tsudecimo said: Yeah it kind of creeeped me out the first time I read it as well.DrGeroCreation said: This is even creepier and more disturbing after I read the article. |
 |
| Why would there be an exception for men? |
 |
| idiotic* And it is sexist, it actually fits the definition well, my point is that there are differences between the sexes that can't be changed so certain things can never be equalized between genders. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
smelly-cat said: That's definitely something to look into.But the problem with this article is that it seems to take an estimation of rapes (reported and unreported) inside prison but only count reported rapes outside of prison. Not trying to trivialize anything but I'm pretty sure MOST rapes outside if prison don't get reported/brought to court. So I have to question that conclusion. I think the reason for this though, is that inmates are surveyed constantly. An "unreported" rape case may not be so unreported when there is video evidence of it happening, even if technically the victim didn't bring it to anybody's attention. If I'm correctly understanding the meaning of the word "reported" in this context, that is.. It's also worth mentioning that the rates for outside of prison rape reports for male victims are far lower than female victims. It is estimated that 60% of rapes go unreported. For men, it is estimated that over 90% go unreported. And out of those reported, for female victims RAINN reports that 25% (10/40) of the reports end up in conviction of the accused perpetrator. The article I linked states that only 9% of reports from male victims result in conviction. EDIT: Holy shit I'm stupid. LOL nevermind. It looks like the conviction rates are actually pretty similar (10% vs 9%). Ignore that whole second part... As low as those numbers look, the fact that they're almost the same is honestly a relief. |
Red_KeysMay 22, 2014 10:58 AM
 |
| Yes, sexism against men exists. No, it's not even kind of close to being as bad as sexist against women is. I think to a point it's silly to complain about "casual" sexism against men since we are generally more privileged than women are on a fundamental level (don't have to worry about rape/assault nearly as much, fewer body/image standards are imposed on us, we're generally respected more in the workplace, etc.), and that disparity deserves serious acknowledgement. But at the same time, there is a certain level of sexism that exists against guys, and it's much more acceptable to not bat an eye against it. Blogs like Jezebel, especially, give me eye cancer whenever I have to read about how all men are super-privileged and we should just all bow down to our female overlords and give them all of our rights or we're just a bunch of filthy misogynistic pigs. |
| I hate myself for turning this into an "us vs them" type thing, but.... Yolocalypse said: Statistically speaking men are much more likely to be victims of violence than women. You absolutely do have to worry about assault.don't have to worry about rape/assault nearly as much Yolocalypse said: I'd argue that this type of issue is universal for everybody. In terms of attention given to the issue and support, women are by far "better off".fewer body/image standards are imposed on us Yolocalypse said: Based on your accomplishments, not your sex. The majority of homeless people are male, if that says anything.we're generally respected more in the workplace I'm only bringing this up because the whole "yea but women have it worse...", "because patriarchy", "it's the men's own fault", "it's actually sexism against women" reasoning is just.. counterproductive. It's dismissive and solves nothing. Make a thread about sexism against women if you want to discuss sexism against women. Important topics should be talked about. |
|
| I was a camp councillor for many summers, and some parents seemed to be immediately skeptical of my ability to take care of children. Also, it went without saying that male councillors should never refer to campers as cute. Little things. |
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
| That goes without saying, if a girl says she loves children its okay. But what if a man says he loves children? Yeah |
 |
| Because women can't be pedophiles. Ohohoho, how wrong you guys can be, ohohoho! |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Red_Keys said: Though it doesn't matter I'd imagine sexism on males to be done by women, not other men. It looks obvious when you mention it but I was thinking something females would do to men.GuusWayne said: Like a man having the police called on him for being with his own children in public.What would sexism against males look like? Or you could read some earlier posts. I highlighted a number of issues that I deserve need to be addressed. Like the suicide rate being 80% male. That is definitely a gendered difference, and while that statistic itself may not be sexist, it is definitely indicative of societal factors that push for it to lean heavily on the male side. The fact that these factors aren't addressed or investigated specifically anywhere really, aside from MRA groups, and that comparative to other gendered issues (like.. birth control for example) nobody really seems to give a shit just shows how much of a general apathy there is for issues concerning men. And yes, that is a fucking issue. A man is four times as likely to kill himself than a woman. Something is wrong. |
