Sigh. I've been deleted and blocked by yet another feminist page on Facebook....

I am absolutely certain the Pakistani reference is untrue and nor am I sure about the women and violence against children statistic. Kritiq used to be good about those stats I'll see if I can dig out an old post of hers which explains where that stat comes from.

The media portrayal of these gangs of men who effectively kidnap and rape girls has been extremely racist. I know someone who works in this area. Within the groups organising this there have been white men (although they may not have been prosecuted). The girls were raped by white men. As MRD says there are plenty of examples of white men and organised crime trafficking, exploiting and prostituting women and girls. The defining factor is not race, it is gender.

And can I ask we stop using the word "grooming" it is really minimising. They were raping these children. It is child rape.

Are you certain you're not thinking only of the UK, and recent prosecuted cases? I rather think you must be. I've never heard that Pakistani men run, for example, the child grooming rings in Russia and Thailand, which are two of the largest exporters of trafficked children from what I understand.

I would point out, too, that the officer saying his investigation was hampered by fear of looking racist may well be true and is certainly upsetting, but doesn't actually prove that OMC's statement is true.

However, I'm letting myself get sidetracked.

The statements are not the same kind of statement, are they?

'Men rape' is a statement that makes the most general claim possible under UK law. It has nothing whatsoever to do with recent cases, and the only thing that would make it an invalid statement would be if the law changed.

'Pakistani men groom children' is not the same kind of statement, because 'grooming children' is not something only Pakistani men can do (unless you're a monumental racist which no-one on this thread is).

Right?

This point's been gone over on this thread already.

I'm not chasing up any references as I'm being upset by a few threads atm - Loose Women calls, I think - but, MRD, I do remember the chief investigating officer saying that their investigations had been hampered by fear of appearing racist. The advocate for some of the victims said so, too ... also that her clients' troublesome backgrounds had prejudiced social services against them, but that's a different point. OMC is right, the gangs were/are specifically Pakistani.

Erm ... really sure the Pakistani ref is not true. Why would you look at group prosecutions? Surely you'd be looking at the organized trade (sorry, horrible topic, but ...).

I think probably speculating on possibilities demonstrates why your statements aren't the same kind of statement as 'men rape', are they?

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik

Are what accurate the summaries after "men rap"e or the quoted stats?

The summaries. Pakistani/Kashmiri - as far as group prosecutions over the last 3 years, overwhelmingly so, I understood. Woman battering children? Don't know, nicked from up thread.

The stats - didn't the link provide sources?
Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending Among Undetected Rapists by David Lesak and Paul M. Miller, published in Violence and Victims, Vol 17, No. 1, 2002 (Lisak & Miller 2002)

Oh, BTW ITYM women cannot rape in the UK; it's certainly an offence in the US see also

Wow, OMC, I've just read your last link! Powerful, and I shall be quoting it! Cheers.

Are those remotely accurate, OMG? I don't think they are, are they?

If they were, perhaps there'd be a point.

It's not 'overwhelmingly' men who rape: women cannot rape.

garlicnutty Rape defn in UK - yep a men only crime. Crimes by women are usually sexual assault.

Men Rape. (Yes, not all do, but overwhelmingly those who commit this crime are men)

Pakistani Men form groups to groom white girls for underage sex. (Yes, not all do, but overwhelmingly those who commit this group are Pakistani/Kashmiri. If you want to be even more offensive to a group, try replacing Pakistani with Muslim)

Women batter children (Yes, not all do, but the vast majority of those who commit this crime are women)

Be that as it may:

Just a reminder for anyone that doubts it, most rapes aren't reported; Perpetrators? Roughly 6% of men, who will commit around 6 rapes apiece. Source.

94% of men don't rape; the 6% who do are likely repeat offenders.
Don't be one of the 6%.

Don't laugh at rape jokes.

garlic - see what you're saying, but sexual assault is different from rape, however you define it in law. Consequences etc.

I agree with doctrine that 'rapists are to blame for rape' is good, but I think it also begs the question 'who thinks they aren't, then?', which is problematic.

I read "men rape" in the same way as I read "women give birth" - I mentally insert a "are the ones who" between noun and verb.

I don't think saying "men rape" or "some men rape" or "rapists are men" creates or strengthens rape culture, in the way that I think the fact that "everyone does it" strengthened the MP-expense fiddling culture.

Things that strengthen rape culture are colleges suspending students for reporting sexual assaults, or famous tennis players blaming 16 year olds for going to parties etc.

And those things are about the rape victims, not about the rapists.

I think MRD is saying "men rape" because that is putting the focus on the perpetrator not the victim. I do see the objections to the "class" language but I also see the intention of the point.

"Rapists are to blame for rape"?

The trouble with the "women are child batterers" is I assume there is a specific sun group that applies to, ie mothers?

"I think the major problem is that some feminists want to use the rape for politicle purposes" Err no. We want men to stop raping us. That isn't a political purpose. It is survival.

But thank you for telling is we can't distinguish "clear women only issues". I wasn't aware we had to.

The Glass Ceiling isn't a female issue. It is an issue that predominantly affects women but it is most definitely an issue with the workplace being designed by men, for men without childcare demands (much simplified).

