I might need to stop.

TBH a bunch of 18 year old kids just shouldn't be thrown together with no adult supervision in this case. We might want to outlaw fraternal hazing and initiation, outlaw drinking on campuses, expel anyone whose caught drinking under 21, etc.. If that sounds like a terrible idea then we might have to consider that the license we grant college freshman and sophomores comes at a cost and if the cost comes at an unacceptable price revoke the license or however much licence brings down rape to whatever part per thousand or hundred thousand is deemed an acceptable compromise.

Is it possibly also due to "consent" being a concept that's changed or is changing?
I mean, there used to be a clearer understanding on both sides what used to be nonverbal consent, or implicit and so on. But due to widening cultural differences, people just don't understand each other that well anymore...?

That's campus-related. Not rape in general.
Please don't take this as apologist, but rather as a thought on the necessity of campus-education regarding what constitutes consent.