Not in my world, I've been seriously threatened with physical violence and weapons... and have threatened.

I've never been in a situation where another woman did the equivalent of telling a rape joke, or otherwise discounting consent -

I think the closest equivalent I can recall is: being in a situation where a co-worker/sometime friend talked about guys she had dated or was interested in, in a worryingly mechanistic way. She used men for what she could get out of them, and knew exactly how desirable she was. I recall being a little uncomfortable but she was older than me. I'd never have felt comfortable saying anything.*




* I have witnessed raucous women on a hen night being way too handsy with bar staff and waiters. I wasn't myself part of any of those groups so I wasn't in the position of having to laugh along.

Thank you for your candor.

There's plenty of women who engage in sexual misconduct like having sex with a man to get a job, promotion, living beyond their means. Plenty of them brag about it, like how they have that person wrapped around their little finger.

I haven't seen where it's any more likely that "good" women will get involved in deterring bad sexual behavior by other women anymore than "good" men will with other men.

It's all sexual misconduct. It's just more likely to be nonconsensual when men engage in sexual misconduct and consensual when women do it. It seems that when a discussion on sexual misconduct comes up, women mostly think in terms of nonconsensual behavior or harassment. The consensual sexual misconduct, like women leading men on to take advantage of them, seems to fall by the wayside for "good" women; unless, it's the "good" woman's man that's being led on by another woman.

Well now, I remember a male boss of mine telling me that when he was a teenager on a summer job at a chicken processing plant where all the factory employees were women, he got heckled, cat-called, harassed, felt threatened by the floor manager, and all the women were just cheering her on. He told me this in the context of harassment training we were undergoing, but I can certainly believe it to be true, and not to be an isolated incident.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Usually men have the power, which is the only reason men exercise it more frequently.

Former waiter at the bar/restaurant had a table full of 40-50ish yo fairly attractive ladies (cougars). The five of them ordered one of the bar specialties, the Cougar Tea. My boy brought out the drinks and said to them "Five Cougar Teas, I hope the irony here isn't lost on you ladies tonight.", with a big smile as he sat the drinks on the table.

He told me "The entire rest of the night was rewr." and made a pawing/clawing motion w/his hands. They were all over the guy. He said later on, "Y'know, that might could have been the best night of my life".:lol2:

Ya had to see the presentation and know the guy to get just how funny that story actually is.

I think that nails it.

#MeToo is now officially over. Sorry ladies.

Aziz Ansari is accused of sexual assault by a woman. A woman who got naked with him, gave him oral twice and allowed him to give her oral once, decided she didn't want to have actual sex and so it became awkward and she left.

https://babe.net/2018/01/13/aziz-ansari-28355

It was a bad, aggressive date with a woman who at first appeared to be into things and then had second thoughts. Now Ansari's career will be affected if not ruined -- or the entire movement will experience its backlash. Which one?

This is exactly what should not happen - awkward advances and misreading of "non-verbal cues" must not turn into assault after the fact when you decide it was a bad time when the guy couldn't read your goddamn mind.

(Also, sucking a guy's dick is a huge "non-verbal cue". If you say no, no, no, ok I'll suck your dick, you should assume that the previous no's are wiped out by proxy.)

This story discredits the entire movement. The ending should have been, sorry you had a bad time. Sex is like that. Human relationships are like that. It's awkward and there are weird pressures and feelings around it. But if no stayed no, you weren't assaulted and you really must STFU for the sake of all the women who actually were.

This is 100 percent bullshit.


UT, you're capable of much better thinking and argumentation. This reads like it was scraped from woman-hating comment thread. I am shocked you put your name to it.

I concede overreaction/overstatement. If the story gets more play it will start discrediting it going forward.

If people just say meh this happens, fine. If Ansari has no more career, serious implications.

Aziz Ansari's career swirling the bowl would not impact--well, anybody but him. Dude's not all that humorous.

I tried, and cannot imagine the woman that would suck his dick.

She was prolly sucking his wallet, and found out it didn't go all way down to the turtles.

