"Give Us The Freedom To Risk Rape"

[Howseitgoin]

Famed feminist Camille Paglia's interesting views on women's freedoms:

"Yes this is probably the most controversial area that I have written about.
From the start, when I became known in the early 1990s, this has been, my views on this subject have been highly inflammatory.

And I am coming to the subject from the point of view of a 1960s women, who, as a student, when I arrived as a freshman, my first year in 1964, the college, rebelled against the strict surveillance by the college administration of the lives of the women students.

This was the period that was called 'in loco parentis', that is, 'in place of the parents'. The college administrations felt that they had the obligation to supervise, to monitor, and protect the women students as they did not the male students.

Hence we had all girl dormitories and all male dormitories. The men could come and go at any hour of the day or night. We women had to sign in at 11 o'clock at night, so that the authorities of the college knew where. And we said, my generation rebelled, and called for an end to this practice. And they said, the world is dangerous, we have an obligation to protect you against rape. And what we said was 'give us the freedom to risk rape. That is true freedom'. That is what the sexual revolution gave to women.

Now, what will women do with the freedom? Feminism should have taken my view and said that 'now, you are an equal of a man and you must protect yourself as a man would. You must see the world as dangerous as a man would.' You must be as defensive and hyper-aware of your surroundings as a man would. Because men too are attacked for all kinds of things. Men too are the victims of crime and so on.

Instead, we've had this process of women calling for protections, a new paternalism, from the government and now from the college administrations again. They want to draw the parent figures back into their sex lives. This to me, is a major major fault of contemporary feminism. There are great responsibilities that come with freedom. And one of them is that you must take responsibility for your own defense."

Seems particularly relevant in terms of today's demand for 'women's private spaces'

Thoughts?

It has been mentioned before AnSolas, I believe that the intention is that the posts are meant to be either word salad or deliberately confusing because the context is removed. The less this poster says the more this poster can jeer and indulge in fuckwittery. If the poster has to reply with thought out ideas and evidence, they generally show just how flawed their points are. And pretty much what there motivation really is.

Yup

it’s literary (and possibly also literal) onanism

Hint.
Best HR advice you can give to anybody :
Identify as hard-to-sack and HR will special order in the lagest barge pole they can afford.
Amyway..

Why exactly are you are providing evidence that Paglia is a Mens Rights First Feminist?

Will you be able to provide some relevance to this:

"That Paglia & Greer have expressed certain positions that are in conflict with trans rights is irrelevant given their over all principles support self determination & are specifically anti nanny state."

and why men should be allowed into all and any space they want?

yes BB.

We are expected to absorb the belittling, the demonising, the 'condescension and supercilious crap'. If we answer in return we are to be jeered at and we are the problem.

As I said on the other thread, I dealt with this particular aspect of superior male hood daily in Australia. I don't believe it when people say that Australia is a misogynistic country, because I deal with versions of this here in the UK. But here lacks the cultural element I picked up the other day. But once you have grown up with it, you cannot miss it.

Bernard, the Matterhorn is growing hourly.

"I can't imagine any decent man who sees these crimes as heinous would be centering his own feelings here at all. If his take away from women naming crimes as male crimes is to make that about him and his hurt feelings, because he's a NICE man and the women talking about the crimes didnt make it clear they don't mean HIM, then he needs to grow up, get perspective and accept he's not the centre of the world."

Intuitively this makes sense but in practice howse this working for us?

Y'know how 'white people's historical crimes' are used to implicate all white people today? That they should carry the guilt & are intrinsically prone to commit acts of racism? Pray tell how did that end? It ended with white people closing ranks & voting in the most far right bigoted racists (sexists) hell bent on white nationalism not to mention going scorched earth on any programs designed to uplift racial minorities. That's the fruit of identity politics.

It's one thing to play it tough on behalf of women but when you do just remember that they have to live with those consequences.

I very deliberately did not. But someone wants to misrepresent what I said.

The "TrueBeliver Woken" who believed humans can change sex? 🙃
My bingo card is just missing "red head" and "coral" but I have not reached midway. Yet!

The "Dear Reader" begin to see a pattern of "waa waa waa" against the backdrop of posters who provide evidence and engage.

Sadly it is part of the contortion tactics that go hand and hand with removing the context.

The aim is to just make anyone posting feel like they are the stupid ones and to ask for clarification. Which gives further opportunity to denigrate and belittle. But the poster doesn’t like it when women mirror that style of posting. Of course.

