Sigh. I've been deleted and blocked by yet another feminist page on Facebook....

[AnnieLobeseder]

...for daring to disagree with them on something they've posted.

Are they really so bloody-minded that they can't handle debate on their philosophies? I realise they get a lot of nasty trolling spam, but there's a world of difference between MRA nastiness and another feminist wanting to debate feminism!!

Is it just me?

"I think the major problem is that some feminists want to use the rape for politicle purposes" Err no. We want men to stop raping us. That isn't a political purpose. It is survival.

But thank you for telling is we can't distinguish "clear women only issues". I wasn't aware we had to.

I don't think saying "men rape" or "some men rape" or "rapists are men" creates or strengthens rape culture, in the way that I think the fact that "everyone does it" strengthened the MP-expense fiddling culture.

Things that strengthen rape culture are colleges suspending students for reporting sexual assaults, or famous tennis players blaming 16 year olds for going to parties etc.

And those things are about the rape victims, not about the rapists.

I think MRD is saying "men rape" because that is putting the focus on the perpetrator not the victim. I do see the objections to the "class" language but I also see the intention of the point.

"Rapists are to blame for rape"?

The trouble with the "women are child batterers" is I assume there is a specific sun group that applies to, ie mothers?

I read "men rape" in the same way as I read "women give birth" - I mentally insert a "are the ones who" between noun and verb.

garlic - see what you're saying, but sexual assault is different from rape, however you define it in law. Consequences etc.

I agree with doctrine that 'rapists are to blame for rape' is good, but I think it also begs the question 'who thinks they aren't, then?', which is problematic.

garlicnutty Rape defn in UK - yep a men only crime. Crimes by women are usually sexual assault.

Men Rape. (Yes, not all do, but overwhelmingly those who commit this crime are men)

Pakistani Men form groups to groom white girls for underage sex. (Yes, not all do, but overwhelmingly those who commit this group are Pakistani/Kashmiri. If you want to be even more offensive to a group, try replacing Pakistani with Muslim)

Women batter children (Yes, not all do, but the vast majority of those who commit this crime are women)

Be that as it may:

Just a reminder for anyone that doubts it, most rapes aren't reported; Perpetrators? Roughly 6% of men, who will commit around 6 rapes apiece. Source.

94% of men don't rape; the 6% who do are likely repeat offenders.
Don't be one of the 6%.

Don't laugh at rape jokes.

Are those remotely accurate, OMG? I don't think they are, are they?

If they were, perhaps there'd be a point.

It's not 'overwhelmingly' men who rape: women cannot rape.

Wow, OMC, I've just read your last link! Powerful, and I shall be quoting it! Cheers.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik

Are what accurate the summaries after "men rap"e or the quoted stats?

The summaries. Pakistani/Kashmiri - as far as group prosecutions over the last 3 years, overwhelmingly so, I understood. Woman battering children? Don't know, nicked from up thread.

The stats - didn't the link provide sources?
Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending Among Undetected Rapists by David Lesak and Paul M. Miller, published in Violence and Victims, Vol 17, No. 1, 2002 (Lisak & Miller 2002)

Oh, BTW ITYM women cannot rape in the UK; it's certainly an offence in the US see also

Erm ... really sure the Pakistani ref is not true. Why would you look at group prosecutions? Surely you'd be looking at the organized trade (sorry, horrible topic, but ...).

I think probably speculating on possibilities demonstrates why your statements aren't the same kind of statement as 'men rape', are they?

I'm not chasing up any references as I'm being upset by a few threads atm - Loose Women calls, I think - but, MRD, I do remember the chief investigating officer saying that their investigations had been hampered by fear of appearing racist. The advocate for some of the victims said so, too ... also that her clients' troublesome backgrounds had prejudiced social services against them, but that's a different point. OMC is right, the gangs were/are specifically Pakistani.

Are you certain you're not thinking only of the UK, and recent prosecuted cases? I rather think you must be. I've never heard that Pakistani men run, for example, the child grooming rings in Russia and Thailand, which are two of the largest exporters of trafficked children from what I understand.

I would point out, too, that the officer saying his investigation was hampered by fear of looking racist may well be true and is certainly upsetting, but doesn't actually prove that OMC's statement is true.

However, I'm letting myself get sidetracked.

The statements are not the same kind of statement, are they?

'Men rape' is a statement that makes the most general claim possible under UK law. It has nothing whatsoever to do with recent cases, and the only thing that would make it an invalid statement would be if the law changed.

'Pakistani men groom children' is not the same kind of statement, because 'grooming children' is not something only Pakistani men can do (unless you're a monumental racist which no-one on this thread is).

Right?

This point's been gone over on this thread already.

I am absolutely certain the Pakistani reference is untrue and nor am I sure about the women and violence against children statistic. Kritiq used to be good about those stats I'll see if I can dig out an old post of hers which explains where that stat comes from.