| SCARY MONSTER |
Red_Keys said: I hate myself for turning this into an "us vs them" type thing, but.... Yolocalypse said: Statistically speaking men are much more likely to be victims of violence than women. You absolutely do have to worry about assault.don't have to worry about rape/assault nearly as much http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims 3% of all men as opposed to 16.6% of all women...yeah, that's "much more likely". This is in the US, so maybe you're talking about a different country but I very much doubt there is any place in the world where men are more likely to get raped than women. Red_Keys said: Just because more attention is given to them than us doesn't mean what I said isn't true.Yolocalypse said: I'd argue that this type of issue is universal for everybody. In terms of attention given to the issue and support, women are by far "better off".fewer body/image standards are imposed on us Red_Keys said: This is ridiculous. The OP addressed the issue of casual sexism against men and I responded to that. I'm not here to discuss sexism against women, I'm merely pointing out that yes, while it does exist, it doesn't exist to the same degree as it does for women, in the majority of societies around the world. I did not once deny the existence of sexism against men, nor did I say it shouldn't be talked about (the most I said was "it's silly to complain about it to a point"). Additionally, nowhere did I state that it was men's fault or patriarchy or blah blah blah that sexism against women exists. You're just drawing faulty conclusions from my statements on your own. I even said in my last comment that I didn't like people who tried to turn this debate into a "man vs woman" thing by blaming men for sexism against women.Yolocalypse said: Based on your accomplishments, not your sex. The majority of homeless people are male, if that says anything.we're generally respected more in the workplace I'm only bringing this up because the whole "yea but women have it worse...", "because patriarchy", "it's the men's own fault", "it's actually sexism against women" reasoning is just.. counterproductive. It's dismissive and solves nothing. Make a thread about sexism against women if you want to discuss sexism against women. Important topics should be talked about. |
Yolocalypse said: I believe he's talking about all violence, not just sexual assault.Red_Keys said: I hate myself for turning this into an "us vs them" type thing, but.... Yolocalypse said: Statistically speaking men are much more likely to be victims of violence than women. You absolutely do have to worry about assault.don't have to worry about rape/assault nearly as much http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims 3% of all men as opposed to 16.6% of all women...yeah, that's "much more likely". This is in the US, so maybe you're talking about a different country but I very much doubt there is any place in the world where men are more likely to get raped than women. |
     Short of the day: Monotonous Purgatory(MAL) ✰Public Domain Club | One Piece Club✰ |
IntroverTurtle said: I believe he's talking about all violence, not just sexual assault. Fair enough, but then we also have to apply some common sense here - how much of that assault is sexism-driven? Most assaults on men aren't driven by any sexist prejudices, but rather by anger/hate derived from other issues (gang violence, racial violence, after-school fighting, whatever). A lot of assaults on women, by contrast, are driven by sexual desire. Not all, of course, but the proportion of sexism-driven violence against women compared to sexism-driven violence against men is high. Anyway, I didn't mean to derail the thread. It's true that there are a lot of issues related to sexism against men that should be addressed, but I personally think that a lot of the issues stated on this thread are overblown with respect to sexism. The suicide rate for men is not likely to be higher because of sexism, but probably because guys are on average more likely to use violent means to kill themselves (I forget where I read this, but there are statistics out there that show that guys are far more likely to use guns or other fatal weapons to kill themselves while girls typically are more likely to try and OD on pills, or use other less violent and less fatal means to commit suicide). And so on so forth. Taken directly from AFSP's site: American Foundation for Suicide Prevention said: As with suicide deaths, rates of attempted suicide vary considerably among demographic groups. While males are 4 times more likely than females to die by suicide, females attempt suicide 3 times as often as males. I'm not challenging the thread, I'm challenging a lot of the assertions made on here because several of them don't seem to relate to any prevailing sexist attitide against men. Some - like the apartment thing, or child care - do. |
