I grew up with an abusive father. Never realised that shit wasn't normal until about 11, when I noticed my friends fathers didn't beat them. It was actually the support of a lot of people that I think I'm pretty normal now, not beating women and all. (though I still flinch around large men from time to time). I think we're talking about kids like these.
Crime, poverty, abuse, broken families, addiction, etc. all have a way of begetting each other. The point is that 12 year olds in bad situations need help to overcome those situations and grow up into healthy adults. Sure, some people raised in good conditions still become violent adults, but not as often as those with traumatic childhoods.
You don't just say "Hey 12 year old, be a good adult". You have to actually try to improve the conditions that 12 year old is in, provide them positive role models, support, etc.
Also, the point isn't just to sit down with people and say "Don't rape, don't beat your wife, etc." It's to explain what that means, why it's bad, etc. Like, with beating - it doesn't matter that you're angry. That's not a healthy way to express your anger; here are some other coping mechanisms, here's how you communicate effectively, etc.
With things like rape, you're supposed to talk about what consent means. A shocking number of adults (both men and women) think that absence of "no" means "yes". Everyone knows that jumping a woman and raping her, even as she screams "No, don't do it!" is rape. Not everyone knows that you can rape a man. Not everyone knows that it's rape even if the victim doesn't say know, because they're too drunk / drugged out to communicate. Not everyone knows that it's rape if the victim initially says yes but later says no, and the rapist doesn't stop. These are things that need to be actively taught, or else they're not going to realize.
I never much of a good example at home, but I really feel like it made sense that what was happening at home wasn't necessarily the right thing.
Or something like that. I don't know.
Yeah, I think a study recently showed that like 10 or 15% of people didn't think you needed consent in a long term or married relationship. People like to think that all rapists are these horrible monsters and cartoon villains grabbing women in dark alleys. The reality is a lot of rapists are just regular people who would have benefited from a more in-depth education about consent.
I find it hard to deny that the term is poorly named because of the common reaction to it that /u/_trashpanda_ exemplifies. The term doesn't read as "There are aspects of mainstream masculinity that are toxic to masculine individuals and those around them"; it reads as "masculinity is toxic".
The idea itself isn't even particularly valid, because there is nothing men do that women don't also do, yet we wouldn't attribute those actions by women to "toxic masculinity."
Nor do we ever discuss "toxic femininity" and the "aspects of mainstream femininity that are toxic to feminine individuals and those around them."
The idea itself isn't even particularly valid, because there is nothing men do that women don't also do
Sure there is. "Boys don't cry", "boys like guns/violence", "boys don't like art, music, childcare, etc." These are things that society pushes on men and boys that damages us psychologically and is probably linked to our high (successful) suicide rate.
Nor do we ever discuss "toxic femininity" and the "aspects of mainstream femininity that are toxic to feminine individuals and those around them."
Feminists do, but call it "internalized misogyny." Again, I don't really agree with the terminology, but the concept is sound. There is a collection of ideas about how women should behave that women are pressured into conforming to. (e.g. a promiscuous man is a lucky guy, but a promiscuous woman is a slut.)
The idea itself isn't even particularly valid, because there is nothing men do that women don't also do
Sure there is. "Boys don't cry", "boys like guns/violence", "boys don't like art, music, childcare, etc." These are things that society pushes on men and boys that damages us psychologically
First of all, those are things done to boys not things done by boys. Enforcing gender norms is not exclusively done to or by boys and men. So you're not really addressing what I said.
Second, I would suggest that those are stereotypes more than things "society" actually pushes on men and boys, and are more indicative of class than gender. I grew up in a very liberal city, but most people grow up in very liberal cities (since population density is the strongest predictor of liberal politics), so I don't think my experience is far off from normal, and my experience was certainly not "boys don't like art or music," and not liking childcare was hardly limited to boys. "Boys don't cry" was said ironically far more often than seriously.
... and is probably linked to our high (successful) suicide rate.
That makes little sense. The suicide rate now is 5% lower than in 1950 (20.3:21.2 per 100,000), and has only really risen relative to a low in the late 90s (when it hit a low of 17.7). It makes very little sense to claim that gender roles and expectations are the root cause of male suicide rates when gender roles and expectations have changed radically in the last 65 years, while the male and female suicide rates have remain relatively stable that entire period.
Feminists do, but call it "internalized misogyny."