Hummm new word for day🤣

And cas bleach is bad have a kitten🐆🐈🐈‍⬛

Have you lost track of your theme of " this identity politic " is OK?

I see. So you're saying that the decent men are simply those who haven't hurt us yet? And that this could easily change if we are not careful to avoid causing them offence? How ironic that your view of men appears to be lower than mine.

"I see. So you're saying that the decent men are simply those who haven't hurt us yet? And that this could easily change if we are not careful to avoid causing them offence? How ironic that your view of men appears to be lower than mine."

Um, I'm not being prescriptive. I'm describing cold hard facts. Life not being fair isn't exactly news.

And you seem to have a pretty low view of women sat cowering waiting for men to hurt them, apparently.

The women I know don't view life like this. They work hand in hand with the men in their lives with the understanding that men and women can and do hurt each other from time to time. I for one admire the majority of men who work hard for their families and appreciate their wives or partners working hard alongside them.

If you take this combative, negative approach to any relationship you have with a man, my guess is that it will never end up proving fruitful.

And you seem to have a pretty low view of women sat cowering waiting for men to hurt them, apparently.

Lol, who suggested cowering? Women are not a monolith so whilst some mistep others have quite the capacity to be strategic. I'm simply suggesting framing matters & shaming doesn't work.

The women I know don't view life like this. They work hand in hand with the men in their lives with the understanding that men and women can and do hurt each other from time to time. I for one admire the majority of men who work hard for their families and appreciate their wives or partners working hard alongside them.
If you take this combative, negative approach to any relationship you have with a man, my guess is that it will never end up proving fruitful.

Um what on earth are you talking about? I'm suggesting just the opposite.

What cold hard fact?

That a man who would never rape and treats the women (and men) in his life well is going to suddenly make and/or support laws which allow rape or sexual abuse or other harms to the women in his life.

To be fair the OP is adamant transwomen are women so 'cold hard facts' probably isn't their forte.

I'm simply suggesting framing matters & shaming doesn't work.

What do you mean when you use the term "framing matters"?

What do you mean when you use the words "shaming doesn't work"

Can you quote yourself when you suggested the opposite to:

The women I know don't view life like this. They work hand in hand with the men in their lives with the understanding that men and women can and do hurt each other from time to time. I for one admire the majority of men who work hard for their families and appreciate their wives or partners working hard alongside them.
If you take this combative, negative approach to any relationship you have with a man, my guess is that it will never end up proving fruitful.

^ this?

But all of your posts are criticising women in general for making men in general feel bad, by judging men in general, rather than individually. You're doing to women exactly what you say women shouldn't do to men, aren't you?

I think they seem like cold hard facts to you because you're projecting from a bubble.
Outside of the communities of enraged, youngish men, socially excluded, unhappy with their lives, blaming women for the ills they percieve to have befallen them, the majority of men are living their lives without too much care for what women are saying about men who aren't them.
They live fortunate lives by comparison with women, and go about their business happy in their privilege, positive relationships with the women in their lives, and not too much to be angry with women about.
I'd be extremely surprised if all these average Joes (the decent men, if you will) suddenly banded together with their less fortunate and more angry brethren who are hurt by women discussing rape.

Men are not Hypervigilant like women are. I don’t agree with quite a few statements there.

if curfew is the way to go why dont we give the men a bedtime? After all they attack men and women it’s not the women doing the attacking! Would be a safer world for all

Shaming people may or may not be helpful, but feeling shame when we have behaved badly is a useful emotion for improving our behaviour in the future or for making it harder for us to ignore other people's needs and feelings. This is alongside societal boundaries, which protect people from uncontrolled behaviour. Just what should invoke feelings of shame and what shouldn't, and where boundaries should be and how rigid, are the source of endless philosophical and practical debate. Shame and boundaries are both vital in moderating our desires so that we don't blunder around hurting people. The excesses of libertarianism and queer theory, just as much as authoritarian ideologies, result in real damage to people.

It’s still victim blaming. Paglia could have called on men to stop raping and attacking women, but didn’t. She rolled over and assumed men will always be like that.

Second wave feminism did a great deal of work on getting men to consider consent and see women as people, then the 90s backlash of the lads and banter took over. Third wave feminism decided being a ladette was better than seeking true equality.

And here we are.