Just to let everyone know, that NISVS study that MRAs use all the time. The one that they usually pull out in low quality jpg form. The one that they claim proves women are raping men as often as men rape women.
The numbers in those charts represent lifetime victimization of men, and yearly victimization of women.
So if you were wondering why that study has rates of male rape several times higher than any other study: now you know.
Now, none of this changes anything on an individual level. All survivors, of any gender, deserve the full support of their communities. Consent education, when done right, discusses how people of any gender can rape or be rapes.
However, this false equivalence does harm. By ignoring the way societal power dynamics, sexism, and patriarchy make rape a gendered issue, MRAs disguise the root of the problem and hinder a solution to that problem.
That’s the male “forced penetration” stat, which the report defines as rape. Women have a limited ability to penetrate men.
The stat you’re looking for is the “made to penetrate” stat, which is almost identical to the female forced penetration stat.
But believe whatever your feels say.
What are Men’s Rights Activists trying to accomplish by insisting that women frequently lie about being raped? Do they want every woman who reports rape to be accused of lying, even if she’s just talking about it on a blog and not reporting it to the police? THAT ALREADY HAPPENS!
Some people believe in things for reasons besides that they serve an ideological end.
Tumblr feminists like to complain about “all the MRAs” in their tags, which is pretty indicative of the whole feminist mentality. If you scroll down the feminism tag it’s rare to see anyone who disagrees with it, maybe 1 or 2% of the posts. Perhaps some of the less popular tags have a greater proportion of negative posts.
Now, when you look at any MRA tag, they’re all full of feminists lashing out at fedora-wearing nice guys. But of course, they don’t consider that a problem at all.
Feminists are good at forgetting they believe that people can be bigoted against their own sex when they try to address misandry. There, they treat it as some sort of devastating response to point out that the supposed perpetrators are men.
Of course, the idea that a gender can victimize anyone is silly. Sexism is the result of social, evolutionary, and environmental forces.
I may be a woman, but I have misogynistic thoughts at times. I stop myself and go, “Damn, did I just think that?” I’ve come to realize that those thoughts are a product of how I was raised and what society has instilled in me.
Sometimes, I don’t even realize my thoughts are misogynistic, either.
For example: I used to disagree with Kristen Stewart’s seeming refusal to smile in pictures. Then someone brought up the point that not all male celebrities smile in photos - no one gets mad at them - and just because Kristen is a woman, that’s no reason on why she must smile. Why is it so bad that she doesn’t smile? Because society has taught us women “should be” approachable, friendly, pretty, and amiable. By not smiling, she’s not being what society deems women should present themselves as.
So, just because you’re a woman doesn’t mean you can’t be misogynistic. Just remember that.
Yeah, nobody expects men to smile. Certainly during my upbringing I was never bothered about how I don’t like to smile unless I find something funny.
What you’re referring to here is the normal expectation for people to smile in pictures, which has been “problematized” to only relate to women. Your feminist subculture has raised you to do so well.
Using the word cracker is never a slur in any context, but using the word stupid is in every context. Truthfully, this word has disenfranchised untold millions.
Paul Wesselman (via jimmynovakancy)
Yeah, that’s why you can remember hearing the word cunt on television.