To be sick of victim blaming on MN?

[CherryChasingDotMuncher]

I'm sick to the back teeth of reading victim blaming comments on here. Am I the only one who's noticed the tides turning on MN recently?

Heaven forbid women who've been through a trauma wear clothes from their actual wardrobe and don't buy a "victim outfit" to wear in public. It appears they're not a real victim unless they adhere to a certain set of behaviours.

That's just one thread today. I've seen comments recently about what sexual assault victims wear, how drunk they are. Yesterday people were equating raping a woman with a woman lying about taking a contraceptive pill (someone even said this was the same as rape) and not too long ago someone commented that it was Amber Heard's own fault that she got hit by the phone Jonny Depp threw at her because she didn't duck.

If you challenge these comments then you're often called a feminazi, an idiot or a man-hater.

I know this is kind of a TAAT (or several threads) but I'm beyond disappointed that a website predominantly for women would have so many people letting the side down and believing that other women are either lying until they can prove otherwise or that they deserve the abuse they get from men. And if that woman has ever displayed any sexual behaviour ever, then it's even worse.

Want to see a REAL rape culture? Google Nanking Massacre. Trigger warning btw

I think you're a bit hard of thinking.

I think you're a bit hard of thinking

So the Nanking Massacre never happened? There isn't a rape culture in war?

Educate yourself

Doesn't the definition of rape in some countries involve digit penetration and object penetration, and thus means in those countries women can be accused of rape?

Woman charged with rape of male taxi driver

www.google.ie/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/12/woman-charged-rape-male-taxi-driver/amp/

No no no Mumof56 that story is false because it came from the telegraph. It's only true if it is written by a Guardian journalist

Not sure I like the 'this rape is worse than that rape' any more than I like victim blaming.
But it seems fairly clear from government statistics, Rape Crisis, Women's Aid and others that the incidence of sexual assault is a massive problem for women in the U.K., so I don't think it's an exaggeration to call it rape culture.

You did notice that incident took place in Ohio, didn't you? Rape is defined differently in different jurisdictions.

"So the Nanking Massacre never happened? There isn't a rape culture in war? "

Rape is certainly a weapon of war. Not sure culture is quite the right word in that context.

then there is no reason for the definition to change everywhere. Here's hoping

Sure it is. A rape culture within the military

@Bert

odd you had no issue with Cherry presenting a case from Switzerland to try and back up their claims

Can I ask posters like Mumto 56 and gotspoiler, to name the first 2 that come to mind what their objective is when you post on thread like this? What would you like to happen/change?

BertrandRussell

I disagree, rape isn't a weapon of war. It's a tool used to boost moral for the troops.

@Bert

What is your objective for posting on a thread like this, what would you like changed?

kursk and to diminish the morale of the captive/civilian population. In that sense it is a weapon of war.

Rape has been used in war since time immemorial to subjugate and demoralize civilian populations. It is most definitely a weapon of war.

I would hazard a guess that the objective of some posters on some threads is to confuse and derail women who are trying to develop, reinforce or share their views on matters such as consent, sexual violence and victim blaming. And housework.

I think not taking the pill could be a controlling dominating act, I've seen some say men do it because they want to trap women and have that control, we've seen on MN posts by women who want to trap men, so if a woman doesn't take the pill after it being the agreed contraceptive measure between the couple to try and get pregnant to "keep" the man and have some control over him then I would say that's a controlling and dominant act.

I also think that not taking the pill and not using condoms when that is the agreed preventative measure is the same. You've consented to sex under those conditions if those conditions haven't been met purposefully by one party then the other could never really give consent.

@CherryChasingDotMuncher mentioned it's because the pill isn't taken at the time of the act, I don't think this matters if it was a preplanned incident, or a woman says that she will take a MAP ( this I'm talking ideally about in a trusting developed relationship)

I also think the physical assault aspect is non important as if you're talking abut the act itself, if it was regular sex just without a condom at the timing of the act there would be no added physical assault as the actual act remains the same, and dependent on position etc the woman could be in control and still has some control in general with thrusts etc so it could be argued that the act would hurt both parties when in reality it's a normal sex session.

If you're talking about after, not every act of non protected sex will cause pregnancy, and not all pregnancies cause the same amount of harm, so this aspect is speculative, as it is about the potentially physical and mental effects bringing up a child could have on a man.

Men could have chosen celibacy but at the same time if we're talking solely about planned sexual encounters with absolute consent based on the contraceptive method so could a woman. I've seen loads of" yeah men need to obviously have sex with women/ get their wick away and it's their fault for having sex and the woman getting pregnant they shouldn't of had sex with her" but this is never said to a woman (again talking only about consensual sex) when women have a lot more options and then the ultimate say if a pregnancy is carried to term( not saying women shouldn't before someone attempts to say I did!) , and although many cannot face having an abortion themselves we're lucky that here it is an actual choice whether you choose it or not. The fact that you may be "inflicting" pregnancy on yourself vs someone else potentially deciding that is a concern warranted, but we know not using a condom is awful, but as I said above the actual harm a pregnancy can cause to each potential parent throughout either the child's life or the parents is somewhat speculative.

Therefore I do believe not taking the pill when that is the agreed contraceptive measure is as bad as not using a condom.

I would hazard a guess that the objective of some posters on some threads is to confuse and derail women who are trying to develop, reinforce or share their views on matters such as consent, sexual violence and victim blaming. And housework

Actually I like to raise the awareness that it happens to men too. I know I know wat about teh menz? Those silly menz and their problems. Many MNers have sons. Many MNers with sons love them, at least I hope they do. So if any sons of these MNers tell their mother they were abused, assaulted, raped etc by a woman what are they going to do? In threads like these it seems the mother would say 'nah ah ahhhhhhh. more women get assaulted by men, check your privilege because we live in a patriarchy'

Frankly it's disgusting. More women, mothers especially need to be aware this shit happens to men. Their brothers, sons, nephews etc

@What would hazard a guess that the objective of some posters on some threads is to confuse and derail women who are trying to develop, reinforce or share their views on matters such as consent, sexual violence and victim blaming. And housework.

Presenting facts confuses women does it?

"More women, mothers especially need to be aware this shit happens to men"

What on earth makes you think we don't know that?

"Presenting facts confuses women does it? hmm"

Remind me what facts you're presenting?

The thread was about victim blaming. If a poster came along and said 'I agree, victim blaming is awful; it's awful when it happens to women and it's awful when it happens to men' that would not have derailed the thread or started a bunfight.

That's not what happened. Instead, pps came along, accused OP of being a rape apologist and insisted the discussion should focus on the very specific, not particularly representative and dubiously evidenced topic of female-on-male sexual / trust violations.

Men are victimised and blamed for their victimisation and that matters just as much as when it happens to women. But we are not allowed to discuss it because the people who typically victimise them are also men and discussion of male pattern violence must be instantly shut down.

What on earth makes you think we don't know that?

The lack of care or empathy when bad things happen to men. Makes me wonder if many MNers with sons simply don't care

"The lack of care or empathy when bad things happen to men"

Such as?