Pointing out double standards does NOT make you sexist!

[Yuuki]

I'm fully aware of the double standards, and guess what? I'm fine with them! They exist for a reason, and I understand that reason. While people keep screaming "we're all humans, treat all humans EXACTLY the same!!" I can't help but shake my head that some rather important (and unchangeable) facts remain - while men and women are all humans, men are still men and women are still women. Differences exist, both mental and physical. And as long as those differences exist, double standards will exist as we bicker amongst ourselves as to what we should keep the "same" and what we should keep "different".

It's the undisputed fact that men commit crime on a vastly bigger scale than women, men commit assault & rape on an overwhelmingly vastly bigger scale than women do on men. Men's prisons and overall inmate populations vastly outnumber womens' facilities. It's a harsh fucking imbalance and the very real truth, deal with it.
Does it make it alright when women commit a crime or are handed easier/lesser sentences for equally heinous crimes? Of course not! But the reason for that attitude exists nevertheless and it's part of being human, it's part of understanding our differences (mental especially) as male vs female.

Regardless of race, regardless of culture, regardless of time period, regardless of language, regardless of location - the primary "difference" that has stayed consistent in the entire era of human existence has been male vs female.
It's the way history has panned out over thousands of years of human civilization, and the way the present is shaping.

What I'm getting at is that I don't see the possibility of double standards ever being fully eliminated as long as there remain two genders in the human species, and I can live with that. All these petty arguments popping up about gender politics and sexism/misogyny/misandry are nothing more than passing events and ultimately inconsequential.

I hope that's not a male bunny, if it is, it's my duty as a feminist to hurt it.

As frustrating as I am sure it certainly is that certain people need to go "fuck feminism" in every single thread about gender issues, I am seeing a growing trend amongst the self proclaimed feminists of being sarcastic or passive aggressive with comments such as "Oh, but I am an evil feminist so my thoughts don't matter" or comments such as yours.

While I am absolutely against the seemingly unbridled hatred levelled against feminism by certain users on this site, I cannot help but wonder if such comments are only doing more damage to the perception of feminists overall. I am not in any shape or form suggesting such comments are a justification for the way people treat it, but I'd have thought the best way to educate and convince people that their views on feminism are wrong would be to show it, ideally in a polite manner.

What I guess I am trying to say is, I get the impression that a lot of people who call themselves feminists on this site are only helping the negative image people have of it, because very few of them seem willing to take the high ground and properly explain their position, instead lowering themselves to the same level as the people who oppose them.

I am certainly not telling you how you should or should not post, merely trying to point out that posting in such a way is really only adding fuel to the fire, and doesn't seem to be particularly helpful in regards to solving the issues.

But feminism DOES have a negative image, and the reason isn't because of sarcasm-feminists "not helping it" but because a ton of of the most vocal feminists have moved-on from genuinely pressing issues to simply tooting their horns at anything they arbitrarily deem sexist. It's because of utterly inconsequential and trivial shit like Sexy Hitman Nuns, Tomb Raider Almost-Rape and E3 Rape Joke gets the most attention and makes the world as a collective SIGH while shaking their head and muttering "...lol, dumb feminists". Some nobody on a forum isn't doing anywhere NEAR the amount of damage to the concept of feminism as the things that get thrown under the spotlight. You know about PETA right? How that BF3 Rat Stabbing got a whole lot of attention and we had similar sighs of "...lol, PETA". Huge negative blows to the group as a whole.

As far as I know, the need for feminist groups in first-world developed countries lies beneath the swamps of obsolescence as African-American Rights groups (or whatever they were called back then), or a gay guy shouting "I'm gay and I'm proud!" while standing outside the local YMCA.

In 3rd world countries I deeply sympathize with the amount of violence against women and misogyny happening on a daily basis, it's bound to happen wherever living conditions are tough and poverty is rife. That's where I can see feminist groups having the most meaningful impact, the NEED for their existence is very much there (if we're really talking about a global scale). But sadly we hardly hear about the hard work those genuine groups are doing from the media. Sucks, eh?

 

[Mr.Squishy]

Wow, you know? I never thought about any of that before, and those are some excellent points. That's why I'm glad we keep having useful discussions like these in every other thread. Because you never know when an insightful tidbit is going to come along and enrich your day. Most excellent!

