Discussion in 'Debate Room' started by HelloThere, May 31, 2014.
Watch the video before commenting...
i'm not going to watch the video because the statement made in the thread title is an outrageous affront to anyone who has ever suffered the pain and humiliation of being raped... please do all rape victims the kindness and courtesy to delete this thread... nothing that video can possibly contain can in any way mitigate the offense of that title... i'm assuming you didn't realize how it would be taken and hope you'll honor my request...
rape should never be the subject of humor... it's never funny to those who've been violated...
I have watched the video - it's a heavily ironic title, one that is supposed to offend until you watch the video. The guy is saying that because of male culture, and society expecting men to behave in a certain way, men who are raped have a very hard time speaking out about their experiences. The main example given is a story of a student being forced into sex by a female teacher, and he does not feel like he can say it because if he had an erection he must have wanted it, but he didn't want it at all - and felt degraded. He could have picked a less abrasive title, I can say that much, and I don't think he saved his video from his title.
As a guy, I've seen examples of the so called 'Lad culture' pretty much every day of my life, and I think there is also something to be said for so called 'Female Supremacists' who seem to only wish to demonize men for the sheer arrogance, horror and imperialism of simply owning a penis. I hope instead for a version of this human race to embrace humanism, be actually kind to each other, and stop being such closed-minded idiots. Oh, a boy can dream.
Maybe this thread should be renamed, and have a caution added?
This guy raises some good points (though his choice for the video title is a bit insensitive). Society treats rape victims differently based on their gender. When a teenage boy has sex with a female teacher, a lot of people say, "Good for him!" But when it's the other way around, all of a sudden people have a different attitude. I hear about that all the time (inappropriate student-teacher relationships are fairly common it seems). Rape is rape. It doesn't matter who's involved.
I definitely agree with the first.
I agree 100%. Even for the Debate Room, such a title is in very poor taste.
Well if you had watched the video before you commented you would understand the misleading nature of the title. The video itself is about male rape victims and how society treats them.
In fact, you just summarized the video.
Good video. Too bad the comments are disabled. I really wanted to see all the male sellouts and female misandrists try to defend themselves.
I'm not sure how to do that.
I'm happy to change the thread title although I don't how to, however I'll defend the title of his video. When he lists the numerous films that feature rape as a subject of comedy... How is that saying anything to society other than "rape is hilarious?" A load of people watched those films, all receiving the same message that the title of that video sends. What does it say about our society that we are only offended when we are confronted with a direct statement, but when that message is presented under a guise of cheap laughs we fail to pick up on it?
I can see your issue, but I think you're taking it a little too far, given that the video actually carries the opposite message. Its title sounds offensive because it's mocking that viewpoint.
EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, the offensive-sounding title might be a good thing. It helps get the point across, and, after all, it's just stating what seems to be a fairly common viewpoint more bluntly than people are comfortable with.
Shock is a common method of getting messages to people. In this saturated media world of bright colours and increasingly boundary-pushing content, you've gotta be loud to make a point.
I just want to make a point that the title of this thread has been changed from "Why Rape Is Sincerely Hilarious." Personally I wish I had stuck to my guns and defended this title. I would say that it is no more distasteful than a car safety advert that features a dramatisation of a car crash, sure that safety advert would bring back memories for a poor few, but the shock value of that advert would save lives.
I'm fortunate enough not to have suffered rape in my life, so it's difficult for me to put myself in the shoes of a victim, but if I was going to, I would probably say that a bit of offense and shock is worth it to get people talking about gender equality. Isn't it?
I re-named the title, so we can talk about the topic, not of how to get attention which sounds like a topic of its own. To be honest, I got a sick feeling to my stomach upon spotting the title, although when I saw the OP, I guessed it was meant to be sarcastic. But then again, I have experiences no man or woman should have, so that could explain the reaction from my part, and I wouldn't want others with similar crap in their past to feel it either.
Anyway, back to the topic:
I talked about this issue with @T.Trian the other day, how rape is supposed to be hilarious, or not rape at all, when it happens to men. These attitudes are strangely ingrained in men, and what he's saying on the video (the reactions he should have) are just the reactions you get when you ask a guy "what if you were stimulated by your high school teacher so she could have sex with you"? From guys who have not experienced it and who have not been made vulnerable by women or other men.