I wonder when the movement will try to take down God for abuse of power after what he did to that poor virgin, Mary. We'll have to wait and see how many other women come forward to say that God did something similar to them. Maybe we'll find that theists have been paying out hush money. It'll be interesting to see if any Churches fire God.
:corn:

It didn't go the way it had played out in her head ahead of time, but needed her friends to validate it's was his fault and she'd been assaulted. She's hardly the first to cry rape after making bad decisions and regretting it.

Cite.

Show me where the woman say she was assaulted.

PRO TIP: ctrl+f gives you a search window to search for specific words on a page

Did you read UT's link or just climb or you high horse and charge the windmill? :eyebrow:

The New York Times has now weighed in, with an opinion piece entitled "Aziz Ansari Is Guilty. Of Not Being a Mind Reader."

Their writer used about the same level of overstatement as I did...

That's pretty rough. But a feminist wrote it, not me, so.

Oh yes, Barii Weiss, gets it! :thumb:

So now it's no longer the #MeToo movement; but, the #MeToo bandwagon.

Or perhaps it's #MeTooMaybe

#Me2BORNOT2B

#MeTooButNotYou

#MeTooLimited

Or maybe simply $MeToo.

$$Cash tag?

This is so depressing.

I can see where this is going. Millennial men stop asking women for drinks, they stop having actual experiences with women that they can learn from and grow from, so they get all their experience from watching pornos. They learn all the wrong lessons about sex from that porn, and it makes matters only worse. It's a negative feedback loop.

It was inevitable; all pendulums swing too far and then correct. I, for one, am glad to see that this one is correcting quickly, by women, and--it seems, though time will tell--gently, without a backlash against all the legitimate cases of harassment and assault.

What if the IRL gist of the 'movement' being publicized as having monolithic, prescriptive goals, is really just a simple idea, like, "please treat women with more respect"?

What if people are just saying: we should call attention to instances of women being disrespected, to raise awareness of how it happens, how it makes us feel, and H O P E F U L L Y to trigger an empathetic reaction, where people conclude "hey, we shouldn't do that"?

Wouldn't the Aziz Ansari story be a worthwhile example of disrespectful behavior? As a society, should we have 'more' or 'less' men behaving like that? Should we just 'not talk' about it?

My internal sense of ethical responsibility tells me, after reading the Aziz Ansari article, that this was really wrong and really disgusting, and honestly probably happens that way all the time, and, I wonder, does "technically illegal" constitute the only bar we require people to meet?

Gross, society. Do better.

well, the argument made by the NYT Opinion writer is that it is anti-feminist to say that women need that level of protection from awkward sexuality

and that a strong, empowered woman is what feminism should be shooting for, and that a strong woman can leave a situation that is uncomfortable, but not coercive, and feel 100% fine having done so

and if it happened would have no interest in trashing a person's entire career out of such an event

because that is also gross, insensitive behavior

If her description of the encounter is accurate that is way more than just an aggressive date - and a heck of a lot more than someone clumsily missing signals. He seems to have acted in a predatory manner with her - very manipulative behaviour.

her description of trying to physically move away from him across the room and him intercepting her - of her trying to give off non-verbal cues, because that is a very difficult situation to be in and knowing how to react in the moment is tricky - the potential threat of that situation because she doesn't know how far he is going to push this, but set against the other thought likely to occur at that moment, of 'am I over playing this, is this really a potential threat? Is this ok?' that sort of stuff puts you into a really strange head space where you can find yourself doing very strange and uncomfortable things because you don't want to offend that person - and where you don't want to act weird or because you just don't know what else to do - it's like a kind of freeze compliance - hard to explain.

Some men - and I know more than one - play on that. They specifically aimto get women into that headspace and then capitalise on it by, for example, demanding that the woman touch their cock, or take off their top - and the woman, often, finds themselves doing exactly what they've been told to do- without enthusiasm maybe, but somehow just doing it.

I've been on the other end of that little game - but it was a few years after before I really realised what that was and what it meant.