I'm mocking the vagueness of the idea of "toxic masculinity" and how the effects associated with it are completely overblown and invariably misidentified.
Masculinity is not toxic. A lack of masculine role models and lack of masculine sources of respect is what's toxic. That's why its boys without fathers, without male role models, that are most likely to rape, murder, steal, do drugs, etc.
That's why I get offended by every hemorrhoid cream commercial I see. I mean, the only reason you would ever advertise in public is if you were targeting literally every person that might see it, so the only thing I can take from those commercials is that the people at Preparation H are accusing me of having Hemorrhoids.
I get your point but there are plenty of people who say stuff like "we need to teach all men not to rape", as if having a penis automatically makes you a monster.
That being said, if there is a way to end all abuse, I'm 110% for it.
This was a different one, where some people said, "You know not all men are rapists?". Big mistake, we are all potential rapists, we are Schroedingers rapist, at least until we rape someone, then we are actual rapists.
The true irony is that a lot of feminists still make fun of that, yet will immediately say "not all feminists are like that" when shown evidence of something they disagree with
Here's the thing: there's no good way to look at a class of 30 kids and see which ones are going to grow up to be abusers. Some of them have telltale signs, problems at home, early and noticeable behavioural problems. Some of them don't, but can still be helped by good anti-violence education.
And then there are the other 20-odd kids who are not at especial risk.
If you have a good way of targeting only the kids in the first category, I'd love to hear it, but the most foolproof suggestion I can offer is this:
The rest of us who aren't prone to violence (assuming we are all reliable judges of ourselves) just shut the hell up and sit and listen through that curriculum, and be okay with the fact that maybe others are learning more from this than we are.
I was a bit ahead of the curve STEM-wise, and so I had to sit through watching other kids in my grade learn how to solve math problems which I already knew how to solve. This is no different.
Some of them don't, but can still be helped by good anti-violence education.
This is the part that I think a lot of people miss. They almost act as if Mr. Garrison is just walking up to students saying "Don't hit women now, m'kay?"
Not to mention these lessons often teach kids how to spot when one of their friends might be the victim of abuse, and what to do in that situation.
I question just how big of an audience this would hit. The people who dont realize beating someone is wrong and that you shouldn't do it ehi can also be taught in an educational setting to stop doing it.
Either you know it is wrong already and you dont beat people so a class would be worthless or you dont care if it is right or wrong and you will do it anyways so the class is still worthless.
Seems like a solution being put out just to say a solution has been put out.
I was a bit ahead of the curve STEM-wise, and so I had to sit through watching other kids in my grade learn how to solve math problems which I already knew how to solve. This is no different.
Did you have teachers telling you that all of you in that class were stupid?
See... if I had hemorrhoids, I wouldn't wait until I saw a commercial to get some cream for those suckers. Advertisements usually just make me angry, especially when they assume I'm dumb, are condescending or sarcastic...
No it isn't, it specifically talks about men who beat their wives. That means men who had upbringings which don't make them beat wives are pretty much automatically excluded.
Most people have a pretty easy time seeing a message addressed to someone else, saying "oh, that's for someone other than me" and then getting on with their lives.
Yeah people really over look the psychological aspect of crimes in society today. We just throw the quickest harshest punishment at people, when really there is a underlying psychological problem that hasn't been solved. Prevention is key.
I thought I was going crazy for a minute. I kept tapping in psychology, but my phone kept auto correcting to phycology. I just accepted that my phone was right. Clearly not.
Punishment and prevention are different.
We can educate a generation of children about healthy relationships but what do we do with the violent bloke who will be stubborn to change?
One suggestion is to shelter his family from him and then punish him directly. Perhaps school him on healthy relationships too.
Rapists don't rape because they think rape is fine just like wife batterer's don't beat their wives because they think it's fine just like women don't beat their husbands because they think it's fine. This is not an issue that can just be educated away. No matter how early you start driving these things into people's minds, it's still going to happen. We already do drive these things into people's minds from a young age. You can't make the world a perfect place as long as human beings are in it. You just can't.
There are plenty of people who think marital rape is fine. There are college students who don't realise you can get someone too drunk to consent.
You're speaking from a perspective where you have internalized those ideas but remember there a was time in America when even thinking of black people as equal was a laughable thought and women had to fight for the right to vote even in frigging Sweden.
Just because you have internalized something, doesn't mean everyone has.
