Al Gore - Officially being investigated for sexual assault

65 posts / 0 new
Last post
Daedalus Daedalus's picture

Well, I read it again and I'm still seeing the same thing - "most men get away with it [rape]. Every fucking day.". The most generous parsing of the statement that I can come up with is that most men are rapists and it happens every day (rather than most men committing rape every day). Perhaps you can elaborate.

KenS

For discussion dynamics writer I have you to apologise to writer, but not babble or people in this thread in general.

The babble dynamic that gets me is the pile-on for the sins of thought deviation. I've never liked it. And lately I've written a fair bit about it. Increasingly, its all I write about. Intellectualy, I knew that would probably get nowhere. "Oh well, no harm in trying." But it turns out I wasnt philosophical about getting zero response or indication of people thinking about it.... even tho I knew that was the most likely outcome.

Thus primed, self-primed in my books, I reacted to that dynamic happening again, when it wasnt. So I apologised for doing that. And I certainly see the irony in my being so touchy.

Because of reactions like that I'm out of here for some time. So I'm not into discussing this. I only came back because I think I'm obliged to make some kind of explanation.

writer writer's picture

Thanks, KenS.

Daedalus, most men [who abuse / harass] get away with it. Most men [and women] let them get away with it by not acknowledging how pervasive it is, not challenging the social norms that make it so chronic, not acknowledging that they may, in fact, know abusers, and by perpetuating the myth that these are isolated cases not connected by a tight web of oppression.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Daedalus, 1 in 4 college women have experienced rape. In the UK, rape conviction rates are a stunning 6.5%, which is actually up from 5% a few years ago. You can find similar studies in Canada and the US. Keep in mind that a miniscule amount of rapes are actuallty reported (less than 10%) so the number of rapists who end up with jail time is disgracefully low. I'd say that demonstrates that "most men get away with it."

At any rate, this is not the thread for men to feel victimized. So if you feel your self-esteem taking a blow, keep it to yourself. I'm not sure what purpose this thread serves aside from educating a few men about the realities of rape. As for the topic in the OP, I have a feeling that Mr. Gore will pull through. I don't have the same confidence for his accuser.

George Victor

"I'm not sure what purpose this thread serves" either, Catch...even armed with such vital statistics. But I'm sure that the National Enquirer is filled with stories that challenge status quo beliefs and value systems just begging for bitterly fought battles with no bloody hope of resolution. It sells to people with the margin in mind.  But should this venue be open to National Enquirer level challenges from folks who know that there will be blood?

kropotkin1951

Daedalus wrote:

Well, I read it again and I'm still seeing the same thing - "most men get away with it [rape]. Every fucking day.". The most generous parsing of the statement that I can come up with is that most men are rapists and it happens every day (rather than most men committing rape every day). Perhaps you can elaborate.

 

It is hard to say whether most men are guilty of sexual assault but if is not 50% it is sure close to that number. I cannot think of any of my close women friends or lovers who didn't have a story of sexual assault.  Having experienced it myself I guess they have shared more with me than they would with most men.  

I have worked very hard and continue to work daily on the only thing I know that I have control over and that is my behaviour as a man.  One of the buttons in my collection is one that says Real Men Don't Need Porn. My wife and I try very hard to model an equality relationship for our sons, daughters and grandsons and grand daughters. Fathers need to teach their boys that sexism is wrong. Uncles and Grand fathers can also help teach young boys when their own father is the problem.  Silence should never be an option because as someone who survived a catholic upbringing I know that silence breeds abuse.

Bacchus

George Victor wrote:

"I'm not sure what purpose this thread serves" either, Catch...even armed with such vital statistics. But I'm sure that the National Enquirer is filled with stories that challenge status quo beliefs and value systems just begging for bitterly fought battles with no bloody hope of resolution. It sells to people with the margin in mind.  But should this venue be open to National Enquirer level challenges from folks who know that there will be blood?

 

I know you have a hate on for Sven george but ET didnt quote the Nation Enquirier and I can post the link for the CNN article as well if you wish? Its not just a inveted news story the likes of which grace the pages of the enquirer.

 

You really need to let it go. Im uncomfortable with the thread as a whole but these attacks just demean you

Daedalus Daedalus's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:
It is hard to say whether most men are guilty of sexual assault but if is not 50% it is sure close to that number. I cannot think of any of my close women friends or lovers who didn't have a story of sexual assault.

 

I know that the number of victims is extremely high - but unless the perpetrators are only doing it once or twice apiece, which I strongly doubt, the number of perpetrators is necessarily several times smaller than the number of victims. My thought is that the average rapist probably has numerous victims.  Personally I think we're talking about a fairly large proportion of men, but 50% simply doesn't add up - unless you're counting those who provide moral comfort to the perpetrators (being that they enable them, and can be considered participants in that sense) in which case I'd put it well over 50%.

My problem with the assumption that "most" men, besides the mathematical impossibilities involved, is that it makes the non-rapist aberrant, which I just don't think is the case. I don't think rape is natural or instinctual, quite the opposite.