She doesn't sound like someone who was into it and then changed her mind. She went on a date with a guy who pushed her past where she was comfortable being and ignored every non-verbal and verbal cue that she was not up for that kind of date just now.

He applied and then withdrew pressure then applied again, breaking down her resistance - and attempting to push her into doing something he must have known she did not want.

As the article points out, this is not some clumsy teenager, this is a man in his mid 30s who has built a comedy and writing career out of understanding romantic communication between men and women.

Unlike the 22 year old he tried to pressure into having sex with him. And successfully pressured into oral sex

A few thoughts:

One of the difficulties in discussing this sort of stuff is that men and women generally have very different perspectives on it - there is a bunch of common ground that we all kind of accept and share an understanding - but then there are some tricky areas.

One of the things that strikes me whenever the question of motive and communication comes up, is that on paper the clumsy novice misreading signals or mis-communicating intent looks awfully similar to the intentional and manipulative attempts at coercion that border on a kind of assault. And so it looks really easy to confuse the two.

I think it is different when you're in it.

There is a side to some men that other men generally don't get to see. And because most of those other men don't really get to see it, what they get is a description of a way of behaving, or a set of actions in which they can see echoes of their own clumsy, youthful attempts at sex and communication. What they don't get to see are the eyes of that kind of man when he is doing that kind of stuff.

See, that is something that is generally only seen by women (or gay men) who encounter this kind of man. And most men who get told about this stuff are decent human beings who don't think the way that guy does and for all the much publicised locker room humour, have probably been exposed to much less of that way of thinking than your average woman has, by the time she hits her 25th birthday.

I've experienced youthful (and in one case not so youthful) clumsy fumblings and I've experienced predatory and coercive men. Fortunately not in great numbers.

It's hard to explain but I do think you know it when you see it. The lizard brain does not scream threat over inept fumbles. But that is a distinction that is very hard to pin down after.

That seems like a fair point of view. Of course, we could take the labels off this and stop caring whether it meets one person's criteria of feminism.

I think we agree there are two elements:
1) an empowered person being competent at defending their boundaries
2) an ethical person not putting others in a situation requiring them to do so

There is a central argument in my mind which states, if person #2 doesn't commit the initial offense, then person #1 would not be in the situation to require any kind of response.

It seems to me that it is wrong, gross, and piggish to gloss over person #2's actions and require person #1 to do anything at all to "fix" the situation that they didn't create. That's totally backwards. It makes more sense to simply address the problem--the behavior.

Doesn't a just society have standards of what is acceptable? Don't we judge people who don't meet them? Yes we do, and we should judge men who do this. That's how society works. If they are not "called out" for this, it means we don't care--we're okay with it.

Don't know whether this has already been posted and I missed it, but this is an excellent article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...b0106b7f65b346

I should probably add to what i said up there, that there is also no doubt a side of some women that other women don't generally get to see as well

Pressured - in both directions! Pressured her into receiving oral!

You know how you women always have pressure us guys into receiving oral. It's always a difficult argument to have with us, I know. We just don't like receiving. It makes us feel less sexy.

So that's part of where the thing goes off the track with us. Hard wiring. So to speak.

Mens and Wimmens Be Different!!

Well - I have only ever had a guy go down on me after I've been persuaded and I fucking hated it. Really not something I have ever wanted any guy to do ever.

Yes - but some of that difference may well be in how we grow up and how that forms our sexual selves and outlooks.

That article I posted a link to is really interesting on that score.

The article has a lot more to say and it's well worth a read

...said no man, ever.

Tim Gunn said it. But he's broadly asexual, not just anti-oral.

WTF !?! You just shattered my dreams, drove a stake through my heart. :mecry:

If God had not intended for man to eat pussy, he wouldn't have made it look like a taco.

Again that may be biological difference - or that men and women grow up with different signals and form different relationships with their bodies because of that. We develop different hang ups because we are subject to different assumptions and messages.