PonPonPonMay 22, 2014 1:35 PM
Heredity said: the funny thing about sexual assault and rape statistics is that i think it only counts as 'rape' if the victim is penetrated, and you can probably see how this would skew statistics. That's because it's sexual assault, not rape. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: Heredity said: the funny thing about sexual assault and rape statistics is that i think it only counts as 'rape' if the victim is penetrated, and you can probably see how this would skew statistics. That's because it's sexual assault, not rape. In Britain you have to be penetrated with a penis to be raped and therefore women can't rape, they can only commit various forms of sexual assault, but not rape. |
Yolocalypse said: fewer body/image standards are imposed on us Disagree there. Men have a lot of image problems, probably more so than women. At least there is this proud of your body movement for women. Men have two settings, you are either working out, bulked and tones or you don't exercise/eat right or look out of shape. Men are always comparing themselves to bigger more toned guys and feel more inadequate. There is far less rage of body shape for males too making it worse. A woman can be skinny, chunky, curvy, wide hips, thin hips and so on. Men have to do with fat, thin or muscular thats all they get, they don't get large but curvy sexy they get fat or thin. Also men can't wear as many styles of clothing as women. Women are allowed to wear anything even male clothing, suits, dresses, hipster clothing, 1940's style anything! but men have to deal with shirts, jeans, shorts and suits. They are not allowed to wear anything feminine or are called gay and are pretty much banned from any female fashion like their coats and dresses. A man would be lynched for wearing a dress or atleast mocked but a woman can wear jeans all she wants. The problem is female empowerment and correctness has come a long way. Mans is still stuck in the old days because nobody considers it an issue to push forward. |
 |
apatch3 said: Immahnoob said: Heredity said: the funny thing about sexual assault and rape statistics is that i think it only counts as 'rape' if the victim is penetrated, and you can probably see how this would skew statistics. That's because it's sexual assault, not rape. In Britain you have to be penetrated with a penis to be raped and therefore women can't rape, they can only commit various forms of sexual assault, but not rape. Rape is referred to as a type of sexual intercourse which involves penetration, it doesn't matter who is penetrated, it involves that shit. If a woman penetrates itself with the penis of a man without the mans permission, by definition it counts as rape. That means Britain forgot it's own definitions and it should go fuck itself. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
dankickyou said: scholes18 said: yeah , it does exist, especially some teachers in the university ; if u are female u will get good marks , if u are male u will really suffer to get good marks Stop blaming the hunnies for not studying for your tests m8. problem that hunnies dont study too |
scholes18 said: dankickyou said: scholes18 said: yeah , it does exist, especially some teachers in the university ; if u are female u will get good marks , if u are male u will really suffer to get good marks Stop blaming the hunnies for not studying for your tests m8. problem that hunnies dont study too Either, not "too", EITHER. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| mm , thx ... my english is poor -.- |
| I hate double standards in general, and while sexism against men does exist and should be taken seriously, it's generally pretty mild compared to the sexism faced by women (at least in most parts of the world), though there are instances where it can put considerable pressure on men (for instance, in some cultures the man is expected to be the sole provider for the family regardless of whether the woman has a source of revenue and such). |
 |
