Please demonstrate where I tried to assume a victim status, or stop talking shit. Broken record now. I don't feel victimized by women fearing rape or by people taking reasonable precautions. I'm really tired of saying "I" in this thread but shit, what else do you do when an entire forum is putting words in your mouth and calling you a monster.
Please demonstrate where I tried to assume a victim status, or stop talking shit. Broken record now. I don't feel victimized by women fearing rape or by people taking reasonable precautions. I'm really tired of saying "I" in this thread but shit, what else do you do when an entire forum is putting words in your mouth and calling you a monster.
Resisting the urge to click "Reply" is probably a good place to start. Just move on.
Someone who upsets someone over a sensitive topic, particularly rape and physical abuse, and then thinks getting an apology because of a misunderstanding is the most important thing about the thread... that is the exact same person who other people think thinks rape is a subject to be trivialized. In turn this leads to someone thinking you are a rape apologist.
Apologizing now, after trivializing the suffering of others, making it less important than you getting an apology, is probably too late. Now you're just an asshole
I'm an asshole in this thread too, but at least I'm not a misunderstood asshole.
There's a limit to the behavior one can excuse because of a sensitive topic. Hysterically accusing me of being a rape apologist is beyond that line.
Please demonstrate where I trivialized the suffering of others.
Just quoting your last two posts is enough to prove my point. You are pjayning the vict in this thread by asking people to respond to your requests. Those same people don't want to respond, because you've upset them by coming off as an asshole. Now you want an apology.
Your next move? My prediction: more of an asshole.
Nope. Not going to be gang beaten over this bullshit. Sorry. I haven't said one thing as hateful, bigoted, or unfounded as 99% of the crap that's been spewed in here. You want a tribal victory over this so you can self justify the tar and feathering. I really have no request other than that this sort of thing should be confined to discussion of the subject matter and NOT the participants.
It's the phenomenon where a social group will shield a sexually predatory member, usually without specific intent to do so, because upsetting the group dynamic is seen as somehow worse than having a rapist in your midst.
I think I've posted this before, but it seems pertinent here.
The guy in question has since been removed from the Enforcer community, but it took a lot of vocalizing to make it happen. The question is: how do we go about creating a community that is proactive in defeating this kind of behavior without also making everyone feel as though they're under constant scrutiny?
The obvious answer is "don't be a rapist," but that's far from the only form of sexually predatory behavior. I bet we all know a guy who relentlessly won't take "no" for an answer. It's part of "the game," right? That's an example of a harassing behavior that leads to people feeling "wrong" in a group setting - and we're less inclined to call that out.
Groups need to be vocal and consistent with their criteria for acceptable behavior, that much is certain.
That link was totally blocked by my work and now the internet police are coming to my house.. Thanks! Oh wait, I am the internet police at my work.. *wipes sweat off brow*
That link was totally blocked by my work and now the internet police are coming to my house.. Thanks! Oh wait, I am the internet police at my work.. *wipes sweat off brow*
Well, it's a blog about sex, feminism, and BDSM. It'll probably get caught by most filters. That entry is a damn fine read.
Guys, he's always has to have the last word. Just let him have it and the thread will die.
LOL. Sweet. Have you stopped beating your wife?
Whale, absolutely people need to call out bad behavior and fear conflict less.
And when your bad behavior is called out, accept it. The group defines acceptable behavior, and if yours is being rejected, forcing it isn't the answer. The "your" refers to anyone in the group.
That's the hardest part of any behavior normalization.
And when your bad behavior is called out, accept it. The group defines acceptable behavior, and if yours is being rejected, forcing it isn't the answer. The "your" refers to anyone in the group.
Sir, are you implying that it is more productive to apologize for a miscommunication than it is to demand an apology from those who misunderstood you? LUDICROUS!
And when your bad behavior is called out, accept it. The group defines acceptable behavior, and if yours is being rejected, forcing it isn't the answer. The "your" refers to anyone in the group.
Sir, are you implying that it is more productive to apologize for a miscommunication than it is to demand an apology from those who misunderstood you? LUDICROUS!
There's a big gap between misunderstanding and baseless and hateful accusation. Can we stop rehashing?
And when your bad behavior is called out, accept it. The group defines acceptable behavior, and if yours is being rejected, forcing it isn't the answer. The "your" refers to anyone in the group.
Sir, are you implying that it is more productive to apologize for a miscommunication than it is to demand an apology from those who misunderstood you? LUDICROUS!
His technology is too advanced! We should dissect him, for science reasons.
That's because it's the greyest area. Total compliance would mean no social change.
It's not as grey as you think - you're overthinking the situation.
This is how these conversations often go:
"[x] behavior makes me uncomfortable. Please don't do it." "That's silly. You shouldn't feel that way. Here's why you're wrong."
Very often, it's an emotional trigger, not an intellectual one. Please note that I did not say IRRATIONAL. A good friend of mine was sexually assaulted, and now she is triggered by someone touching her on the shoulder from behind. Emotional response with a perfectly rational explanation: PTSD triggered by unexpected touch.
