Uncomfortable feelings about the teaching of "consent"

growapear You are the only one here who is making this a racial issue. Trump's election to the most powerful office in the world is illustrative of the fact that white males are still perfectly capable of getting their voices heard.

You really are splitting hairs at this point all men, some men the point is enough men for it to be a problem. I'm not on board with every nuance of feminism but for crying out loud sexual violence is about as open and shut a case as it's possible to get. On this one I am firmly on the side of women.

Datun

If you are teaching your boys that women are very likely to be frightened of them, so they shouldn't sit beside them or if you can help it, anywhere near them on public transport, they should cross the street to avoid them and try not to look at them... do you not think that at the very least this will make them uncomfortable about females ?

It is meant to make men think, and be aware of the issue and to care about it. Even to actively think of ways they can combat it. What is wrong with that as an aim?

The justification for it seems to be based on the idea of privilege theory. No other group would be subject to the same treatment where you take the worst behaviours of the minority and ascribe them to the whole. It isn't about making men think - it is about making white men feel ashamed - because you deem that they have all have some power they need to give up. You would never say that "blacks need to get a grip on this witch craft rubbish". If we take FGM as an example or more widely the way women are treated in muslim countries are treated, that is not something that white men in this country have anything to do with. However no qualifications are typically made to account for the fact that it is men with brown skin who are to blame, because that would be racist, so we'll just go with "men".

I live in an all male household. The very, very last thing I would want to do is to make those males feel ashamed of being men.

It is genuinely not always easy to talk to men about the imbalance of power between the sexes and the fact of male violence. Because most men have never had to think about it. Most women experience it on a daily basis, to some degree or another. They are very used to seeing it. They don't necessarily analyse it, because female socialisation makes us think 'that's just the way things are'.

Anyone who actually asks why is that the way things are, tends to have something of a lightbulb moment.

Do you genuinely think that the word "men" in that example is meant to mean "all men"? It means men as a class. Of course it doesn't mean every single man. Why does it get you so wound up that language is used in this completely normal way? It's not meant to make men ashamed of simply being men. It is meant to make men think, and be aware of the issue and to care about it. Even to actively think of ways they can combat it. What is wrong with that as an aim?

Apologies for mixing you up.

So basically you need all statements to have a NAMALT attached so as not to offend, otherwise you won't engage?

But NAMALT would never be used because as I said - i believe the purpose is to make men feel ashamed of being men.

You're getting your posters mixed up...

So basically you need all statements to have a NAMALT attached so as not to offend, otherwise you won't engage?

Sparrow

really? is that what you genuinely get from what people have been saying?

You said (One of many examples) :

Men rape women in their millions across the world

The noun "Men" is used here to denote a group who behave in a terrible way. Not "some men" or even "rapists" but doggedly just "men". The intention is clearly to teach that all men are the problem. Guilt by association. Once the veneer is scraped away far ruder statements and generalisations about "men" are made.

Holly

What I do hate is the fact that women have, for centuries been treated as second-class citizens who do not have a right to control their future or their body

Is this how you feel in 2017 ? That you have no control over your body, or that you have less control over it than "men" ? Which men ? Which men have more control over their future than you ? All men ? Most men ?

How much effort have groups of men put into reducing male violence?

Here was me thinking we spent billions of pounds on maintaining a large and capable military force to keep our citizens safe from violence. My bad.

Is that OK with you ?

Perfectly.

FFS...?

"the idea that men are not interested in controlling male violence is nonsense."

Really?
How much effort have groups of men put into reducing male violence? Or dealing with the effects? Cos shelters for people fleeing domestic violence (almost all perpetrated by men) seem to rely on funding from potential victims. Haven't seen charities taking out TV slots or posters to tell men that a violent man is scum and if your mate thinks violence is funny, ditch your mate. Haven't seen male politicians standing up and demanding harsher sentences for violent domestic crime or more support for victims - women do, and then get derided for being shrill/only interested in domestic stuff/not supporting male victims of violence.

Where are all the men working on this stuff, because if they are, their media profile is seriously shit?

" Being a man is the problem since your analysis holds that men are bad." really? is that what you genuinely get from what people have been saying?

Thought you weren't posting any more?

Only because I thought the OP wanted me to. Since she said that wasn't what she wanted and since questions were addressed to me it seems reasonable to reply to those. Is that OK with you ? FFS

So why did you say that feminists want to make men and boys ashamed of themselves for things they can do nothing about?

Because they can do nothing about being men. Being a man is the problem since your analysis holds that men are bad.

So why did you say that feminists want to make men and boys ashamed of themselves for things they can do nothing about?

What are the things they can do nothing about?

Thought you weren't posting any more?

So men and boys can do nothing about male violence.

As i've said so many times the idea that men are not interested in controlling male violence is nonsense.

Just for the record, I don't hate men either. In fact there's several men I adore and more that I quite like.

What I can't stand is assholes.

Stop being one and we'll be cool.

I should probably say 'bogeywoman' not 'bogeyman'. Can't emphasize enough how stupid I find that caricature of feminism. Most bra-burning, angry lesbians I know are gorgeous.

Ok have 1 in 4 white people been assaulted by black people? No they haven't thus it's not a fair comparison.

Good.

Tooticky

Sorry you feel that way, I wont post again in that case. it is your thread.

'They try to teach young boys and men to be ashamed of themselves for things they can do nothing about. I actually came to this forum hoping for sensible discussion about the effects of the now obvious backlash that this is causing, but rather i just see more of the same boring old stuff about white guys are the spawn of the devil and responsible for all the worlds ills. Women obviously had nothing to do with anything since they had no power.'

So men and boys can do nothing about male violence. But women can do something about it??

I don't hate men. At all. That's just another stupid straw man, an age-old bogeyman of the ugly, bra-burning, angry woman who is "probably a lesbian anyway".

What I do hate is the fact that women have, for centuries been treated as second-class citizens who do not have a right to control their future or their body. The rules around consent are part of a long, long fight - going back centuries - to insist that women are treated as people who have a right to some kind of self-determination over their own lives. Basic, fundamental rights: the right to vote, the right to own property, the right to work, the right not to be raped in marriage are very recent. Why was this? I can tell you, it's not because every woman prior to 1920 was individually too stupid to vote. It was because collective power relations were configured in a particular way that systemically disenfranchised, disempowered and devalued women. This was partly political, partly legal, partly institutional, partly cultural.

So don't come on a fucking thread about gender inequality and tell women that it's 'all about individuals' now. Only when we reach a utopian situation where women aren't disproportionate the victims of gendered violence, aren't paid less for the same work, aren't doing more than 50% of the housework on top of equal full-time hours, and aren't disproportionately the losers when it comes to childcare can we even begin to start saying that collectives and cultures don't matter when it comes to gender.

If you'd done even the most basic amount of reading on gender studies in any discipline, you would know this already.