The emotions such acts cause must be pretty damn confusing considering what society expects vs how it really makes you feel. For girls it's okay to feel vulnerable, be the victim... but what about the guys?
I don't think you will have a problem getting attention for your thread on this forum when the title contains the word "rape." The reason why I think changing the title was the right thing to do was what @KaTrian already mentioned:
Even if it's just some rape victims who feel the sting when they see the title, even that's too much since they've gone through enough shit for more than one lifetime, right?
I think a part of it stems from the macho culture: men aren't supposed to be victims, especially victims of physical violence performed by women (hence all the ridicule male victims of domestic violence encounter), but of course that's bs.
Rape is never funny, comical, or hilarious, no. There is, however, one difference that I think has affected those attitudes quite a bit:
Physical capacity. Sure, men can be raped by women and other men, be it penetration or involuntary genital stimulation, I'm not denying that, but I believe there's a psychological difference between a situation where the victim is stronger than the perpetrator and physically capable of putting a stop to the act when they so choose.
I know there are exceptions: some men are weaker than some women, but I'm talking about averages here to explain why such a large number of men don't take it seriously when a man says a woman raped him. Even if we talk about teenagers, most 16yo boys are already stronger than their female teachers.
What makes the situation tricky, is that coersion and forcing isn't always physical. It can be social (e.g. female boss threatens to fire male worker if he doesn't cheat on his wife with her), it can be psychological (manipulation), or a combination of various ways of coercing/forcing. Since those means don't cause physical pain and they don't leave scars or bruises, it's more difficult even for the victim to associate the act with rape. Hell, it might be years later that he realizes he was, indeed, abused.
Regardless, I still don't see it as quite the same when the victim is stronger than the rapist (and isn't restrained/doesn't have a gun to his head or some such). I'd imagine the level of fear, pain, and horror involved isn't as bad in such cases, especially if the male victim isn't penetrated or subjected to serious STDs.
I would compare a male raping a female to a male raping a male. That is much closer, especially if the rapist is physically more capable than his victim, so the victim couldn't put a stop to it even if he tried. I haven't experienced that, but I would imagine the level of fear is higher in such situations than when you know the rapist wouldn't stand a chance against you if you chose to start resisting physically.
Mind you, I'm not saying we shouldn't take female on male rape seriously, we should, I'm just saying the situation is usually a little different, with different nuances, and I'm also playing the devil's advocate here and throwing around possible reasons as to why so many men don't take that sort of rape seriously and think the boy should thank his lucky stars that he got laid by his teacher (which is actually a very common fantasy among teenage boys; yet another reason why so many can't see such an even as a negative experience).
I'm basing these views partly on guesswork, partly on personal experiences of being coerced without physical overpowering. I still have a hard time seeing it as anything else but my fault 'cause I didn't resist physically (I didn't because, you know, it's wrong to use force on women and all that jazz).
Absolutely. The end result of this idiocy, of course, is a large group people who actually take pride in discriminating against themselves.
I guess they're sort of like all those women who will happily use slut-shaming and other misogynist tactics to take each other down.
I can see how you'd arrive at that conclusion. On the other hand, a victim's knowledge that they could have stopped it but weren't assertive enough to stand up for themselves might add to the damage of the experience.
Of course, if she is armed or much stronger than her victim, the element of dominance and fear could be just as strong.
I think it really depends on the situation.
I'd say they're about the same. Forced vaginal intercourse can cause pregnancy, but anal rape (an unpleasant concept, but I have to bring it up to fully explain my point) is often more physically damaging and more likely to spread HIV.
Interesting concepts to explore. I'll admit that there are probably some differences between those experiences, although I think most people who downplay male rape are operating more on sexism than anything else.
The fact that someone is mentally vulnerable does not make it acceptable to victimize them. As far as I'm concerned, the only one who deserves to be raped is a rapist, and even then no one has the right to administer that punishment.
I've got nuthin
I think plain old "feminist" gets the point across pretty well.
Well, if you consider all feminists to be evil incarnate, I guess it does.
Edited to add: Otherwise, "some radical feminists" would do the job. I probably wouldn't call women with fundamentally anti-male attitudes feminists at all, any more than I would call members of the Westboro church Christians, but I guess I don't get to write the definitions.
Sure thing, I've changed my post.
