Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

“There is no evidence that predatory and abusive men have ever had to pretend to be anything else to carry out abusive and predatory behaviour.”

106 replies

ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:06

I know this was years back.

It's just struck me again what vacuous bullshit it is.

Every man who has abused and predated has pretended to be something else.

How many men wear T shirts saying 'Hi, I'm a rapist', or state their intent to abuse children when applying for a job or meeting a prospective partner, or signing up for a dating app, or going out for a drink with someone, or spiking said someone's drink, or 'love bombing' a target, or stalking someone, or abusing their position of trust in their job, church, social group?

Every predator and abuser 'pretends' to not be a predator and abuser, surely?

Deception, manipulation and lying is a fundamental part of abuse.

It's quite chilling that politicians got to the point where they would make a statement like this.

It's effectively saying that men will openly warn us before abusing and predating. It's the direct opposite of the truth. In other words, it's a huge, blatant lie.

www.holyrood.com/news/view,shona-robison-must-resign-over-gender-reform-comments-alba-mp-says

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 15:31

Shortshriftandlethal · 03/10/2024 14:04

It's the Emperor's New Clothes, isn't it?

You go along with something because you think that is what everyone else is doing; even better if you've been told there is virtue in it.

So somebody has fed them this line, that predatory men don't 'pretend' to be otherwise? It's a fucking weird one. I wonder where it came from.

I'd imagine someone who said something like that had quite specific motivations for creating that lie.

OP posts:
ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 15:30

theilltemperedclavecinist · 03/10/2024 14:31

Can't the desire of a male to commit rape be a pure paraphilia in itself? Sex and power.

It's not classed as a paraphilia. Depressingly, it's perhaps too close to the norm/typical.

The list of paraphilias is fairly specific, although I'm sure there's probably other behaviour that would fall into that sphere:

'A total of eight Paraphilias are listed in the DSM V and include pedophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism, sexual sadism, sexual masochism, frotteurism, fetishism, and transvestic fetishism.'

'Paraphilias are persistent and recurrent sexual interests, urges, fantasies, or behaviors of marked intensity involving objects, activities, or even situations that are atypical in nature'

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK554425/#:~:text=Paraphilias%20are%20persistent%20and%20recurrent,of%20paraphilia%20and%20paraphilic%20disorders.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK554425#:~:text=Paraphilias%20are%20persistent%20and%20recurrent,of%20paraphilia%20and%20paraphilic%20disorders.

OP posts:
OllyBJolly · 03/10/2024 15:25

What gets me is how definitely and earnestly these words are said. It's like a groupthink that comes mainly from women who would claim to be feminists within "progressive" parties.

I think more and more that the predominance of the professional politician ie - university- spad- candidate- MP/MSP - creates an echo chamber that distances these individuals from the real world. They lose touch with common sense and critical thinking. They become so entrenched that they don't brook any view that conflicts with their own. It's quite scary really.

AstonScrapingsNameChange · 03/10/2024 15:07

ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:27

Yes, and again: vulnerable doesn't necessarily mean harmless.

This is a really important point.

A person can be both of these things.

theilltemperedclavecinist · 03/10/2024 14:34

Anyhow, if this is about single-sex spaces, when was the last time someone proposed their abolition 'because NAMALT'?

EdithStourton · 03/10/2024 14:32

One answer to that bullshit:
Savile.

theilltemperedclavecinist · 03/10/2024 14:31

ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:32

Virtually all the paraphilias centre on non-consensual participation. And people often have a 'cluster' of paraphilias.

Can't the desire of a male to commit rape be a pure paraphilia in itself? Sex and power.

Shortshriftandlethal · 03/10/2024 14:04

It's the Emperor's New Clothes, isn't it?

You go along with something because you think that is what everyone else is doing; even better if you've been told there is virtue in it.

ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:49

Yes, I suppose there's the chance it was just thoughtless waffle to try and argue against a view Robison/Sturgeon didn't want to support.

I just can't help feeling they were actively railing against safeguarding. It feels to me that they were somehow bamboozled into actively supporting and colluding with predators and abusers. I'm pretty sure they didn't do that intentionally, but how, how the fuck do qualified, moderately intelligent people get so hoodwinked that they end up in that position?

OP posts:
Anastomosisrex · 03/10/2024 13:46

Just here to repeat two very key and pertinent words in the OP:

vacuuous bullshit.

Jurassic Park Ian Malcom GIF
Shortshriftandlethal · 03/10/2024 13:36

There was a really interesting interview last week, on Radio 4 ( My Cultural Life), with the artist Marina Abromovich - whose 'art' is predicated on pushing the boundaries of her own body and inviting others to do the same. She ended up in some very extreme places.

popeydokey · 03/10/2024 13:35

OuterSpaceCadet · 03/10/2024 13:24

When abusers are professionals or status holders in a position of trust - teachers, doctors, scout leaders for example - the pretence is that they fully embody what that role is expected to be, with all the boundaries and duties of care that come with it.

If we didn't expect these boundaries and duties of care to be upheld, we wouldn't necessarily be happy undressing in a room alone with them or with our child spending all day with them behind a closed door.

Exactly this.

Shortshriftandlethal · 03/10/2024 13:34

DeanElderberry · 03/10/2024 13:30

It is also related to the (deluded imo) view discussed elsethread earlier that rape/abuse is about power and not about sex. For some men, sexual enjoyment comes from the exercise of power - the two are intertwined. A consenting partner is less fun.

Exhibitionism, frottage, voyeurism, invasions of private space - they are all sex acts, and the non-consensual element is a key component.

I think it comes down to boundaries. Pushing them, over-coming them, transgressing them. People who are into S&M always go on about boundaries too. The thing is once you push a boundary and it gives way - you tend to keep pushing more. The transgression of boundaries becomes the dopamine hit. The thing you are addicted to.

ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:32

DeanElderberry · 03/10/2024 13:30

It is also related to the (deluded imo) view discussed elsethread earlier that rape/abuse is about power and not about sex. For some men, sexual enjoyment comes from the exercise of power - the two are intertwined. A consenting partner is less fun.

Exhibitionism, frottage, voyeurism, invasions of private space - they are all sex acts, and the non-consensual element is a key component.

Virtually all the paraphilias centre on non-consensual participation. And people often have a 'cluster' of paraphilias.

OP posts:
ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:31

Shortshriftandlethal · 03/10/2024 13:29

Who was it that originally said that?

Shona Robison, Nicola Sturgeon also said it iirc. Link in OP.

OP posts:
RoyalCorgi · 03/10/2024 13:31

ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:26

It's showing a staggering lack of awareness of how predators operate. There are opportunist predators, sure, but even those generally require a bit of planning and malice aforethought. I really cannot grasp her thinking process, here.

I suppose she thinks that predators are sort of monstrous outsiders, 'others' who aren't part of society, aren't part of families or social groups or any kind of network?

I strongly suspect she doesn't think at all. She's fully subscribed to the gender bollocks, which requires that people actively don't think. If you allowed your brain to engage with the issue even for one short moment, you'd quickly see how nonsensical it was.

Shortshriftandlethal · 03/10/2024 13:31

Predators stalk their prey and become adept at noticing and targeting weakness, defencelssness and vulnerability.

DeanElderberry · 03/10/2024 13:30

It is also related to the (deluded imo) view discussed elsethread earlier that rape/abuse is about power and not about sex. For some men, sexual enjoyment comes from the exercise of power - the two are intertwined. A consenting partner is less fun.

Exhibitionism, frottage, voyeurism, invasions of private space - they are all sex acts, and the non-consensual element is a key component.

Shortshriftandlethal · 03/10/2024 13:29

ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:26

It's showing a staggering lack of awareness of how predators operate. There are opportunist predators, sure, but even those generally require a bit of planning and malice aforethought. I really cannot grasp her thinking process, here.

I suppose she thinks that predators are sort of monstrous outsiders, 'others' who aren't part of society, aren't part of families or social groups or any kind of network?

Who was it that originally said that?

ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:27

popeydokey · 03/10/2024 13:15

And the bloke who's "just John". "Oh, that's just John, that's just the way he is, you need to treat him differently and change your boundaries and requirements for funny/lonely/disadvantaged characters like him".

He might not be pretending but society is pretending his oddness means he's harmless.

Not that there's anything inherently wrong with being an oddball. It's just people shouldn't abandon their boundaries or safeguarding practices because of it.

I think there is something to be said about how much of this "hidden in plain sight" that people accommodate and let slide, for sure. But that doesn't mean that abusers don't pretend.

Yes, and again: vulnerable doesn't necessarily mean harmless.

OP posts:
ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:26

It's showing a staggering lack of awareness of how predators operate. There are opportunist predators, sure, but even those generally require a bit of planning and malice aforethought. I really cannot grasp her thinking process, here.

I suppose she thinks that predators are sort of monstrous outsiders, 'others' who aren't part of society, aren't part of families or social groups or any kind of network?

OP posts:
OuterSpaceCadet · 03/10/2024 13:24

When abusers are professionals or status holders in a position of trust - teachers, doctors, scout leaders for example - the pretence is that they fully embody what that role is expected to be, with all the boundaries and duties of care that come with it.

If we didn't expect these boundaries and duties of care to be upheld, we wouldn't necessarily be happy undressing in a room alone with them or with our child spending all day with them behind a closed door.

ArabellaScott · 03/10/2024 13:24

ReadWithScepticism · 03/10/2024 13:19

Additionally, why is the notion of 'pretence' made central here? Many, many Catholic priests, scoutmasters, pop stars, TV presenters who used their positions to abuse were fully sincere in their occupancy of those positions. The preists believed in God, Rolf Harris really loved kittens, the scoutmasters genuinely wanted to help boys build campfires, etc. And they wanted abusive sexual gratification too.

Their sincerity didn't eliminate the possibility that they would exploit those positions to abuse. It isn't necessarily about pretending at all (other than pretending not to be a rapist). It is about remembering that none of these statuses reduce the relatively high propensity that males have to commit sexual abuse. So we mustn't let any of those statuses justify gaps in safeguarding.

(Edit for clarity)

Edited

Yes. It's not that they are 'pretending' to be a priest or a scout master, although I suppose Robison's suggestion is that they were being insincere, because their motivation was to access vulnerable people and victims.

So what she is saying is that men are genuine in their intent when they seek positions of power and responsibility, and the raping/abuse is just a sort of unfortunate accidental thing that they fall into by chance having found themselves inexplicably in a position where they have easy access to victims?

OP posts:
ReadWithScepticism · 03/10/2024 13:19

Additionally, why is the notion of 'pretence' made central here? Many, many Catholic priests, scoutmasters, pop stars, TV presenters who used their positions to abuse were fully sincere in their occupancy of those positions. The preists believed in God, Rolf Harris really loved kittens, the scoutmasters genuinely wanted to help boys build campfires, etc. And they wanted abusive sexual gratification too.

Their sincerity didn't eliminate the possibility that they would exploit those positions to abuse. It isn't necessarily about pretending at all (other than pretending not to be a rapist). It is about remembering that none of these statuses reduce the relatively high propensity that males have to commit sexual abuse. So we mustn't let any of those statuses justify gaps in safeguarding.

(Edit for clarity)

Morwenscapacioussleeves · 03/10/2024 13:18

I had exactly this conversation with a Labour canvasser last night, there was an "oh" moment on his face when I spoke about sacred castes...