Charming display of passive aggression. Really paints you as the superior person.

 

[Zhukov]

You want stats? Here, have some bloody stats [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2011-2012/DVAustralia#_Toc309798375]. (Here's the same ones [http://www.domesticviolence.com.au/pages/domestic-violence-statistics.php] in a much shorter and easier to read version.)

Well, whaddaya know? Mostly male-of-female by some fucking huge margins. What a surprise! It's almost as if it's common sense that stronger people are more likely to beat up weaker people than the other way around.

Find me one statistic that says otherwise. One. Fucking one.

He said "The statistics are inaccurate because Men are incredibly unlikely to report being beaten and/or raped by a woman due to male psyche" and you said "But these are the statistics!" Tell me, does Brawndo have what plants crave?

Yes, I read his post. Thank you for the recap.

Thing is, I find, "Well, I'm positively sure that there are a whole lot of unreported statistics out there that support my position", to be about as weak as an argument can get.

 

[manic_depressive13]

The people who were trivialising the issue and making out to be a big joke were the same people who question a woman's clothing and sexual history in female rape threads. Everyone gets accused of not fighting back hard enough. You seem to have this ridiculous notion that victim blaming and dismissing female rape victims is a thing of the past.

You've got a good point there, but think about police and prosecution services and how they react to the situation. I've read news articles where the responding police officer is the one making the jokes...

Yes, and that's disgusting, and it has to be stopped. Male rape jokes and depictions of violence against men in media that are played for laughs makes me feel ill. So by all means make a thread or start a discussion saying "Male rape/ Violence against men is trivialised and ignored. This has to stop." I would applaud you.

But you rarely see that. What you are far more likely to see is "Male rape is trivialised and ignored. THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN TO A WOMAN." Which is not only a fucking lie, but it distracts from the topic by making it a "versus" thread, puts feminists on the defensive due to the inevitable accusations they receive, and generally does nothing to help anyone, because at this point no one actually seems to care that the treatment of both male and female victims is disgusting. It just becomes a pissing contest.

I would argue that cops in general need to have sensitivity training when it comes to these issues. After all, it was a cop who made the comment about women getting raped because they dress like 'sluts' which incited the slut walks.

 

[thePyro_13]

Not much to say, other than I agree with the OP in entirely. The female on male rape stuff is actually very indicative of modern mindsets. There was a thread on here not too long ago(>month) in response to a rape case in china.

A non-trivial number of replies were outright disgusting. "He got an erection; therefore it's not rape", "He wasn't fighting back hard enough for it to REALLY be rape" and other similar comments in the same vain. The same kind of bullshit people pulled against women who were raped not so long ago, and which we now rightly recognise as BS, yet they are happy to repeat history if the victim is a man(likely without realising the comparison to rape deniers of the past). It indicates a lack of education regarding general abuse(as opposed to female specific abuse; or hate crimes) and a complacency in accepting media interpretations of men who are always stronger than women and never cry or struggle with problems.

This is a problem, a big problem; and it should be given a lot more attention than it gets. Sadly some attitudes towards "violence against women" can actually reinforce(not intentionally) some of the problems the OP has brought up(without even getting into the crazy, man hating, privilege trading, branch of feminism who attempt to paint white people and males as being unabusable; but that's another thread).

Ok turns out I did have a bit to say.

There wasn't a single self proclaimed feminist in that thread who didn't acknowledge that it was rape, and agree that laughing about it was disgusting. I don't know what branch of feminism you're talking about but they certainly don't exist here.

The people who were trivialising the issue and making out to be a big joke were the same people who question a woman's clothing and sexual history in female rape threads. Everyone gets accused of not fighting back hard enough. You seem to have this ridiculous notion that victim blaming and dismissing female rape victims is a thing of the past. That's the problem I have with people who point out these "double standards". You act like everything is peaches for women and that only men face ridicule and insult, when in reality they are both attacked for not preventing their own rapes. Women for not being pure and modest enough, men for not being strong enough to deter their rapists.

