A man raped me, another tried to. They were not animals. They were men

Some of the Rules of Misogyny seem applicable...

Actually I should have said saying man will lead to changes behaviour, it is more likely to lead to increased levels of sexual misconduct

That reads as a threat to me. If you name male violence it'll get worse.

I agree deathgrip
men say they would never do that but think its ok to laugh at a rape joke cause its banter, or cat calls or stopping random women in the street is fine cause they are just trying to engage women, or that groping women is harmless fun and no one really get hurts, or that persuading their partner to do something they have objected to is fine its not really coercion, but they haven't actually raped anyone cause they never used violence
and for anyone who says not all men - see my earlier post

they have the ability to make a choice between good and evil.

Sure, but the problem here is the normalising of the “evil” acts to the point where many see it as an expected part of dating / being sexually active. We need to move the conversation towards the everyday abuse perpetrated by those who would publicly condemn “predators” and “would never do something like that”, despite the fact that they have.

Agreed random - I’m so sorry you experienced that too. I was in a relationship from 15 to 20, which was very caring and considerate. Then I became single and was assaulted and / or raped by three sexual partners in a row. I have no doubt they wouldn’t characterise it that way, but that’s what happened. That’s how it goes with the majority of situations and I’m sick of hearing men get defensive and say they’d never do such a thing when I’ve seen so many who absolutely will in the right circumstances. This wasn’t power trips by sexual predators, this was men who felt their needs were more important than my consent and that if they could manipulate me into consenting, they’d done what they needed to do and anything after that was acceptable.

I wish that men, privately at least, would start to examine where in their own past they’ve behaved in coercive ways and understand the impact of that. I had this discussion with my DH and he acknowledged that he behaved this way as a teenager as did all of his friends, and it has really changed his perspective on the issue.

Hear hear Deathgrip.

(I think) Most rape and sexual assault isn't some rabid monster pinning a screaming woman down, though of course its traumatising whatever the circumstances. For me, it took years to acknowledge that it had happened, because it wasn't violent and I didn't believe he was 'like that'

It's coercion, pressure, ignoring body language, pushing boundaries. If men believe that only monsters commit rape, it's easy for them to say 'but I'm not like that' or 'I didn't do anything wrong - I'm not a monster!'

It also leads to victims questioning whether or not they can even call it rape, whether or not they have a right to be upset. At least in my experience.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger’s-rapist-or-a-guy’s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/amp/

Naming male violence as a problem causes male violence? Cool story, bro.

Human beings are rational- they have the ability to make a choice between good and evil. That is not a theological statement but a statement of fact.

Human beings are capable of rationality, certainly.

I suspect some people’s brains are not well wired for empathy and impulse control etc. from the get-go and I’m certain some people are terribly, sometimes irreparably, damaged by their life experiences, so I don’t think ‘choice’ is as comfortingly clear cut as all that.

I don’t believe in good and evil and that allows me some hope that things can get better.

Actually I should have said saying man will lead to changes behaviour, it is more likely to lead to increased levels of sexual misconduct

Because people do get defensive or react in unexpected ways if they feel they are lumped together with others. And whilst men with more critical thinking skills will manage to differentiate, many people will react instinctively

if you run a campaign that says loads of people are littering and it's bad, you won't solve the litter problem. It gets worse. It gets normalised across the Population.

you need to make littering people seem to be some small obnoxious "other" because "other" is a strong concept in affecting people behaviours( them and us ) and "small" because the bigger team is safer, more likely to win

So what is the equaivlent with rape? Yes animal implies no choice, but saying man will not lead to men changing behaviour, so what terminology will?

For too long, men have absolved themselves as a class of sexual crimes by blaming it all on “predators” - not regular men, a rare twisted breed that are nothing like them. This means they dont have to question the times they’ve pushed past a woman’s boundaries, coerced a sex act, harassed a woman, guilted a teenage girlfriend... because they’re nothing like the actual rapists. They’re removing the connection between rape and the “low level” sexual assault of which most men have been guilty at least once if they’re honest with themselves.

But blame it on the predators, and they don’t have to do that.

I don't really like women being treated as a class ( except when it is necessary) so I also understand that there limitations in treating men as a class

. I am not trying to absolve men, I want them to understand that we don't blame them individually, personally, so that they can identify a difference to themselves that makes it easier for them to despise rapists and perverts and creeps. Because it's easier for people to fight other than to improve themselves?

I am really struggling to see the distinction Midge is making. Why should good men get defensive?

I've heard my husband say occasionally about the actions of other men that he is ashamed to be a man but I don't actually think he needs to say that. I don't expect him to take the blame for what other men do.

The "real men don't" propaganda seems to be an effort to absolve men as a class of the responsibility to address the aggrieved entitlement and male dominance displays that they celebrate and support.
Dworkin told us years ago that “Pornography is the theory and rape is the practice”

Disgrace to manhood sounds good

But real men do rape. Good men don't. I'd hope good men would be indignant on behalf of women, not defensive. What are they most concerned about, the crime committed on a woman or a perceived slight against men?

I suppose something like 'disgraces to manhood' might serve, separating from good men without maligning animals.

I may have been wound up today, but would it help if the rapists were called people rather than men or animals . Does the subsetting help ( because it is always men) more than it hinders ( because there are a lot of good men who get defensive)

Like - They don't deserve to be called men so rather than animal something still human

Not in crime statistics of course, more in discussions

I am trying to get to "how can we fix this" and if it makes men more keen to fight because they can distance themselves from rapists .. " a real man would not rape"

*“How do you even begin to reason with an animal like that?”

And that is exactly my point. You cannot reason with any animal. You can train some animals; you can do things to calm a frightened or distresed animal but you cannot reason with an animal.

Rapists, criminals and evil men are men. They made a choice to behave the way they do.

It's not 'normalising' rapists. It's not allowing other men to claim that rapists are a different species, or not part of human society. Women need good men's engagement and help to combat bad men.

“How do you even begin to reason with an animal like that?”
You certainly don't begin by saying they're an animal and distancing yourself. Begin where you like, chaps, but do begin.

I don’t think it can be treated as a pathology. These men aren’t ‘other’. They are (mostly) men who have been very badly damaged by shit parents and/or toxic masculinity.

Not sure I like normalising rapists.

This is the way Trump is addressed by the likes of Jessica Valenti in The Guardian; going on about him being perfectly normal, nothing unusual about his behaviour, move along, nothing-to-see.

I'd like to think that males-who-rape are an aberration, a mutation. That society should identify a cancer, and then isolate it, deal with it, prevent it occurring again. I know the narrative is that rapists are men, but how is that 'presenting' itself? That sounds horribly close to the myth that feminists say 'all men are rapists'.

What is being achieved? To appear to decry all men, to try to appeal to them by pointing-out that rapists are just like them (not sure how that works). Why not try a different route; rapists aren't men, don't condone them, don't apologise for them, because if you do, then you too, aren't a man.

Trying to what, embarrass men by normalising rapists just doesn't seem like a cutting-edge message.

The "like animals" analogy in relation to any violent act is sheer nonsense.

Human beings are rational- they have the ability to make a choice between good and evil. That is not a theological statement but a statement of fact.

Animals react by instinct as to what is best for their species and the individual animal. Some animals can be trained to do things but no animal can make an individual choice between good and evil.

Thanks