Maysie Maysie's picture

Daedalus wrote:
 I know that the number of victims is extremely high - but unless the perpetrators are only doing it once or twice apiece, which I strongly doubt, the number of perpetrators is necessarily several times smaller than the number of victims. My thought is that the average rapist probably has numerous victims.  /quote

Your doubts and thoughts are incorrect. And I think you're conflating the media's stereotype of rape (perpetuated by a stranger plus lots of physical violence) with the range of what sexual assault encompasses.

Canada's is a rape culture (google it if you don't know what that is). As is the US. Sexual assault, rape, sexual harassment are daily realities for women. Both the threat as well as the acts.

If you are a man then you're living out your bias and privilege by not seeing what writer and others have taken time and patience to write out for you. If you're a woman who's never experienced this, or is numb to the realities of most women, then you are in fact an anomaly.

Patriarchy breeds both hatred and desire of women, by men. But to be clear, rape is not about sex, it's about power, and is merely the tool or the means by which this particular type of violence against women is acted upon.

Patriarchy also breeds male entitlement and sexual "acting out" (sorry I can't think of a better phrase) that ranges the gamut of sexual assault, rape, sexual harassment, as well as any and all ways (such as images and words) that sexualize and objectify women. Individual men may resist, or attempt to unlearn this, and they do. I know some of them. But yes, the majority of men have this, unfiltered, in their consciousness. Does this mean most (over 50%) of men are rapists? I don't know. I don't even think that's the point. The point is, this culture of power and dominance needs to stop.

See the thread "Don't Rape Part 1" started by writer today. For some reason I can't link to it.

Bacchus

Maysie wrote:

Patriarchy breeds both hatred and desire of women, by men. It also breeds male entitlement to sexual "acting out" (sorry I can't think of a better phrase) that ranges the gamut of sexual assault, rape, sexual harassment, as well as any and all images that sexualize and objectify women. Individual men may resist, or attempt to unlearn this, and they do. I know some of them. But yes, the majority of men have this, unfiltered, in their consciousness. Does this mean most (over 50%) of men are rapists? I don't know.

 

And would we even know if we were. We all know if we are the sort on tv. Run around with a mask and knife abducting women or breaking into their homes and violently attacking them and prob killing them.

But how much of real rapes are those? Aside from 3 in Toronto I can think of (paul bernardo and another balcony rapist, plus the one when I was at York) all the rest are from people the women knew. And that kind of sexual assault is miniscule compared to the vast majority of the other types that go on.

Daedalus Daedalus's picture

Maysie wrote:
the majority of men have this, unfiltered, in their consciousness. Does this mean most (over 50%) of men are rapists? I don't know. I don't even think that's the point. The point is, this culture of power and dominance needs to stop.

My only concern is with the notion of people being somehow inherently criminal/bad because of their race, gender, or whatnot. I don't believe in pre-judging people by who or what they were born as. No one can help that. People should be judged only by what they, as individuals, do and say - and they have the right not to be presumed guilty on the basis of gender or race or anything else like that.

 

I haven't got any other concerns or disputes than that - and I have nothing more to say on the matter. I was just pointing out a statement that I thought was carelessly made, and has undesirable implications. I didn't mean to distract from the topic of Al Gore and people's habit of knee-jerk defending things they know are wrong simply because of perceived alignment.

remind remind's picture

a man telling women to judge men by what they do and say, and ignores; the fact that that is what we have been doing, and that we do not have the luxury to presume innocence, before we take measures to protect ourselves

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Daedalus wrote:
My only concern is with the notion of people being somehow inherently criminal/bad because of their race, gender, or whatnot. I don't believe in pre-judging people by who or what they were born as. No one can help that. People should be judged only by what they, as individuals, do and say - and they have the right not to be presumed guilty on the basis of gender or race or anything else like that.

The privilege to examine and judge people as depoliticized entities is just that: privilege. Women, at least one in four of whom will be sexually assaulted in their lifetimes (that ratio increases, by the way, when considering women of colour, women living in poverty and especially women living in war zones), don't necessarily have the privilege of looking at men as "inherently" non-criminal. The idea that they should is part and parcel of liberal bourgeois ideology that works to uphold the patriarchal power structures which empower and facilitate male erotic entitlement. It's the same sort of thinking which constructs "human rights," as if the deprivation of such a priori rights has nothing to do with the fact that one is Palestinian, Muslim, Congolese, Gay, etc. and is simply some apolitical withdrawal of enlightenment-sanctioned "human rights" as such.

Believe me. A woman at risk of sexual assualt doesn't have the privilege of refusing "pre-judgement." Such a privilege is aggressively withdrawn from her everyday in capitalist, patriarchal culture.

George Victor

That old agency of the 70s and 80s flying the  Status of Women flag did not just advance the cause of women's equality in the work world.   Based on the fact of a functioning libido - comes with the territory in all of Gaia's critters - they felt that the suppression of porn could have a significant effect  on the beast bit.  Of course, nobody wants to go there into such arbitrary territory and risk losing that fundamental societal freedom which was slowly enlarged in the last half of the last century.  But feminists did believe it was possible to pick and choose...and most importantly, the unmentionable libido of Homo sapiens, was fair game. 

Those feminists are now treated as the Carey Nations of the young, sexually active set.  Or have I got this all wrong?  Can't wait to hear from the more "hip" or whatever label is useful these days.

 

 

Pages