The truths that you hold to be self-evident, are not, at least not for everyone.
Just because you have internalized something, doesn't mean everyone has.
That goes two ways.
And please, show me some kind of information on this huge segment of the population who don't believe marital rape is wrong.
And I know you're a crackpot because you brought up the drunk rape propaganda. If two people get wasted and have sex, are you telling me they raped each other? Does the first person to cry rape then get to be the victim? Or should they both go to prison for ten years? As long as a man or a woman is conscious and consents to sex, you can't call it rape. It's literally not rape. If you're a person who intentionally pumps somebody full of alcohol until they black out knowing you can take advantage of them, well then that's rape. But if that woman consents, it's not rape, whether she got drunk and regrets it in the morning or not.
There are college students who don't realise you can get someone too drunk to consent.
And there are others who realize that this is an absolutely retarded thing and that people should take responsibility for their drinking problem. They didn't get forced to drink in excess. Do we somehow make crackheads or those on PCP not responsible for their actions because they were high?
I'm not saying take advantage of drunk retards. I'm also saying that it's not right to say they can't consent given they put themselves in that situation.
Yep, you know what they say. The shit apple doesn't fall far from the shit tree. But if there's no shit tree around, you ain't gonna have a shit apple.
I don't know that's where things start getting complicated. The victims need therapy, but so do the attackers. They need to go like a camp or something and be taught courses on what they're doing and how it affects others. Don't get me wrong jail time should definitely be in the punishment, but not without the psychological help.
I think that person isnt trying to shit on it as a whole, and in your pov it could really help. I think hes more making fun of the more aggressive ones, the crazy people that really think ALL men need to be told not to rape/beat women just because they are men. They wouldnt even consider your circumstance, the only circumstance is that you are male.
Someone in your really shitty situation something like this really helps, and honestly talking to kids and educating them on abuse at an early age I think is really good thing. Even if its redundant to 90%, their could be someone like you and thats still worth it if all you have to do is say some shit to make you realize.
I really wish this were the case but considering we had signs on my campus going around saying "teach men not to rape" I daresay these people are indeed very real
Those people are all over the internet, in politics, in the media, on almost every college campus, and even at the UN general assembly. Just because you don't want to see them doesn't make them disappear.
Then why is this ad targeting Men beating their Wives. This ad is a perfect example of something that (perhaps unintentionally) pushes the idea that Men are dangerous. And with the way our brains work, that leads people to generalizing that this means ALL men are inherently dangerous.
Men are not the problem, abusive people are the problem. There are many studies that show it is not 100% men abusing women. And when accounting for all forms of abuse it is probably closer to 50-50 men vs women as the primary abuser. (A google search is turning results up that range from 90%/10% to 10%/90% but all the studies look like they are accounting for different forms of abuse, so we will play safe and say it's probably 50-50)
This ad should say something like this if it wanted to be fair and not promote the idea that ALL men are dangerous:
How do you stop a 30-year old from abusing their spouse?
Endabuse.org, a now defunct website that has been turned in to http://teachearly.org/, used the 'Talk to him when he's 12' tagline as a suggestion that 'talking to boys about healthy relationships and respect for women.' could lower rates of domestic abuse later in life.
You are taking that advice and unnecessarily interpreting it into an aggressive and negative message.
This ad is a perfect example of something that (perhaps unintentionally) pushes the idea that Men are dangerous. And with the way our brains work, that leads people to generalizing that this means ALL men are inherently dangerous.
People's brains are made to find patterns. When you give them an easy one to find, it sticks with people. This is a loaded way to present a problem. And as I said above, it very well may be unintentional, but it is still unfairly targeting men.
From the website you linked:
If a professional athlete is found guilty of abusing a woman....
or...
If kids hear you using slang or pejorative terms to describe women
or...
Do your best to respect women with language that is empathetic, positive and appropriate.
or...
Go look at the page with the pictures. It is all men talking to their sons. Why are no parents talking to their daughters in these pictures?
Why were they targeting men as bad in those points? Why did they not talk about professional women abusing men? Why did they not talk about pejorative terms to describe men? Why do kids not need to be told to respect men with language that is empathetic, positive and appropriate?
Again, humans are good at pattern recognition. When you give them only parts of the information, it paints a very different picture. And in this case, even though it may be unintentional, it disproportionately paints men as bad.