The problem is sheltered individuals who have no understanding of the realities of rape, and dismiss the pain it causes to both sexes. It has nothing to do with evil feminazis trying to push the idea that men can't get raped, or only focussing on female rape, it's a problem with society's attitude towards rape as a whole. Just last year an American politician said that if a woman falls pregnant as a result of rape, it wasn't "legitimate rape". I think it's ridiculous to paint these things as a double standard when they're not. All it does is create an "us-vs-them" mentality. There are serious issues with the way rape is perceived, and where the blame is placed, for both genders.

My comment about 'that' kind of feminism wasn't directed at the mentioned thread, and I haven't seen any supporters of that drivel on the escapist anyway. Since it doesn't seem relevant, I won't mention it again.

I don't think that female rape denial is completely a thing of the past and am just as horrified by "legitimate rape" as I am of the other things I'd mentioned; but I was referring specifically to the claims that if the victim has an orgasm(or any sexual arousal) that it wasn't rape, or the accusation that a significant struggle must occur,I thought modern society had already put those specific claims in their coffins; perhaps I was mistaken. I usually don't read rape threads.

My complaint is that the ratio of supporters of rape victims to denialists is completely different depending on the gender of the victim. I'm talking from personal experience here, so this may not line up with attitudes in the world at large; but it takes a little coaxing to get people to accept a male victim was actually raped, in cases where a female victim wouldn't have been doubted at all. Again, personal experience from conversations I've had(IRL), they may not represent the larger community, but should show why I hold the opinion that I do.

I never said anything was peaches for women, I didn't even mention the situation for women in my post. I don't dismiss that people still try to talk away rape cases. What I don't like is that far too many people don't even consider the possibility that men can be raped too. I think we should devote most of our attention to raising awareness for women who have been raped, and in preventing female rapes from occurring; as they are the clear majority of cases. However I do think that some awareness needs to be brought to the fact that this can happen to men as well.

 

[manic_depressive13]

I never said anything was peaches for women, I didn't even mention the situation for women in my post.

Fair enough. Perhaps I jumped the gun a bit, but when you said:

"He got an erection; therefore it's not rape", "He wasn't fighting back hard enough for it to REALLY be rape" and other similar comments in the same vain. The same kind of bullshit people pulled against women who were raped not so long ago, and which we now rightly recognise as BS, yet they are happy to repeat history if the victim is a man.

It sounded like you were suggesting that being accused of "wanting it" because they had an orgasm or didn't fight hard enough isn't a problem for women anymore. A cursory glance at the media and legal system show it is still a huge problem.

Of course I agree with everything else you said. More emphasis needs to be placed on the fact that 'no' means 'no' when men say it too, and that men can be raped or be victims of domestic violence.

 

[BNguyen]

If someone hit's someone there is a negative consequence to hitting someone.
There is no negative consequence to being a male or female.

Combining these two I believe male or female, you hold responsibility for hitting someone.

The opposite is true where male or female, you should treat the other person as (unless necessary for professional reasons ), not a male, not a female, but a person.
gender really should just be like any other characteristic: red hair, black hair, blue eyes, brown eyes, tall, short, male, female (again, except for professional/medical reasons).

Can't we all just eat some dandylions and be happy little bunnies. Those guys don't have to worry about things like these. Only bloodthirsty birds of prey.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, we need to worry about bloodthirsty birds of prey... wait, what were we talking about?

I don't know, have you seen Watership Down?

 

[Cheesepower5]

You should probably read the last sentence in your quote.

Also, criminal statistics are twisted in a sense that male is much less likely to report abuse.

Hey, look. Someone continues to misunderstand. I'll repeat myself.

"Shall we all not do the study and statistics thing? We're all just going to select the one that reinforces our own bias and cheer it."

Like, y'know. Selectively quoting tiny snippets off a massive page. From WIKI-FUCKING-PEDIA, of all sources. At some point, while deliberately separating your quote from any and all conflicting and/or contradictory information, do you stop and think "Wait a minute, all I'm really doing here is reinforcing my own presumptions!".

I say again, can we just stop now? Debating the ins and outs of a Wikipedia article is not making anyone look like scholars.

Generally, I find Wikipedia to be pretty reliable on things that only legalists, scientists and other general eggheads would be editing. Sure, you'll see a lot of whacky pop-culture misinformation edited in, but in more complicated stuff it's pretty rare to find vandalism and false information. Excepting the highly controversial issues, of course.