Self defense is rape culture?

Post Reply New Topic

So being upset at the way a man treats a woman is just feminist dogma? It is the derogatory tone in which you are using the word dogma that prompted my response.



Of course not. I am one. I fail to see what this has to do with the conversation.



^I also fail to understand what you are saying here. Perhaps you are incorrectly using the term "ad hominen?" Or perhaps you are misunderstanding me? All I am saying is that your particular phrase there does not cast you in a favorable light, and I did try to give you the benefit of the doubt that it was simply poor phrasing on your part.

I do apologize if I have offended you, as it was not my intent.



How exactly is this asking to be absolved? Perhaps I am not reading it correctly, but it seems to me that she is not looking for forgiveness. She is merely stating a reason for the behavior she is being criticized for, and being attacked for doing so.

I haven't weighed in on your posts here prior to this, but if you want my opinion, they are coming across as having a fairly antagonistic and dismissive attitude toward woman.

Now you're conflating the feelings that an individual may have felt with the way that person chose to react.

'You're teaching your sons bad examples of how to treat women' is straight out of the feminist handbook.



You require clarification?

Disagreeing with, criticising or even mocking feminism =/= sexism.

There's an incredibly hypocrisy that seems common to feminists, and you're demonstrating it here. When it suits your purpose, "feminism" is synonymous with "egalitarianism". It ceases to suit your purpose when you wish to derail legitimate criticism by pretending "feminism" is synonymous with "femaleness".

I'm not going to lecture you on the subject of intellectual dishonesty, but I most certainly will not tolerate it as an excuse for making false allegations against myself.



Put another way: "I didn't realise I was misinterpreting your expressed opinions in a self-serving way."

Not buying it.

For the record, I meant exactly what I posted. Explain how being critical of feminism "does not cast [me] in a favorable light".

What you posted constitutes ad hominem reasoning. I criticised the feminist ideology demonstrated in Riley's anecdote whereas you attacked my character. It's cute that you tried to dismiss it as a failing on my part to understand either yourself or the relatively simple concept of logical fallacies. Cute, but not an especially strong argument.



When one accuses someone of sexism, one cannot claim lack of intent.



She is justifying behaviour that has been criticised by misrepresenting it as something it is not.



Gender is not relevant to the discussion taking place. The same standard applies whether Riley is male or female - unless you believe men are not subject to harassment.

At no point in any of my posts have I antagonised anyone based on their gender, your opinion is built on spurious foundations. I'm sure you're aware that you are entitled to express your opinion here whatever I wish. I do firmly suggest, however, that you refrain from making unsubstantiated allegations against myself.

I DID NOT CHASE HIM DOWN THE STREET. I followed him from a bus stop to a tram stop which were not far away from eachother. Where he went I had to go through anyway.. and "harangue him"? Oh the poor guy..

FYI. Lecturing a creep on bad behaviour is not "feminist dogma". It is not "feminist dogma" if I have a problem with a random guy saying "Can I F- you."

Correct.

Suggesting that he is teaching his sons a bad example is feminist dogma.



You stated: "[I] followed him to a tram spot and he kept ignoring me."

So yes, you did chase him. As in you pursued him with the intent of catching him in order to harass him and subject him to your will.

Both of you were in the wrong. What he did was merely rude and obnoxious. What you did constitutes a criminal offence in most of the civilised world.

Thankyou. I was a bit stunned with this "absolved" crap.

I'm doing confessional now maybe? I don't know wtf he's on about "feminist dogma". So stepping off a bus and reacting to being abused is me being a feminist I guess. Or something.

I don't need to be absolved for anything as the guy was not a victim.

Actually the police said what he did was a criminal offense and that I didn't break the law. As for the guy being subject to my will.. he owed me an apology and I got one.

He was the victim of coercion and harassment - based purely on your own testimony.

Also, pretending there's only one possible meaning of the word "absolution" in order to dismiss it is exactly the kind of intellectual dishonesty I have come to expect from feminists.

You've both demonstrated textbook feminist behaviour in this thread. If it can't be shamed into shutting up, let's try mockery instead, right?

adifferentname. You obviously have a problem with women in general.

..my "testimony"? This aint a bloody court room. I shared an experience that was on topic and the responses have been illuminating. Your defense of a guy who randomly sexually degrades women just proves that yes we do live in a rape apologist culture.