I'm sure there are plenty of women out there who do like it

Men and women are different. But, are we saying men just can't understand even the most basic things about women that they are literally blanketing the airwaves and news cycles with?? PLEASE RESPECT US, PLEASE TREAT US WITH RESPECT. And men are just like, "huh huh, I like it when my wiener gets touched and you should like the same things, with your own body--you should have the same boundaries we do, and if you don't, well DURR DUHRRR me brain not hear that." Come on, grow up.

The message of the #MeToo movement was "sexual abuse and workplace harassment will not longer go unreported." Saying it's about general "respect" is a serious dilution/broadening of that which is not good for the movement.

Ansari is a self-described feminist man, celebrates the #MeToo movement and is considered woke. He probably believed he was respecting her. He texted her the next day (unprovoked - hurr durrr neanderthal man would not text or call, and that would be seen as a sign of... disrespect) and he was surprised to find it didn't go well.

How do you allow someone to stick their fingers down your throat repeatedly against your will. Wouldn't you pretty much just close your mouth after the first time?

I've already rejected that premise. I reject the utter ƒuck out of the idea that we can't do better than discouraging things that are ALREADY ILLEGAL.

Like, really, in 2018, we can't make this a general goal? Too ambitious??

How do you keep sticking your fingers down someone's throat who is repeatedly letting you know they aren't into it? WHY would you?? Wouldn't you just NOT do that?? And if you did--wouldn't you be a piece of shit??

I heard that Ansari's career will be hurt because millennial women are a lot of his fan base and they don't like this story. Well guess what--millennials can *decide for themselves* that they *don't like someone's behavior* and they *don't like that person* It's. That. Simple.

Like, I'm sorry you're a creepy predator and people don't like creepy predators?? HaHa!! it doesn't work that way

I guess she wasn't very good a letting him know. I guess she isn't very good at shutting her mouth if she didn't want fingers or a dick in there... multiple times.

I'm thinking she didn't effectively let him know she didn't like it, or changed her mind after about liking it..... Or the whole thing was a set up to get DanaC to write another million words about feminism.

Why stop at women's respect? Let's go all the way and talk about respect for all. It's definitely not just a feminist issue! I've already talked about the male equivalent of sexual assault being physical assault. We've shared stories. We've shown it to be a massive problem. It would be great if we could convince people to stop physically assaulting males. It's something that is "ALREADY ILLEGAL" and we never even talk about it.

#MeToo I was physically assaulted so I am taking the tag for my OWN purposes.

What, is that offensive?

What, too general?

Wasn't the problem YOU PERSONALLY were hoping to address?

You ReJeCt the PrEmIsE?

I'm sure you now see, I don't get to do that, and you don't get to do that, because that is not how this works.

I think it is clear and obvious that there is a massive, longstanding, global deficit in the levels of basic human decency and respect that is paid to women--specifically, and I think it's clear and obvious that the issue currently has traction and visibility, so now is the time to press that advantage and discuss it to the maximum possible extent. All the rest is blah, blah, blah. This is what's happening.

Oh great slogan. Every man in the world can nod and say good idea, but that applies to someone else, someone in those shithole countries, or the ragheads, Commies, etc, certainly not me. Generalities only work on paper.

Seems like the only thing worse than generalities are specifics. Specifics are rebuttal fodder.

I think it is clear and obvious that there is a massive, longstanding, global deficit in the levels of basic human decency and respect period.

So why don't we make it about all assault?

This is sounding a lot like Black Lives Matter vs. All Lives Matter.

You're free to organize that.

What society is getting better at raising awareness of is what the victims of an injustice say are the issues they have with it, not what an unaffected person's opinion is of whether they're saying it wrong.

Nobody should stop you from organizing the thing that matters to you.

Everyone has a valid voice and experience, and if it resonates with other people, a 'support group' develops--this is an awesome thing happening, facilitated by technology. It's open to all.


There can also be a backlash. Sometimes retributive movements are conceived of to minimize other people's voices, rather than listening to them. Sometimes "all" is used to drown out an uncomfortable specific.

Mmm. Well #MeToo is hereby diluted in this thread, let's see how it goes in real life.

I noticed.. you're saying that broadening #metoo from "sexual assault" to "respecting women" would dilute the message, and I'm saying that broadening #metoo from "sexual assault" to "all assault" would dilute the message.

