So many evil men...can't stand it

[SplitHeadGirl]

First of all, I know fully well that men will get upset at what I think and am about to say, so I would like to clarify that I am talking about EVIL men, not the good, wonderful dads and granddads and husbands and nice single blokes out there....the ones who I KNOW (my brain, not my gut, tells me so) are in a majority, but who seem to be few (is it their deafening silence?)

But any fool can see that the sheer amount of men, who are prepared to do unspeakable things to women and girls (and boys as well as other men, not to mention the vulnerable and the elderly...wow, the list goes on) is just overwhelming. I read today about Anene Booysen, and I was absolutely heartbroken, but yet not shocked. For men to be so diabolical to women is not shocking anymore, and that is men's greatest tragedy.

I have two little daughters, and a little son, and I fear for them at the hands of men. Not women...just men.

I feel like I am thinking out loud with this post, so no worries if no one feels they can respond. I just wish I didn't feel so helpless at the tsunami of male violence.

Hello everyone,

Thank you for all your reports, and apologies for arriving late to this thread. Can we remind you of our talk guidelines, particularly in regards to personal attack and troll hunting.

I open the paper and see the evil done by some men, and turn the pages to see ever more damage done by some men. So depressing and sad.

The one in four figure comes from the British Crime Survey actually and it's pretty stable each time it's published. The police accept its findings as a more reliable guide to crime than their own figures, because so many crimes go unreported (particularly rape which only has a 10-15% reporting rate.

Rape actually has several meanings. There's the figurative one (rape of the countryside etc.) and the literal one, describing the penetration of an unwilling woman. Within that, there's the legal definition of rape, which varies depending on which jurisdiction you're in and the one used colloquially. The one that's used colloquially is used differently by people depending on their POV. A woman may have a different view from a man. A rape apologist will have a different view from someone who implacably opposes rape in all circumstances.

The good thing about being a man is that they got to define what rape was and they defined it in such a way that they gave themselves legal permission to rape women without it ever being called rape. The fact that some women may have felt themselves to be raped, was not important, rape apologists got to tell women they hadn't been, because it's not the victim who defines rape, it's the law as made by people who were never going to be victims but may have included perpetrators.

Brilliant eh?

Norudeshit do we know what the breakdown by sex is of the perpetrators of sexual assault?

Rape definitions are broad enough and clear enough. It's never going to be good enough for you Basil, lets be honest here.

There has been 1 deletion on this thread TheLateKateSMumsnet and one personal attack withdrawn. So clearly not a lot of personal attacks and I haven't seen any trolling so why the comment?

And as for your statement Brenslo:

"There isn't a woman in the world who's in a relationship with a man who hasn't had coerced sex."

Jesus. And you're calling feminists man-haters? Really?

Basil - I have no idea and have no intention of looking it up. I was merely pointing out what a flawed statistic the 99.999% is and how misleading it is.
Surely you can see that it is misleading if a woman cannot commit that crime without joint enterprise (which is not always easy to prove).

In what way will it never be good enough for me SF?

Of course norudeshit, but let's face it, are the figures going to change markedly for sexual assault?

Are we going to find out that women commit 50% of sexual assaults? I doubt it.

In some jurisdictions, you don't need a penis to commit rape. Rape can be penetration by an object, so you don't need to be male to commit it. And still overwhelmingly, rapists are male. As are other convicted violent criminals.

Violence is gendered. It's not man-hating to say it. It's man-hating to imagine there's nothing we as a society can do about it, because somehow men are born that way and can't help it and therefore we'd all better just accept it and STFU about it instead of investigating ways we can change it.

Unless It's a feminist jury, a feminist judge, with feminist criteria & feminist sentencing (30+ years).

I'm very glad that the law & sentencing is not created by 'victims', it would hardly be 'balanced' would it.

"There isn't a woman in the world who's in a relationship with a man who hasn't had coerced sex."

If that was true, then it would mean all women have been raped.

I actually don't think it is, but I think most women who have relationships with men have probably been raped.

'Are we going to find out that women commit 50% of sexual assaults?'

I wouldn't be at all surprised if they did.

I was asking about that on the previous page, Basil. I asked if research had been done on the differences between violent and non-violent men. Someone said that the cause had been identified as a sense of entitlement. Are you - or anyone else - aware of any research in this area? Has it been identified as to why some men have this sense and some do not?

Given that all men grow up in a patriarchy, they should all have this sense, unless there are mitigating factors.

'I actually don't think it is, but I think most women who have relationships with men have probably been raped.'

..........words fail me. Hate speech.

Wy victims in quotes Sigmund? And why wouldn't it be balanced? Victims at least know the effects of crimes a damn sight more accurately than the perpetrators.

Why are you bothering to just make things up like that SF?

What's the point?

When have I ever said that?

I just think that the legal definition of rape should have some relationship to the actual reality of it.

Being forced to have penetrative sex you don't want to have, is most people's understanding of rape. It's not the law's, because the law has fought very hard to ensure that the rapist's definition is the one that holds sway.

Which is why it was legally possible to rape your wife and not be a rapist in law, right up until the 90's in this country.

And yet everyone knew that though technically, legally these men weren't rapists, in reality they were.

What's your definition of rape?

D'you think Breslo's comment was hate speech as well SF?

Of course norudeshit, but let's face it, are the figures going to change markedly for sexual assault?

I very much doubt it but I still object to such misleading statements being given out. I fortunately have the good sense to know that it isn't possible for a woman to rape a man (without joint enterprise) so of course the figure for rapists is going to show that 99.999% of them are men. But how many people will read something like that and not realise that the figure is misleading?
It's a bit like somebody telling me that 100% of convictions for theft in a given year were committed by people aged 10 or over - of course they were because anybody younger than that is below the age of criminal responsibility and cannot be prosecuted.
Statistics telling me the obvious are meaningless, but misleading statements about those statistics are just manipulative.

I agree with Sigmund that the victims of crime shouldn't be the ones who determine the sentence. But that's true for all crimes.

Grennie and Basilbabyeater.

I think you need to read her post in it's entirety to understand what Brenslo meant. She said she also encouraged her husband to have sex also sometimes. So is she also a rapist?

Greenie - you've just tumbled into the man-hating scenario that you feminists always claim is a figment of MRA's imagination.

'And why wouldn't it be balanced?'

Are you for real? I mean really? Really, really? You don't know why it wouldn't be balanced?

Hi Biggedybiggedy off the top of my head I can't point you to any research on violent vs non violent men, though I'm sure there's been a fair bit. There's certainly been a fair bit on rapists, but that's a specific form of violence.

No recognising that the majority of women have probably been coerced into sex, is not man hating.