Thankyou for this information and posting it with respect. I do agree with it and typically I would have had a more neutral response to the situation. I have had some training however the problem was the unexpected.. going from very passive daydreaming out the bus window to a very hostile environment as soon as I stepped off it. If I had've just been walking around and then come across it I probably would have been in a more vigilant state of mind and perhaps responded differently but I was startled. I will probably be more conscious of new surroundings from now on however.

Based on the fact that I criticised your actions as an individual and gave your words merit rather than dismissing you based on your genitalia?

Interesting conclusion.



FYI testimony can also mean "an assertion" or "an account presented as fact". Perhaps it was remiss of me to assume you would know that.



I referred to him as obnoxious and rude and stated implicitly that he was in the wrong. In what way does this constitute a defence? Are you basing this solely on the fact that I pointed out how you committed criminal acts against him? Is saying you were wrong the same as saying he was right? Should you be judged any differently to him simply because he's a man?

As for the bold text. This man did not rape you, nor did he attempt to rape you. If we're going to put obnoxiousness on the same level as rape, we're going to need a hell of a lot more prisons when feminist principles become law.

On a more serious note. I have never personally experienced sexual abuse, though I am intimately acquainted with the damage that predatory human beings can cause. One of my childhood friends was a victim of Robert Black. The perpetual misuse of the word rape (and worse) by feminists in pursuit of their goals is despicable. It s**ts all over people (both genders) who have been victims of rape (or indeed rape and murder). We do not live in a "rape culture", no matter how you define it.

No, I don't have a problem with women. What I have a problem with is irrational, illogical or inconsistent arguments that rely almost exclusively on fallacies or derogation. If you expect your views to be treated any differently just because you're a woman, well now that would be sexist.

How someone feels has a direct influence on instinct.



So when conservative Christians say the same thing they are really just feminists?



I said that the way you phrased your statements comes across as sexist.

Just so you know for the future, an ad hominem attack would have been something along the lines of me trying to discredit you in a way that has nothing to do with the subject at hand, so you are using the term incorrectly. So if I had said you have no right to speak because you flunked a chemistry class in college or because your great grandfather was in the KKK, that would have been an ad hominem attack. The fallacy in ad hominem is due to the irrelevant nature of the appeal made. Now why don't you go ahead and improperly call this statement a straw man (another phrase frequently used incorrectly in these forums).



So only you are allowed to criticize? My entire point was the way you are coming across. It was a statement that you seem to be fairly condescending toward women. Although at this point I am close to accusing you of sexism, because every post you make is worded in a way that makes it appear so.



And again, I was stating my opinion about the way your posts are coming across.



Because of your dismissive manner of someone's upsetting experience and constantly demeaning attitude toward feminists and feminism as an entire segment of the population worhty of insult.



And again, I was critical of your writing style, primarily, and posting to see if perhaps I was reading things wrong. But now I am beginning to be critical of your character (in regards to your attitude towards women, at least).



Take it how you want it. You demanded an apology, and this was a sincere one. If you were looking for contrition, you won't get from me based on the exchanges so far.



You may want to re-read your posts, and the posts of others as well. What you have been responding to was a WOMAN who was talking about being treated in an abhorrent way about a MAN in terms of the way women can be mistreated by men and her immediate reaction. The way you have addressed this is to primarily attack the actions of the woman reacting to harrasment, as well as to accuse her of being the one who should be punished and throwing in some very insulting things about feminism in general and largely ignoring the actions of the person who initiated the event. Which is why I started off by saying that you are coming across as sexist, and gave you the opportunity to clarify, which you took as a reason to attack feminism and feminists.

You most definitely are allowed to express your opinions, as am I, including my opinions about your character on subjects which are being discussed. And allegations of sexism would not be entirely unsubstantiated at this point, considering the broad stereotyping brush you choose paint every feminist with.

But does not inform the language one chooses to adopt. Remember, we're discussing the fact that she elected to lecture him on the "example you are setting your son", not the difference between rational and irrational decision making. Let's try to stay on point here.



False analogy. Conservative Christians do not preach a doctrine of rape culture.



No, you overtly stated that I had either phrased my statement poorly or was sexist.