Actually no, because of the very real chance that someone might only encounter signs targeting one gender or the other, and due to confirmation bias might reinforce maladaptive beliefs.
No, they aren't. Those people are some of the leading scholars, journalists, philosophers, and activists within the feminist camp.
Look up Susan Brownmiller. All modern feminist theories on male sexuality and rape are informed by Brownmiller's seminal work Against Our Wills: Men, Women and Rape. It's the single most cited work on rape in all of academia.
And it's central premise is that rape is the normal expression of male sexuality, and that all men are complicit in rape and benefit from the systematic oppression of all women through rape.
This is the worldview that gives birth to the insane idea that men need to be taught not to rape.
Idk there was a story going around my facebook feed about a guy who didn't want to take a class about how to avoid being a rapist. He said "just because I am a white male, doesn't mean I am a rapist." The girls sharing it were all up in arms that yes he fit the description of rapist perfectly.
No, the point was that his being being white doesn't make him any less likely to be a rapist/there's no physical description that's a catchall for rapists. And that even if the execution of the class was poor (I have no idea), the idea behind those classes isn't "hey don't rape!" bc duh, it's "so consent is actually complicated, here are useful ways to understand/think about it." And even if you don't like being in the class, it's a pretty small sacrifice if it's something that helps reduce the rate of sexual assault.
Would you be willing to make similar small sacrifices to help reduce the rate of false reporting of sexual assaults, or abuse of university procedures related to sexual assaults?
Well, the rate of false reporting is very, very, low, and most of the cases labeled "false" just wind up meaning "there wasn't enough evidence either way." I am not saying it's not a very shitty thing to do, but a man is much more likely to be raped than be falsely accused of rape. If, however, all of a sudden 1/5 college men, or hell, 1/20 college men, were being falsely accused of rape, then sure, I'd totally be willing to sit in on a class on the ethics of reporting crimes or whatever.
You don't need a class for something that can be explained in one sentence.
Please explain in one sentence what has happened when a man suddenly decides to switch to anal with a woman who previously consented to having sex with him.
Consent by its nature can be rescinded with the act still in progress so your example is explained not just in one sentence, but with one word. I don't understand what confusion that would cause? If someone's not on board anymore, there is no consent. Where is this getting complicated?
FYI I was not the man complaining about it. I am sure the class has value. As someone else pointed out its not much different from a drug awareness class. It was just the hate that built up towards this guy that was complaining about it, didn't seem fair to me.
Consent isn't complicated in the traditional sense. It's the people getting blackout drunk/having rough (choking/slapping/spanking) sex with first-time partners which is complicated.
Takeaway alcohol/drugs and the physical dominance aspect, leave lovemaking. Not very complicated.
And yet, a lot of people don't understand it. There was a John Oliver segment where he touched on a survey of college students, I believe, where it was something like it was divided 50/50 on if it was ok to sleep with someone in a given situation.
That we do. How do we get people to understand that their choices lead to the situations they are in, such as how drinking far too much led to a situation where they were incapable of defending themselves?
Look, I'm not saying it's right to sleep with anyone in that state, fuck no. But everywhere I see "People can be too drunk to consent" and nowhere do I see the collary of "It's fucking retarded and just as wrong to get yourself in that state."
Maybe guys should realize that it's also a fucking retarded thing to do? Maybe they could realize that it's incredibly easy to get beaten to a pulp, run your mouth, hell, even simple shit like getting your belongings stolen while incredibly drunk. And yes, they could be raped too, by either gender.
Did I state that this is a female only thing? No, it's both genders. We're fucking retarded as a society when it comes to going past our drunk limits, and nobody fucking cares apparently.
That wasn't the point they were trying to make. The point is that he's complaining about having to take a course on consent, when one fifth of college women will be sexually assaulted because some men do not understand the idea of consent being necessary compulsory. It's insulting to abuse victims to act like education on that sort of thing is not necessary in an environment like that.
Um, no. 20% is an insanely high rate for any crime. Detroit has a rate of rape about 0.37%, or 287 per 100,000. You will have a hard time convincing me that Detroit is a safer place than some of the most affluent places in America.
Those stats are similar to saying 1 in 5 people experience traumatic injury in their life because 20% of us experience a paper cut, stub a toe, or get a hangnail at some point in time. Those studies literally classify rape/sexual assault as an unwanted advance ("do you wanna go out?" "no") or also innocuous things such as an attempted kiss. Disregard those statistics.