| Then there's the double standards. The other day, I was with a girl in school and she started touching my chest inappropriately. I told her to stop but she continued anyways. If they genders were reversed, then somebody would be in some serious shit. Sorry if that sounded overly dramatic |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| I did say this shit though. So yeah, I think Britain is retarded from that point of view. Immahnoob said: apatch3 said: Immahnoob said: Heredity said: the funny thing about sexual assault and rape statistics is that i think it only counts as 'rape' if the victim is penetrated, and you can probably see how this would skew statistics. That's because it's sexual assault, not rape. In Britain you have to be penetrated with a penis to be raped and therefore women can't rape, they can only commit various forms of sexual assault, but not rape. Rape is referred to as a type of sexual intercourse which involves penetration, it doesn't matter who is penetrated, it involves that shit. If a woman penetrates itself with the penis of a man without the mans permission, by definition it counts as rape. That means Britain forgot it's own definitions and it should go fuck itself. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| "I'm not sure she/he consented, I didn't ask." "RAEP RAEEEPPP RAEEEEPPP" "But he didn't rape me, what the Hell..." |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: No, person B would have to say that they did not give consent from how I read it."I'm not sure she/he consented." "RAEP RAEEEPPP RAEEEEPPP" "But he didn't rape me, what the Hell..." Also, life imprisonment? I know life isn't actually life, and a rape case has the potential to be particularly brutal, but the parameters described in that law do not merit life in prison. |
| Oh, I have to take it in order? I thought it's like "B doesn't say it out loud, does open her/his legs though, np np." and "A is not sure if the dude/dudesse opening his/her legs is enough of a way of saying, I want the D, but will go for it anyway.". "If there is a witness though, A can be prosecuted because the witness which we will call C, is a cock head.". |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Heredity said: i think we can all conclude that the british are sillynannies. Agreed man do I hate my country sometimes, so dumb. |
|
Heredity said: Kibura_Iburasa said: i hear you guys have a mandatory porno-block, and that asking to be off of it essentially puts you on a close-but-not-quite sex registry type thing now. did that cave in at the last second, or is it still going?Heredity said: i think we can all conclude that the british are sillynannies. Agreed man do I hate my country sometimes, so dumb. i bet that list makes men look great. google 'go away cameron' addon - even if you're not in England and under the block it's a good addon for quick proxy :] ((one click activates proxy, one click deactivates)) |
  Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet |
Heredity said: i hear you guys have a mandatory porno-block, and that asking to be off of it essentially puts you on a close-but-not-quite sex registry type thing now. did that cave in at the last second, or is it still going? i bet that list makes men look great. Last i heard it didn't get implemented (last I checked hur hur 2D porn) but the fact they actually tried shows a certain levels of retardation. |
|
| The most retarded ban/censor in history. That of porn. Good job, UK. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: Probably gonna kill the computer industry. What's the point in even buying a laptop now?The most retarded ban/censor in history. That of porn. Good job, UK. |
Heredity said: Well, fancy that...it doesn't say anything about the eye socket. #EPICLOOPHOLEactually, british law specifically says 'he.' britbong law on rape said: The offence is created by section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003: 1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if— (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis, (b) B does not consent to the penetration, and (c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents. (2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents. (3) Sections 75 and 76 apply to an offence under this section. (4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life. |
Heredity said: Are those all cumulative requirements though? actually, british law specifically says 'he.' britbong law on rape said: The offence is created by section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003: 1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if— (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis, (b) B does not consent to the penetration, and (c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents. (2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents. (3) Sections 75 and 76 apply to an offence under this section. (4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life. Seeing how part 1 does not specify a gender, and only b) and c) are explicitly linked with "and", I would naturally interpret that as a) only being applicable for men, but any person regardless of gender could still be convicted if they meet the requirements in b) and c). Of course, I'm no expert on britbong law, but this would definitely be a reasonable interpretation. |