The media portrayal of these gangs of men who effectively kidnap and rape girls has been extremely racist. I know someone who works in this area. Within the groups organising this there have been white men (although they may not have been prosecuted). The girls were raped by white men. As MRD says there are plenty of examples of white men and organised crime trafficking, exploiting and prostituting women and girls. The defining factor is not race, it is gender.

And can I ask we stop using the word "grooming" it is really minimising. They were raping these children. It is child rape.

Are you certain you're not thinking only of the UK, and recent prosecuted cases?

No, I was thinking of exactly that. Sorry if I've misunderstood.

<a class="break-all" href="http://www.thelizlibrary.org/site-index/site-index-frame.html#soulwww.thelizlibrary.org/liz/statistics.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">child battery by a fellow fan of statistical rectitude

No worries! Easily done.

That's the reason they're different kinds of statements. If you're talking about recent cases, saying 'The pakistani men groomed children' is accurate. If you're talking about the rape of children as a practice, you'd not say that, because (sadly) all sorts of people can and do rape children.

In the other situation, under UK law, only men rape.

I think doctrine's comparison to 'women give birth' is the best way of thinking about it though. Or 'women have abortions; men use condoms'. It doesn't mean all women give birth and have abortions. Just that women are the gender who do it.

scallops, really sorry, I take your point, you're completely right.

"The overall statistics give the lie to such claims. Greater Manchester Police, in whose area the offences took place, has declared that 95 per cent of the men on its sex offenders register are white. Just five per cent are Asian. But things do look different when the focus is narrowed to crimes involving groups of men grooming girls on the street. In 18 child sexual exploitation trials since 1997 ? in Derby, Leeds, Blackpool, Blackburn, Rotherham, Sheffield, Rochdale, Oldham and Birmingham ? relating to the on-street grooming of girls aged 11 to 16 by two or more men, most of those convicted were of Pakistani heritage."

I don't think any of us are denying that those prosecuted were mainly of Pakistani heritage. We are saying that it isn't the whole picture.

Ah, OK it's the summaries - no, as stated, I understood and nicked for upthread I don't know if it's true or not.

As with your pointer to my UK bias, I'd point to yours - women rape too elsewhere in the world.

My point was rather that we all bristle about Pakistani groups being groomers - it being untrue that Pakistani men groom children. The vastest majority don't.

It's therefore not all that surprising that some people find "Men rape" a facile simplification.

Similarly, it's quite likely that the most offended by the statement up thread would be Pakistani men - "Men rape" doesn't offend me, but it's not helpful and doesn't address the issue...

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik

I think doctrine's comparison to 'women give birth' is the best way of thinking about it though. Or 'women have abortions; men use condoms'. It doesn't mean all women give birth and have abortions. Just that women are the gender who do it.

Ah.
Men rape or sexually assault in the UK
Women sexually assault in the UK

Got you.

Did you not read my copious 'under UK law' disclaimers?

I also said upthread that rape is different in consequences from sexual assualt.

Your point makes no sense. They're not comparable statements. Honestly, this has been gone over and over.

To be brutally honest, I can't help feeling that if you believe a statement is 'not helpful', it's probably a reasonable sign it's doing it's job. These statements aren't meant to be comfortable fluffy bunnikins for you.

Cross post.

Wahey. Yes, you've got it.

Considering we're in this conversation thanks to the statement "men rape", it seems odd that we are still exhibiting adverse reactions to statements that "Pakistanis do X" and "Women do Y". All of these statements are misleading in the same way.

The sole difference is that only men can rape under UK law, whereas other nationalities can systematically abuse girls and other genders can beat children. The statement "men rape" has been justified by its gender exclusivity. This exclusivity only exists, however, by virtue of the British statute book. The defence is invalid in other countries with different laws, since it depends on a legal definition of rape. How can "men rape" be an acceptable statement in the UK but not in Canada?

In Victorian times, UK law said only men could be homosexual. Would it be true to say, therefore, that "Victorian men were gay"?

I'm giving up on this now, anyhow (FWR heaves sigh of relief,) as I feel I'm trying to pitch logic against emotion. That rarely works.

It does address the issue that feminists want to address. Which is that men have used rape as a tool for oppressing women.

Upthread is LeithLurker demanding that feminists shouldn't use rape politically yet that is what men have been doing for centuries.

We have to be able to name our oppressors and define what they do to us.

There is no equivalent comparison with Women are... because women don't oppress men.

And the whole UK thing. Do you really believe that there aren't gangs of white men in the UK exploiting and raping through prositution women and girls? Really? Because you are wrong.

Oh and it isn't fucking grooming.

No, they're not misleading in the same way, garlic.

Come on. Honestly, are you not reading, or disagreeing but feeling it doesn't matter to take issue, just to refute?

You're not normally like this.