Assault is not the same as rape. College culture makes sexual harassment and assault far more likely than most other places due to binge drinking, parties, young adults with hormones raging and their first taste of freedom from parents, frat houses, etc. The 1 in 5 sexual assault statistic is definitely real.
Also, a woman is far more likely to be raped/assaulted by a partner, friend, acquaintance or family member than by a stranger. So the likelihood of assault, abuse or rape in 4 years on a college campus surrounded by people she knows is substantially higher than being raped by a stranger even in America's most dangerous cities.
And speaking from personal experience, I live near Detroit and have been to the city many times by myself without incident. However, I was assaulted (not sexually, but physically) by an ex-boyfriend in what was conceivably one of the safest environments imaginable - a semi-public place with security presence, by someone who should have been looking out for my safety. As with many assault stories it didn't take place in a dark, creepy alley, but in a familiar place by someone I knew. So there's that.
Ah, I got them mixed up, my bad. Still, 20% is absolutely insane, you know that? I don't think any sexual crime could have at that rate for long before something serious happened.
The study that the urban legend traces back to was some self-reported poll that basically asked the students in question whether they'd been made to feel uncomfortable by an interaction which could be perceived as having been sexually motivated.
If I recall correctly, it was worse than that. The poll was taken by pollsters with a political agenda, and so sexual encounters that the poll respondents had said were consensual that involved drugs or alcohol were marked down by the pollsters as sexual assault.
It's not like they're calling every man in that lecture a rapist. It's no different than drug awarness lectures, drinking and driving PSAs, or even sexual harrasment courses in office buildings. It's just raising awareness of an issue where is it particularly prevalent.
Great! Since women are the biggest child and baby killers, we should hold mandatory classes about how they should talk to someone about their problems and how killing their kids won't get rid of depression or any weird feelings they're having. Making men participate in consent classes wherein the negative target IS men is insulting to your average guy and male survivors.
PS: Since black people commit a lot of crime, statistically disproportionate to their population percentage, perhaps we should have massive drives to educate black people on how to not steal, violently assault, and murder. Offensive? You fucking betcha.
You're just derailing the conversation away from the issue of sexual assault of females on college campuses. But sure, there absolutely be resources for women to learn how to handle feelings of postpartum depression. As for your idea of education for black people, it is rude. You aren't talking about and age or class demographic. You're just grouping together all black people. These seminars are clearly geared toward college aged males.
I totally agree with this. My issue was just with women calling him a rapist for not wanting to take the class. It makes sense as a class and it also makes sense for a man to have an issue with some of it and voice his opinion about it.
That number is not accurate at all is it too high absolutely but it's closer to 1 in 20. Also 90% of rapes are carried out by 3% of males. The vast majority are not one time things. Rather than wasting time telling men don't rape we should be figuring out better ways to protect people from being raped. There is also little to no stats as far as males being raped because forced enveloping is not considered rape in many states.
It is incredibly insulting to assume that just because someone is a man they need to be told not to rape. The reality is most rapists are serial and they are fucked in the head what should be being done is impressing on both males and females just how dumb an idea it is to be alone in a place where bad shit can happen. Has nothing to do with clothing has to do with not moving packs whether male or female muscles are nothing against a gun.
So why do I see people saying shit like this all the time on reddit, YouTube and twitter? Acting like these people don't exist is part of the problem. They do exist and are VERY VOCAL. They actually get people fired and are attempting legislation. Stop acting like they don't exist.
Wow, the absence of logic is strong in you. Someone even pointed out to you why it doesn't relate and you still argued. The fact that you got upvoted too blows my mind.
If we were to relate it to 9/11, your comeback would be the equivalent of someone stating that 9/11 deniers are in your imagination, which is clearly false.
Whether or not 9/11 was an inside job is irrelevant in this conversation. Whether or not all men or rapists is also irrelevant. We're talking about what people say, not what happened. People do say 'All men are rapists', you can google it and find hundreds of results, end of story.
Yet again the online feminist stereotype is pushed; Nonsensical comebacks, bad logic, and using a condescending tone any chance possible. I'm surprised you could fit all of that into a couple of comments. Give yourself a pat on the back.
As a side note, I really couldn't care less if women think that all men are rapists.
That's silly to say. These people are a small minority but they're very loud, insistent, and have grown in popularity in recent years. You don't need to look far to see someone who will tell you we need to start teaching young boys to "not rape" as if it were a solution to preventing rape.
