Rebutting the Straw Men/Owning up when "it's a fair cop, guv.

My posts are all so long! Sorry, on my phone so didn't realise. I do go on!

I haven't been raped. I've been assaulted though, from a few times I've been touched inappropriately - a guy next to me at the cinema when I was a teenager and similar, to a couple of more serious things by an ex-colleague and a group of men who accosted me one night when I was on my way home alone. I'm not including the times I've been followed home or intimidated here, just actual physical stuff. I don't spend my time thinking that I'm a victim, or that all men are rapists, or that I'm always in danger, but I do reserve the right to put my safety first, ahead of other considerations.

For example, a female friend recently mentioned a creepy guy asking for her number and I replied that a creepy guy had asked for my number as I got off the bus and followed me part way home the other night. Various men I was wth thought it was unreasonable to call the guy creepy and assume that he was doing anything but being friendly. They then said a lot of 'what is the world coming to when a guy can't even be nice'. I'd just like the understanding that personal safety is more important than validating a man's belief that he's a nice guy. I'm often coming home late from work, and it's not always safe so I'd like the benefit of the doubt that rather than judging every nice guy I work with to be a rapist I'm making an informed decision from someone's behaviour late at night that they might have the intention of doing me harm. I don't know how many times I've been unnecessarily guarded, but I do know I've been wrong the other way on a number of occasions and seriously thought 'what can I say or do to get me out of here unhurt?'

I'm not are if that makes any sense to anyone but me, but while I don't think Al men are rapists, any given man could be a rapist, and when I'm by myself at night I trust my judgment to keep me safe. If that means I don't smile back at a guy who is genuinely just saying hi, then if he really is a nice guy I would hope he understands that if I don't smile back he's a bit miffed bit if I do and he turns out to be a really not nice guy then in his mind I've just encouraged him and got myself in potentially a dangerous situation. I have a lot more to lose is all I mean.

Mide, you are male, I think? Do you get a "all men are potential rapists" vibe from MN feminism? Or feminism in general?

Thanks, hope you don't mind me asking.

Mide7 - yes that it what I mean. It's the demonising (if that's a word - my phone doesn't like it) of men for having a penis that I find so objectionable.

Yes - not all feminists do, I know.

YY Seneca

Please tell me I'm wrong if you think I am rainbow but IMO all men have capacity to be rapists. Same way as most people have capacity to be murderers. Doesn't mean that everyone you meet is going to do it in their life time. Or perhaps I'm being pedantic.

I interpret it as any man could be a potential rapist rather than all men.

I certainly agree that male violence against women is a feminist issue and I do understand that it is just stating how the world is.

But it's the impression I get from feminists on the FWR board that because of this all men are potential rapists and if I can't see that I'm stupid. I don't think that all men are potential rapists and that is one of the reasons why I don't identify with feminism. I know earlier on the thread it was mentioned that "not all feminists think that all men are rapists" but many many do and tend to bang on about it.

I also don't think there is anything wrong with being a victim - as a description of a person who has been the target of a crime.

I agree. I do think it's important to try to avoid assigning some kind of inherent negativity to the word "victim" as regards the person who experiences violence. Its meaning should be understood as negative regarding the perpetrator, not as to the victim. Some survivors of violence, especially domestic violence and sexual assault, acknowledge a benefit from recognizing that they are victims because it helps them focus on blaming the perpetrator rather than themselves.

There just need to be enough feminists who have a negative perspective on various things - like femininity for example, to make women not identify with feminism

Agreed. Good points from almond

Yes Lurcio I think that would be a good idea. I have posted on and off for a while on FWR. On some things (prosecution of rape, porn, prostitution, abortion I am firmly in what I suspect is the rad fem camp) On other issues I disagree.

It has stopped now but I've in the past been asked why do I read and post on here if I don't call myself a feminist?

Oh - lost half my post

Thank you Lurcio.

I suppose for me - I have been raped, but it was only one man. He will not have an effect on the rest of my life.

My self esteem has been badly damaged (and had a longer lasting effect on me) far more by women than by men.

Also you ask why women who are vulnerable should put up with stuff - I don't think anybody who is vulnerable should put up with anything be they male or female.

I think the crux of the problem for me is that I feel that unless I identify as a feminist, I'm somehow not one of the 'enlightened ones' and therefore, despite being a woman, my views are less valid.

I would like to engage in discussion and explore my own thoughts about various issues, but there is a feeling - and not just on mn, but IRL interactions - that if I dont 'toe the party line' I am obviously ignorant and misinformed.

When I read the OP I didn't think that it was a direct response to the other thread. I haven't read the other thread actually so can't comment. I just thought you'd been inspired, Lurcio, by what you'd read to start a thread about common misconceptions. I'm all for also addressing issues in feminism, which I think is already done on threads quite a bit, but one thread doesn't have to do everything, does it!

I would call anger feminism social justice warrior feminism - all the check your privilege, die in a fire, educate yourself, shout abuse, call out culture, white male tears stuff. It is really, really awful and there is a lot of it online.

While that is not the fault of posters on here, those people call themselves feminists.

I worry about my teens coming into contact with SJW people and tell them not to talk about political issues because of it.

" I do not regard all men as potential rapists."

Nor do most feminists.

I have a question of my own - what is victim feminism?

Because I think feminists as a group has done the opposite thing of being a passive victim by creating protests, law change, women's shelters etc.

I also don't think there is anything wrong with being a victim - as a description of a person who has been the target of a crime.
But it's a "victim attitude" you have a problem with, right?

This thread is so patronising and turning me further off feminism.

Clash, I think that's fair. But those wouldn't be described in the same way.

So to a Christian I might say "Christians think menstruating women are unclean" - sure, that's in the bible somewhere but very few UK Christians buy into that (similar I guess to the PIV/rape statement) and most would say so as a rebuttal.

I might also say "Christians have a view of womanhood influenced by the two Marys" and that would be a point of broader discussion not quick rebuttal (like perhaps "feminists are not welcoming to male allies"

Hope that makes sense.

I don't agree with most feminism I see online. Most of the lib fem stuff online seems quite contrary to women's human rights.

I agree, almond.

I wonder what the other thread's OP is planning. She said that she would create a follow-up thread.