"The statement "to harangue him in feminist dogma" is either poor phrasing or a bit sexist."
"All I am saying is that your particular phrase there does not cast you in a favorable light, and I did try to give you the benefit of the doubt that it was simply poor phrasing on your part. "



Just so you know, calling someone sexist is an attempt to discredit me in a way that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. As I have already said, this conversation and my contribution to it have nothing to do with gender. Just so you know, the discrediting based on personal attributes need not be overt - an implication is sufficient. Just so you know, this focus on whether or not you have committed a logical fallacy will not serve to distract from the fact that you claimed I was being sexist. Just so you know.



I believe we have addressed the irrelevant nature of the appeal in this case, no matter how much you wish to pretend it didn't happen.



I just found your strawman.



You are still conflating "feminism" with "femaleness". You are also making unsubstantiated claims. I invite you to demonstrate where I have been "condescending toward women". I invite you to further demonstrate that I have treated the posts of any individual in a different or derogatory manner based on anything but the content of their posts. Or is it that you think I should treat the views of women differently because of their gender? Is your bone here the fact that I have the audacity to approach women's posts through the same critical lens as I do men's posts?



Yes, it was quite clear that it is your opinion that I am sexist. There is nothing wrong with holding this opinion. The same cannot be said of expressing said opinion in the manner that you have.



Oh, you mean in a favourable light where feminists are concerned? You can be assured that I shall lose no sleep as a result of feminist ill-will. Fact: I am male and I do not identify as a feminist. The former is sufficient to damn me to the shit-coloured spotlight as far as feminists are concerned. The latter merely serves as a final nail.



You still don't seem to understand that feminist =/= woman. Despite being male. And a feminist. The irony astounds me, it truly does.



Expected, not demanded. My expectations were found wanting, however. Your non-apology apology did not come across as sincere.



Riley posted an anecdotal account of her interaction with another human being. Her account included the following:

Behaviours by individual A
An obnoxious request for sexual intercourse.

Behaviours by individual B
Pursuit of an individual for the purpose of confrontation.
Continued harassment of an individual despite that individual demonstrating a lack of desire to interact further.
A demand of subservience backed up with the threat of police involvement.

Were you to reverse the genders, my criticism of the actions of both individuals would remain the same. However, your preference is that the MAN be held fully accountable for his rude behaviour while the WOMAN be allowed a pass because it was hey, just instinct or whatever. Does the MAN get a pass if he posts on here and claims his response to a subjectively attractive member of the opposite sex was instinctive?

This does not constitute equality.



There were two separate events. "this middle aged man said "Can I f- you!" in a hostile voice and walked off"

According to her own anecdote, Riley initiated the second event. This was a mistake, no matter the cause.



Repeat after me: feminist does not mean woman. Feminists do not represent all women. Criticism of feminism is criticism of an idea and not a gender.

Because the alternative is that feminism itself is a sexist movement, and that couldn't possibly be right, could it?

Browbeating?? It's considered "browbeating a stranger" now if you stand up for yourself to let someone know that it's not okay for them to disrespect you the way they did? I don't see this as "browbeating" or "retaliating", I call it teaching someone something that their bloody parents obviously failed to do when they were a child.

RILEY, don't let anyone here tell you that you were in the wrong. Seriously.... It doesn't matter what "could have gone wrong". It sounds like you were in a public place with other people around and not in any real danger. It's not like you followed the guy down a dark alley or something. If no one ever stands up to people like that and lets them know that it's not okay to treat others that way, then those people will probably just continue to do so. Maybe that guy will continue to do so anyway, but at least you stood up for yourself and that's something to be proud of, imo.

Browbeating......jeez. That's so laughable and ridiculous. How dare anyone not be okay with being treated like they aren't a human being...

I still think women should have a right to arm her self or find a way to defend herself while at the same time teaching people not to rape. The latter is probably not going to always work which is why women should be able to protect themselves so they don't always have to be too scared to go somewhere.

That's terrible advice. If someone threatens you, or tries to violate your personal space, you push back. A molester won't stop just because you ignore him. If a man acts like an animal, treat him like one.

Stay proud and strong, Riley, you did a good thing.

Terrible according to whom? The entire professional self defense community would agree with my suggestion, as in the people that teach this stuff for a living; what are your qualifications for judging it?

Also, no one was talking about threats or molesters, reading carefully and/or honesty will save you a lot of trouble here.