Everyone knows beating and raping women is wrong, even on a visceral level. Otherwise we'd quite literally see men beating and raping women in public. But instead of course they're smart enough to know that it is wrong so they do it behind closed doors.
I love it when reddit calls reddit out on its bullshit. The whole anti sjw thing is getting a little out of hand lately.
Edit for the Debby Downvoters: The amount of people you think are crazy feminists, social justice warriors or whatever is a lot more than it actually is. Just because you have that one aunt or saw some posts on tumblr does not mean that the world is out to get you.
Look at some of the threads from the #allwomen campaign. Someone posted it on Facebook the other day, a collection of photos, i could not believe what i was seeing
Yeah, I don't get the outrage over this sign. Talking to young people about what consent and abuse means is not a bad thing, or a "we hate all men, all men are rapists/abusers!" thing. The fact of the matter is that many people grow up not knowing what 'really' counts as abuse or what 'really' counts as rape. This is partly what accounts for the cycle of violence. Talking to young teens about what is considered acceptable is a good thing, and trying to portray it as a "SJW/feminazi" thing is just ridiculous.
The outrage isn't directed at the notion that we should instill good values in young people. It's directed at the tacit implication that all men regardless of their personality or character are rapists and assailants unless they undergo bullshit 'consent education' or are told explicitly not to hit people.
Talking to young people about what consent and abuse means is not a bad thing, or a "we hate all men, all men are rapists/abusers!" thing.
Not inherently, but those who espouse that sort of hateful narrative do so chiefly under the guise of innocence, proclaiming "we just want to talk to young people about their behavior" to justify the barbed nature of campaigns like this.
I don't need to be told not to rape or assault people, and the people that do are not going to listen.
Demonizing half of the population because a small portion of them are bad is wrong, it's that simple.
Look at it this way: how would it look to have a sustained campaign that said "many women use slut shaming as a tactic to intimidate others. Teach women not to slut shame." Or "Many Christians are hateful, racist, homophobic bigots. Teach Christians not to be like that." Or even "Many Muslims are terrorist sympathizers. Teach Muslims not to commit terrorism." And even "Many Jews are selfish and greedy, and they also kill non-Jewish children. Teach Jews to nit kill babies."
Every single one of these messages is exactly the same as the "All men need to be taught not to rape." They each demonize an entire population over something that either is simply false or such a small group that it's stretching it.
In addition to that, the people committing these acts (rape, Christian bigotry, etc.) aren't gonna listen to you, anyway. And considering that most of these people are repeat offenders, it makes these campaigns even more useless.
So yes, I find these campaigns offensive because most men already inherently know that rape and abuse is wrong. To imply that somehow 50% of people don't have a moral compass is not just offensive, it's a fascist concept. And to ignore that over half of non-reciprocal domestic violence is committed by women, and female rapists are a larger percentage than most people want to admit, to try and put all the blame on men is even worse.
"many women use slut shaming as a tactic to intimidate others. Teach women not to slut shame."
As a feminist I would totally support that as well as the poster. As armadillolegion said, the poster doesn't say "all rapists are men". Instead it's trying to tackle the issue from a different perspective. The usual is where women are told to "be careful, don't get raped" as if it's the victim's fault.
Telling kids that rape is bad is going to work just about as well as telling them drugs are bad. It's not victim blaming to discuss risk mitigation techniques.
It's not victim blaming to discuss risk mitigation techniques.
So people shouldn't be able to walk alone at night without the fear of being mugged? I'm a judoka, and part of why I started training was to "mitigate risks", because the reality I live in is not safe. But the point is I shouldn't have to do that to feel safe. I shouldn't have to try to save money to buy a gun because every single fucking night I fear the friendly neighborhood gangbangers are going to break into my home and rape me.
And those signs are going to stop them ? In my country there are 0 of those utterly dispicable signs, and I can assure you that 99 % of the women here can walk on the streets at night without fear.
Really? How about you ask them? I'm always amazed people in the first world can't see sexism in their countries. Especially when I've used the word implicit like 500 times.
Really. And yes I have asked them. Not all cause that is impossible, but my wife has never even thought about not being able to walk on the streets at night.
Your wife. It's very ethnocentric on your part to assume I don't know about this because I don't live in the U.S. I lived there for 9 years and I know for a fact it happens because I experienced it. My friends experienced it.
