You are parsing my comments entirely incorrectly. See my response to Joreth above.
As in some previous discussion about the use of terms like "rape culture," while the goals are extremely valid the antagonistic and hateful language directed at men who're struggling with these shifts not only ignores the realities many of them face but actually turns them from taking a positive path by making them feel attacked.
Re-read her descriptions of men who, for some of the reasons I cited, are likely to feel that such a change WOULD mean they don't get sex. Valid or not, dismissing their concern and demeaning them for HAVING it rather than engaging them in constructive dialog about how to deal with the issue in a healthy manner not only won't get the VERY important message of "You MUST get affirmative consent" across, it will actually anger and alienate many of them.
Unfortunately the reactionary way in which both of you chose to parse my words is a huge part of this problem. There's a heavily anti-male "with us or against us" slant to many of these discussions where people automatically assume that calling ANY part of a proposed orthodoxy in to question means that you're supporting something awful.
First thing I typed: "I agree entirely with your premise" The portions you're quoting came from a section that was noted in its last sentence as intended to "give a different perspective on some of the men you're hearing from" not to defend their behavior but to put a face on comments like this: First of all, boo hoo. If the only way you can have sex is to find women who are afraid to say no, I'm really not very sympathetic to your sense of entitlement. Second of all, if all the men in the world just up and stopped fucking anyone who refused to give consent when they really did want sex, I guarantee this whole "nice girls don't say yes" bullshit will go right out the window." because a) the second half of the statement is simply unrealistic and b) the first half is an outright attack/insult that will HARM the important message.
Go back & read my last paragraph again, especially the opening & closing sentences: "So again, I agree with your premise & I think it's a good idea." "for some guys who move in to it before the women around them catch up it DOES probably mean they'll go without sex. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it, but I'd argue by dismissing & demeaning those who raise the concern you're hurting your message."
In other words I CONSISTENTLY supported the aims of this and agreed with it, yet you STILL read sections of my words out of context as supporting something I find abhorrent. As in the previous "rape culture" discussions all I was saying is "Yes! This is a huge problem! YES! We need to change these things! However, hateful language and antagonism will not solve the problem, they'll set efforts BACK." In BOTH cases I have been attacked, told I don't "get" it, and have been accused of "supporting rape" when in fact I do no such thing.
no subject
See my response to Joreth above.
As in some previous discussion about the use of terms like "rape culture," while the goals are extremely valid the antagonistic and hateful language directed at men who're struggling with these shifts not only ignores the realities many of them face but actually turns them from taking a positive path by making them feel attacked.
Re-read her descriptions of men who, for some of the reasons I cited, are likely to feel that such a change WOULD mean they don't get sex. Valid or not, dismissing their concern and demeaning them for HAVING it rather than engaging them in constructive dialog about how to deal with the issue in a healthy manner not only won't get the VERY important message of "You MUST get affirmative consent" across, it will actually anger and alienate many of them.
Unfortunately the reactionary way in which both of you chose to parse my words is a huge part of this problem. There's a heavily anti-male "with us or against us" slant to many of these discussions where people automatically assume that calling ANY part of a proposed orthodoxy in to question means that you're supporting something awful.
First thing I typed:
"I agree entirely with your premise"
The portions you're quoting came from a section that was noted in its last sentence as intended to "give a different perspective on some of the men you're hearing from" not to defend their behavior but to put a face on comments like this:
First of all, boo hoo. If the only way you can have sex is to find women who are afraid to say no, I'm really not very sympathetic to your sense of entitlement. Second of all, if all the men in the world just up and stopped fucking anyone who refused to give consent when they really did want sex, I guarantee this whole "nice girls don't say yes" bullshit will go right out the window."
because a) the second half of the statement is simply unrealistic and b) the first half is an outright attack/insult that will HARM the important message.
Go back & read my last paragraph again, especially the opening & closing sentences:
"So again, I agree with your premise & I think it's a good idea."
"for some guys who move in to it before the women around them catch up it DOES probably mean they'll go without sex. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it, but I'd argue by dismissing & demeaning those who raise the concern you're hurting your message."
In other words I CONSISTENTLY supported the aims of this and agreed with it, yet you STILL read sections of my words out of context as supporting something I find abhorrent. As in the previous "rape culture" discussions all I was saying is "Yes! This is a huge problem! YES! We need to change these things! However, hateful language and antagonism will not solve the problem, they'll set efforts BACK." In BOTH cases I have been attacked, told I don't "get" it, and have been accused of "supporting rape" when in fact I do no such thing.