In the sense of calling feminist extremists "feminazis," yeah, I agree, it shouldn't be used. Just like I think such offensive, demeaning labels shouldn't be used of any group of people, especially if the purpose or even unintended end result is that a large group of non-extremist people who have nothing to do with the extremists are grouped under the same offensive label.
Kinda like the milder, but still offensive "gun nuts/nutters" often used to paint all firearm owners with the same brush as militant right-wing extremists who send death threats to people they disagree with, carry rifles to minor league baseball games, often discriminate against homosexuals, different ethnicities, religions etc, so in this case, the term itself isn't as offensive as "feminazi," but its connotations are because it links firearm owners to people who are basically criminals, indicating indirectly that they, too, are criminals.
However, we should be able to discuss such terms here as long as we don't direct them at people. Like I'm doing here: I'm not calling anyone a feminazi or a gun nut, but I'm talking about the terms and their use.
When it comes to replacing those offensive blanket terms, my favored all-purpose alternative is simply "extremists." That's what they are, it can be used to refer to just about any extremist/radical group, and in most cases it depicts clearly enough what kind of people we are talking about.
@Adenosine Triphosphate, you have a point there; someone who could have stopped the abuse because they were physically more capable but didn't (for whatever reason), may experience stronger feelings of regret/remorse/guilt, and blame themselves for what happened more than someone who either fought back but was unable to stop the abuse or didn't, but was so much less capable physically than the assailant to begin with that it wouldn't have mattered anyway. In those instances, the situation was essentially out of their hands, so while they have other psychological (and possibly physical) scars to deal with, possibly more severe ones, the feelings of regret, guilt etc. might not be quite as prominent (depending on the individual in question as well as the situation, of course).
DISCLAIMER: I suck at making my point clear, so if I come off as offensive, I apologize.
I'm in the same mindset of @T.Trian . It's a lose-lose situation for them. Punch out the woman trying to rape him, he's dubbed a woman beater. Don't do anything and he's a wimp for not fighting back (which would then lead to the former problem.) That said, what a male rape victim experiences would be different. The psychological/physical scars would still be there, the horror would still be there, but they wouldn't have to worry about the potential risk of pregnancy. I think what I'm trying to say is that experience is the same, yet different for both sexes. Women, generally, wouldn't be able to fight back and they have the added horror of being pregnant as a result to deal with. Men? They would have to deal with the Catch-22 of why they didn't fight back against their attacker and if they did, have to deal with people potentially thinking they're a disgusting woman beater for trying to defend themselves. What could they do? Push her off and run like hell? But then wouldn't that make people wonder why they fled from what was apparently free sex?
Long story short: The horrors of rape is still present, but it's different for both sexes. I also think it's worse for the women because (a) they often can't fight back against their attacker and (b) they have to deal with the risk of pregnancy in addition to the already-present psychological scarring that they have. To me, it's worse for women because it renders them completely powerless. To add to this, suppose the woman did get pregnant? Then she'll have society telling her what she can or can't do with that baby.
What I'm trying to say in my rambling, clumsy prose is this:
+ Rape is horrifying, regardless of who is getting raped. Women have it especially horrifying because they have to deal with the prospect of getting pregnant as a result of it, and the prospect of society telling her what to do with that child.
@Adenosine Triphosphate - That's where the victim blaming comes in, which is just disgustingly unspeakable for words. It's whole mantra is 'It's your fault you were raped' either because of 'skimpy clothing' or 'being a wuss for not fighting back'. No one deserves to be raped, no one 'has it coming'. I fail to understand the logic behind victim blaming. You were a victim of a crime, so therefore you must have done something to deserve it? What? It completely absolves all guilt from the perpetrator.
I would also like to point out that it isn't just man-on-woman and woman-on man. Sometimes it's man-on-man and woman-on-woman. Rape is basically using sex to force dominance and power over another human being. You don't need to be the opposite sex to do that.
DISCLAIMER: Again, I'm not that good with conversations as sensitive as this, so if I came off as offensive, I apologize.
Meta-Discussion- To be honest, 'femnazi' just makes the person using it sound immature regardless of the context. How about 'extremist'? Calling someone a Nazi is not a good way to be taken seriously and it's really offensive. You're basically taking a group and associating them with one of, if not the singular, worst groups humanity has ever seen. It's fine to disagree with them, it's fine to think that they're going overboard, but they're not Nazis.
Separate names with a comma.