When someone says a behavior is unacceptable, they have reasoning. If you want to know the reasoning, you ask to be enlightened - you don't argue with their position. Ultimately, any behavior is acceptable or not because the group declares it so. The intellectual "why" is literally irrelevant. I know you think it's relevant to YOU, and maybe it is, but the group doesn't care about satisfying intellectual curiosity - we control behavior on a functional level.
Now, you could have the deep "help me undestand your issues" conversation. That's productive and can help lead to mutual understanding, and help your behaviors to be accepted. That is also a one-on-one, usually.
It's funny because muppet doesn't realize that by whining and bitching about being tarred and feathered about playing the victim, he's actually playing the victim.
That's because it's the greyest area. Total compliance would mean no social change.
It's not as grey as you think - you're overthinking the situation.
This is how these conversations often go:
"[x] behavior makes me uncomfortable. Please don't do it." "That's silly. You shouldn't feel that way. Here's why you're wrong."
Very often, it's an emotional trigger, not an intellectual one. Please note that I did not say IRRATIONAL. A good friend of mine was sexually assaulted, and now she is triggered by someone touching her on the shoulder from behind. Emotional response with a perfectly rational explanation: PTSD triggered by unexpected touch.
When someone says a behavior is unacceptable, they have reasoning. If you want to know the reasoning, you ask to be enlightened - you don't argue with their position. Ultimately, any behavior is acceptable or not because the group declares it so. The intellectual "why" is literally irrelevant. I know you think it's relevant to YOU, and maybe it is, but the group doesn't care about satisfying intellectual curiosity - we control behavior on a functional level.
Now, you could have the deep "help me undestand your issues" conversation. That's productive and can help lead to mutual understanding, and help your behaviors to be accepted. That is also a one-on-one, usually.
Still pretty grey. One to one, you risk perpetuating tribalist thinking because of the lack of "review" for lack of a better word.
On the other hand, an open forum fails spectacularly for this, as has been recently demonstrated.
Holding up "the group" as the gold standard of behavior has many historically documented issues. I'm not sure it's possible to overthink what a tangled mess group dynamics and moral relativity are.
It's funny because muppet doesn't realize that by whining and bitching about being tarred and feathered about playing the victim, he's actually playing the victim.
It's pretty much unavoidable. I either address it or don't. The group analysis is very similar either way.
I bet we all know a guy who relentlessly won't take "no" for an answer. It's part of "the game," right?
I don't. I literally, seriously, don't know anyone like that. And if I did, they'd get quite a bit of grief from me on a regular basis.
Just a note, I know at least 5 people off hand that wore down the opposition. In most of those cases they are now happily married (other then my sister who is now getting divorced). Sooooooo.... Sometimes not taking No for the answer is a good plan long term, just when it comes to "Have sex with me right now" they better take no for an answer.
Most of the questions on this thread (about the experience of women and boundary violation) could be answered with some google searches. Here are terrible and not-rare-enough stories.
Comments
Please demonstrate where I trivialized the suffering of others.
Your next move? My prediction: more of an asshole.
There's a blog post I read a while back about The Missing Stair:
http://pervocracy.blogspot.com/2012/06/missing-stair.html?m=1
It's the phenomenon where a social group will shield a sexually predatory member, usually without specific intent to do so, because upsetting the group dynamic is seen as somehow worse than having a rapist in your midst.
I think I've posted this before, but it seems pertinent here.
The guy in question has since been removed from the Enforcer community, but it took a lot of vocalizing to make it happen. The question is: how do we go about creating a community that is proactive in defeating this kind of behavior without also making everyone feel as though they're under constant scrutiny?
The obvious answer is "don't be a rapist," but that's far from the only form of sexually predatory behavior. I bet we all know a guy who relentlessly won't take "no" for an answer. It's part of "the game," right? That's an example of a harassing behavior that leads to people feeling "wrong" in a group setting - and we're less inclined to call that out.
Groups need to be vocal and consistent with their criteria for acceptable behavior, that much is certain.
Whale, absolutely people need to call out bad behavior and fear conflict less.
Show me EXACTLY WHERE I said I need to have the last word.
I'm out yo. ^_^
That's the hardest part of any behavior normalization.
This is how these conversations often go:
"[x] behavior makes me uncomfortable. Please don't do it."
"That's silly. You shouldn't feel that way. Here's why you're wrong."
Very often, it's an emotional trigger, not an intellectual one. Please note that I did not say IRRATIONAL. A good friend of mine was sexually assaulted, and now she is triggered by someone touching her on the shoulder from behind. Emotional response with a perfectly rational explanation: PTSD triggered by unexpected touch.
When someone says a behavior is unacceptable, they have reasoning. If you want to know the reasoning, you ask to be enlightened - you don't argue with their position. Ultimately, any behavior is acceptable or not because the group declares it so. The intellectual "why" is literally irrelevant. I know you think it's relevant to YOU, and maybe it is, but the group doesn't care about satisfying intellectual curiosity - we control behavior on a functional level.
Now, you could have the deep "help me undestand your issues" conversation. That's productive and can help lead to mutual understanding, and help your behaviors to be accepted. That is also a one-on-one, usually.
On the other hand, an open forum fails spectacularly for this, as has been recently demonstrated.
Holding up "the group" as the gold standard of behavior has many historically documented issues. I'm not sure it's possible to overthink what a tangled mess group dynamics and moral relativity are.