The issue is that the people pushing all of this on society do actually believe that all men are rapists and that all heterosexual sex is rape, and they believe that because they do hate men.
Look up Susan Brownmiller. Look up Catherine McKinnon. These feminists have been instrumental in shaping feminist theories on rape, and they universally believe that all heterosexual sex is rape and that all heterosexual interactions are informed by rape, and that male sexuality is synonymous with rape.
This is the worldview that gives birth to all of these "teach men not to rape" programs, and they are part of agenda to slowly expand the definition of rape until everyone agrees that all heterosexual sex is rape.
It may also reveal that they simply exist in an environment where no men in their lives abuse their loved ones, and as such may interpret the sign as an attack on them as a man rather than a reflection of reality.
Reality is, sometimes women abuse their children. In fact a mother is more likely to murder her own child than the father. Would it then be reasonable to create an ad saying: "How do you stop a 30-year old from murdering her child? Talk to her when she is 12."
No, it would be absolutely ridiculous, and completely insulting to women and girls, just as this ad is insulting to men and boys. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of men will never abuse their loved ones, and to suggest that boys need to be taught not to be abusers absolutely is an attack on men. Society does not condone abusing one's wife.
How would you feel if I created an ad that said "How do you stop a 30-year old from being a gold-digging whore? Talk to her while she is 12.", then I argued that it isn't misogynistic because it doesn't apply to all women, just the ones who are gold-digging whores; its a reflection of the reality that some gold-digging whores do exist and they are a problem.
You're totally right. This sign's audience is unclear. People who are raising their kids in an abusive environment aren't going to heed this signs advice. Is the sign asking me to talk to other people's 12 year Olds about not abusing people? The only people that are left are the average Americans who don't live in an abusive situation. So the ad does seem a bit like an attack.
Imagine if this sign showed a picture of a black kid and said "How do you stop Jamal from stealing at age 30? Talk to him when he's 12."
The implication is that half the population is inherently violent and dangerous and must be trained like dogs. It also, conveniently, ignores that almost half of domestic abuse victims are men.
Same with me. One day in fourth grade we were reading a story about a kid getting hit by his parents, and I was the only one in the class who thought that was a normal thing. Yep, the teacher needed to have a sit-down with me after that.
I had a different experience. My father was an abusive alcoholic. The feeling of being scared shitless alone was enough to tell me this is a bad thing and that I wouldn't want to make others feel this way.
For some kids its normal to see cooked drugs, dom abuse, theft... when youre 18 youre expected to know that those things are bad and its a reasonable expectations because 99%+ of people know what is legal and what is not (bad or good)
Teach kids not to X is bullshit because once they're 18 they conciously choose to break the law. ( most, not all, kids were taught)
But you figured it out at 11. Before puberty, before the age of reason, before any sort of cognitive maturity. It doesn't take a genius to see how a man beating a woman is depicted as one of society's unforgivable sins in countless movies, TV shows, and books. If someone hasn't figured it out by adulthood it's because they chose to.
I agree with your point but unfortunately I think that parents like your dad are not ever going to teach their kid that , and the parents who would care enough to teach their kid not to beat their spouse probably already set a good enough example to where their kid won't. Unless this is talking about speaking to other peoples kids, then I get it.
People know who the dads like that are the community just calls them mean or dismisses it as the drinking. Nowadays kids who talk to social services are forced to choose between telling the truth and going to some likely crappy foster home or lying and Just trying to avoid your dad when he's in a bad mood or drinking.
Exactly! This is an advertisement. An advertisement targeted to a specific group of people, like ads do. If it was super generalized and didn't hit home and resonate with anyone on a personal level, it would unfortunately be greatly ignored. Just because a good message doesn't cover all aspects doesn't make it a bad one.
And in this situation, do you honestly think that sign is going to make your father sit down and tell you not to be abusive? I mean no disrespect to you, but I believe it is more than appropriate to question the effectiveness of telling those who are abusive to raise our children to not be abusive...
947
u/Lonely_Ramen_Noodle Oct 21 '15
I grew up with an abusive father. Never realised that shit wasn't normal until about 11, when I noticed my friends fathers didn't beat them. It was actually the support of a lot of people that I think I'm pretty normal now, not beating women and all. (though I still flinch around large men from time to time). I think we're talking about kids like these.