| Well Baman, it seems A is always a man, and if you don't take it in order it doesn't really make that much sense. Who is B if you don't take into consideration 1 + (a)? Who is A if there is no 1 + (a)? |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: No, but that's it, A's gender is not specified in the root paragraph, only in (a). If the point of the paragraph was to only aim at men, then why not specify that from the start?Well Baman, it seems A is always a man, and if you don't take it in order it doesn't really make that much sense. Who is B if you don't take into consideration 1 + (a)? Who is A if there is no 1 + (a)? (a) specifically involves the party with the penis being the aggressor, so it makes sense to use "he". Meanwhile (b) and (c) is only for non consensual penetration in general, and with that there is no reason person A couldn't be a woman and B a man. So like I said, the question is whether you are supposed to interpret a b and c as cumulative requirements or not. |
Baman said: But in (a) it says he penetrates another person (B) meaning that person B is the person being penetrated. (b) states that person B did not give consent so they are the one being raped, not person A (assumed to be "he" by elimination).Immahnoob said: No, but that's it, A's gender is not specified in the root paragraph, only in (a). If the point of the paragraph was to only aim at men, then why not specify that from the start?Well Baman, it seems A is always a man, and if you don't take it in order it doesn't really make that much sense. Who is B if you don't take into consideration 1 + (a)? Who is A if there is no 1 + (a)? (a) specifically involves the party with the penis being the aggressor, so it makes sense to use "he". Meanwhile (b) and (c) is only for non consensual penetration in general, and with that there is no reason person A couldn't be a woman and B a man. So like I said, the question is whether you are supposed to interpret a b and c as cumulative requirements or not. |
Slyr3do0n said: As I've been saying, that's only a issue if you assume (a) to be a requirement and that (b) and (c) cannot stand on their own.But in (a) it says he penetrates another person (B) meaning that person B is the person being penetrated. (b) states that person B did not give consent so they are the one being raped, not person A (assumed to be "he" by elimination). Now, I don't know how Britbong laws tend to do this, but from my experience with Norwegian legal tradition, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be a problem to interpret it without (a), unless any preambles or similar states the opposite. |
Baman said: Slyr3do0n said: As I've been saying, that's only a issue if you assume (a) to be a requirement and that (b) and (c) cannot stand on their own.But in (a) it says he penetrates another person (B) meaning that person B is the person being penetrated. (b) states that person B did not give consent so they are the one being raped, not person A (assumed to be "he" by elimination). Now, I don't know how Britbong laws tend to do this, but from my experience with Norwegian legal tradition, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be a problem to interpret it without (a), unless any preambles or similar states the opposite. It wouldnt be a list if it wherent requirements. Its a -> b -> c etc... If it wherent like that they wouldnt list it by following letters. |
baki502 said: Well, that varies a lot though. We've got several laws with letter-numbered points for different, non-cumulative criterias.It wouldnt be a list if it wherent requirements. Its a -> b -> c etc... If it wherent like that they wouldnt list it by following letters. Heredity said: Well, I guess they just dun goofed then.you need all of them for it to count, i guess. the person only commits the offense if they suffice a, b, and c. 2, 3, and 4 describe what comes after that (what else to take into consideration). i thought that was obvious. I assume they have other paragraphs to convict female rapists then, or do they just use some kind of assault charge instead? |
| So what do they typically use to convict female rapists with instead then, assault or abuse or something? Seems awfully inefficient. Then again, that's what you get with a derpy system like Common Law I guess. |
More topics from this board
» 2023-2024 NBA Season Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )deg - Jun 18, 2023 |
647 |
by zzz
»»
19 minutes ago |
|
» Is this forum dead? It seems like it.DesuMaiden - 9 hours ago |
14 |
by rohan121
»»
46 minutes ago |
|
» what is your favorite ice cream flavor? ( 1 2 )removed-user - Apr 5 |
62 |
by duchessliz87
»»
47 minutes ago |
|
» Will aliens finally appear this century?Absurdo_N - Apr 7 |
46 |
by Hikinekomori
»»
2 hours ago |
|
» Global enviroment ( comments )SyrupPastryNice - 12 hours ago |
11 |
by KittenCuddler
»»
3 hours ago |