I think the major problem is that some feminists want to use the rape for politicle purposes in terms of it promotes their ability to distinguish clear women only issues, in the same way as "Glass ceiling" is seen as a female issue.

Notdead makes a valid point in that, the purpose of making a statement may have several purposes, the way that it is received is always in the power of the listener. So the messgage that it was a male passage of right to go to football matches tanked up with drink, and then fight the opposition fans was normalised by those that jeard that message thinking it was "normal"

Maybe we should use reverse psychology and say most men NEVER rape, as this will promote the idea not to?

Saying anything more specific than 'men rape' will have one (or both) of two results:
1) It puts focus on the victims, as if rape were a crime without a perpetrator.
2) It suggests rape is something specific to a subset of the male population, as if there were something other than the act of rape itself that defined a rapist. There is not.

Saying 'rapists rape; rapists are men' does neither.

When the UK gets around to following other countries' lead in widening the definition/naming of rape to include weapons other than a penis, more women will be rapists. That may well be a whole other kettle of fish, but I guess you could say atm that 'women inflict sexual assault with objects'.
I don't like that, either, but it follows the logic of 'men rape'.

It's just occurred to me that this may be entirely about the UK legal definition! Is that so? "Men rape" because only men can rape, in law?
In Canada, say, where there is only sexual assault, do feminists say "Men commit sexual assault" despite the fact that most men don't, and some women do?

"most men will NEVER rape. However a minority of men do not seem to understand that sex should always be clearly consensual. This lesson, we are going to discuss that in detail".

This is a terrible way to start a lesson about decent sexual ethics.

1 - why start with "most men will never rape". We do not know this. A huge number of rapes go unconvicted. We don't know if the same men get off again and again, or if many men do the odd unconvicted rape. We just don't know. A lots of rapes happen.

1. And anyway, why is there this constant need to reassure, "don't worry boys, you're all great"? (this is what they will hear) Why is that the most important message?

1. I cannot remember that ever happening at my school. We didn't have lectures about not doing things that started with "most girls will NEVER do x". It wouldn't have worked if we didn't understand clearly that we were absolutely all included in being told not to do x. I think that starting with "most men will never rape" begs the question in fact.

1. "a minority of men do not seem to understand that sex should always be clearly consensual". It is, imho, a mistake to position this in terms of understanding. Maybe some don't understand. Some do. The lesson today is partly is about helping the boys to understand; but what they will go on to do in life is about understanding first and, as importantly, then choosing to do the right thing.

a lot of psychological evidence shows that the more a message goes out that everyone is doing it all the time 'all men are rapists' or 'men rape women' the more likely people tending that way will act on it..

eg 'everyone fiddles their expenses'

if you say 'everyone under-claims expenses' people are more likely to miss a claim or two.

similarly with economic disadvantage..the message 'all women are disadvantaged in the workplace' causes both acceptance and underperformance .. which then adds to disadvantage. which means communicating disavantage as in 'most employers like you are addressing inequity' is more likely to generate positive policies.

It is risky to normalise rape as an inevitable feature of being male (like we did with man fighting on a night out/at football grounds in some sections of society in the 80s)

that gives a comfortable get put space for men 'its something I can?t control inside of me' / because of external stimuli connecting with the inevitable rapist in me.. so that some of the personal blame can be avoided.

we shouldn't give up understanding why it happens but to communicate almost that 'real men rape' is a big mistake on behalf of radical feminism. . They don't and rape is NOT normal or automatic for men.. lets keep on that.

Why on earth would it make the boys feel worthless?

I'm heading out of this discussion as it's making me feel a bit sick, but just to be clear:

Saying anything more specific than 'men rape' will have one (or both) of two results:

1. It puts focus on the victims, as if rape were a crime without a perpetrator.
2. It suggests rape is something specific to a subset of the male population, as if there were something other than the act of rape itself that defined a rapist. There is not.

Teaching boys should be about the same language and concepts as teaching girls, when it's applied to their own sex lives.

Teaching them that we live in a society of gendered violence is merely necessary and basic.

The two things should not be carried out at the same time.

"Women kill unborn babies" Actually this is not true. Technically there is no such thing as an unborn baby. "Unborn baby" is a loaded term invented by holders of a certain ideological position. It is a foetus.

I've xposted while faffing around the kitchen! Will catch up.

Prom,

All the points you make above could also be brought into my preferred discussion, getting the same message across, but not making the boys feel worthless. I also suspect that the introduction that you find acceptable would switch off 80% of the boys and the rest of the lesson would be ignored.

I still reckon "rapists are men" a worthwhile statement: while not exclusively true, it is overwhelmingly correct. The disputed statement, "men rape" is not an overwhelming majority, so it looks incorrect to me.

Larry offered "Women kill unborn babies" (problematic interpretation of 'unborn babies' there, but point made all the same.)
Women are child-batterers. (Approx 75% of violence against children is perpetrated by women.)
Women scratch and bite.
Women are manipulative.

I'm going with the child-battering as, while it's not a direct equivalent of the rape statement, it's equally emotive.