Whereas actually, as it's not about us, whatever either one of us thinks is academic at best.

that was my entire actual point ~ we are now on exactly the same page. i think

Well, this leads to the question that I suppose all of us realized was inevitable:

What do cross-cultural studies say about head?

Yeah, I think so.

Like, I guess, I hope you were being sarcastic --portraying a guy who wants to purposefully undermine a movement, with a counter "all" movement--and I took you literally?

It was a supposition, a common approach to debate

I would love it if people found out that the male[-ish] equivalent of sexual assault is plain old assault, but I don't dare think I could sway the #MeToo movement that way, and I don't really want to. It should be a new movement.

yes - a new movement. Men (and women) standing up and saying: let's stop the violence. Let's stop the appalling risk that most young men face at some point in their lives from, mainly, other men.

There are huge issues facing young men in particular. Suicide rates are tragically high - and so are injuries and deaths from violent assault.

But for these there are often a different set of dynamics involved than those at play in sexual misconduct It needs to be tackled but not necessarily in the same conversation .


We really need to stop treating this as a zero-sum game. And here's the thing - most women have men in their lives. Speak to any mum, sister or wife about the scourge of violence affecting men in our society and you will find they share your concern.


I actually do not see 'assault' as the male equivalent of sexual assault. Assault .... is assault. It affects both men and women - but men are more likely to suffer it than women (except in the home/ in the context of a relationship).

Sexual assault is sexual assault - it is suffered by men and women, but women are more likely to suffer it than men.

The triggers for violent assault are not necessarily the same as the triggers for sexual assault - they are often bourne of very different motivations and contexts.

I think Bruce made a really interesting point somewhere that - what marks most of these allegations of sexual misconduct is a power relationship, and since men are more often in a position of power over women than the other way around, men are the primary perpetrators. If more women were in positions of power or authority over men, we could well see an increase of women abusing that power in much the same way.

The primary distinction for me between the kinds of violent assault that many young men risk when they go out in the evening and the kind of assault women face sexually, is that one is brutal and impersonal while the other is much more intimate.

Setting aside stranger rape, and the masked man in the bushes, which are by far the rarest kinds of sexual assault, women are, in large numbers experiencing violence, threat, or simply a dehumanising form of predatory behaviour from men they are either intimate with, or economically subordinate to in some way.

Setting aside violence in the home, which is not the most common violence suffered by men, and which bears far more resemblance to the sexual assault/abuse/exploitation described above than to any other form of violence, men in large numbers experience violence, threat or intimidation from other men with whom they have neither an emotional connection nor economic relationship.

It is a disgrace that for many young men the streets are a dangerous place. It is also a disgrace that for many women the bedroom and boardroom are dangerous places.

They are two very different issues. They are not each other's gendered equivalent. And they impact differently. But they do overlap.

Here's the thing though - most violent assaults are carried out by men. Women assault men too, and other women, but most violent assaults, and certainly most serious violent assaults are carried out by men.

Most men who suffer violent assault suffer it at the hands of another man/men. Most men who suffer violent sexual assault or rape, suffer it at the hands of another man. Most women who suffer violent assault suffer it at the hands of a man, and most women who suffer sexual assault, suffer it at the hands of a man.

So - when women start kicking up a fuss about being abused by men, and a man says: yeah, but what about the violent assaults suffered by men? What is it exactly, that he wants to hear from women? That we care? Fuck yes, we care. My best friend and former partner, J, was beaten up by a gang of lads at a train station a few years ago. It was a horrible experience for him, it shook him to his core and everybody, me included was horrified. They were only in their teens. They'd been harrassing an elderly chap and J tried to intervene in a light and friendly tone and they just went fucking nuts.

That shit worries the hell out of me. It worries a lot of people.

Women saying to men 'please stop ignoring what we're saying and just assuming your needs outweigh any of ours up to and including bodily autonomy' is not the same thing as women saying 'we don't give a shit about any of the problems and risks faced by men'.