Feminism discussion

[Res]

That feeling when you get ignored in a thread about feminism...

I was going to say the same thing... I hope you didn't feel I was ignoring you, though. I'm not too focused on the wage gap and I find it's interesting that it's what most men usually jump to when discussing feminism.

My problem with the feminist label, is that while I agree with many things feminism believes in, it's such an umbrella term, that no one really agrees what its principles are. Plus, I don't want to be lumped in with misandrists who claim to like drinking male tears.

I've felt like this, and I've wavered on identifying myself as a feminist, but I claim the label because ultimately there isn't an alternative I like, plus I don't want feminism to be taken over by White Feminists/TERFs.

I think a lot of the problems are societal, and would would impossible to legislate away, but I think many of these will improve as time goes on.

Me too, and I think things are a lot more equal amongst the younger generations, although honestly my online experiences aren't wholly convincing of that.

I really strive for equality of both sexes. There's really discrimination against both in different ways. For a personal example, I had an attending say that it's irresponsible to get pregnant while a resident, which had me thinking that if we all waited until being done with residency, or eggs would have all shriveled up by then. There's also subtle things like some of the male residents being given the best surgical cases, then the girls getting blamed for being behind on cases. It's not fair, but I don't see an easy way to fix it, short of making sure the younger generation tries to be more egalitarian. Trying to pass a law would just lead to more paperwork and accomplish nothing.

I don't want people to think I'm trying to garner sympathy, though. Men have their own, different problems. Men make up an overwhelming majority of the homeless population, and women generally have an easier time finding support, with designated women's shelter, but no men's shelters. Men tend to take more risks, and as a result, men tend to end up at both the far right and far left sides of the bell curve.

I agree, and I also strive for equality of the sexes (although note: most people mean equal opportunity when talking about equality. I'm not arguing, for example, that 50% of firefighters should be women, when men are more likely to meet the physical requirements for being a firefighter. There has to be choice, too.

EDIT: I found one of the articles I was written for, it's not too long a read.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Res

[twice]

I think feminism is important to a certain extent. Women are indeed important.

But I personally do not support the people who try to argue something should be respected/and equal while bringing down others at the same time.

(You'll find most of that on places such as tumblr.)

Humans deserve to be treated as equals I don't get what is so difficult about doing that. It isn't hard.

[Tryhard]

I'm not sure how I feel about the deference to 'traits'. Honestly sometimes I feel as though the use of shifting male to masculine is just to gloss over that people want to criticize solely men. I get it, machismo is incredibly obnoxious. But is it really such a rampant view that it is indicative of an entire culture? A trait by itself is not a wholly good or bad thing without context, and if society is perceiving it to be so, then it is fault of the people within that society who hold that view, not as indicative of the culture in general, when you can pick on things like aggression or dominance against submission or compliance, especially when everyone is different, and draw a narrative between male and female from that unfairly in my opinion.

I'm a little skeptical of the Huffingtonpost for the second point. I have used it before, but it has strictly been pro-feminist and quite biased in that regard in my opinion. That said, I'm still going to argue against it even if men are less likely to pursue child custody. I don't necessarily agree with you that a child should mostly spend more time with their mother, but I feel as though this is really not a point that can be shown as an example of any patriarchy at the very least, and really destroying for the fathers who do want to attempt to gain custody that are disadvantaged. It's a real issue and I'm not sure many care, aside from the MRAs who are usually the ones to bring it up, maybe you don't have a good view of them or not, but I find it telling that instead of attempting to work together to bring equality to both genders from focusing on one of them each, feminists and MRAs have found themselves as incompatible enemies. Perhaps that's just my naivety.

Usually the argument is prostrate cancer vs. breast cancer, as prostrate cancer rates are much more equivalent to breast cancer. There's a referenced rebuttal here, with the key point being: Breast cancer is far more highly prevalent in younger women than testicular/prostrate cancer is prevalent in younger men, and while it is no less sad, those men are at an increased risk from many other ailments.

Yes, you are right, I should have mentioned prostrate cancer too. The article was interesting, but couldn't it still be said that if the patriarchy was supposed to take care of men over women, it would favor the ones that affect men the most regardless of age over the one that affects solely women? Assuming that the patriarchy is furthering the privilege of men, (and not really sure how you can use masculine in this case) wouldn't they want to fix their "own" problems?

(Side note: Breast cancer admittedly probably does receive more attention than it should compared to other cancers, including other cancers that affect women. There's the argument that it's because it's a 'sexy' cancer, as well as being a more visible cancer (quite literally speaking). Which, again, is a product of a patriarchal society).

'Sexy' cancer? Who even makes this argument? I find that ridiculous.

So I guess my main contention is that I'm skeptical about this difference between masculine and male being valid. And I'm not sure that's something we're going to resolve, which is unfortunate. I perhaps had a little more to say (and i kinda don't want to get into rape culture now) but I need to sleep.

Edit: I will say that I may not have been clear about how I've seen a lot of, if you would call them, anti-feminists that are also incredibly obnoxious and prone to unfairly criticizing feminism, and I obviously wouldn't agree with them either.

Women are cool.

Brilliant insight as always, Refa. Edited September 16, 2016 by Tryhard

[Crysta]

Manly black razors are infinitely better than womanly pink razors in spite of being the same price. In fact, the latter might as well be plastic.

This grave injustice must be corrected.

[Parrhesia]

I'll put it this way; ask forty people what their definition of feminism is and you'll get forty different answers. There's many people who share my beliefs on equality below, but wouldn't describe themselves as feminists. That's the kind of thing that'll happen when feminism's PR machine is fucking terrible.

By my definition, I'm a moderate (as opposed to radical) feminist. There is inequality all around us, and the fact that it doesn't destroy lives at birth doesn't mean we as a society can't strive for better. The reason the laabel is 'feminist' instead of, I don't konw, 'equalist' or whatever, is because as far as gender goes? Men enjoy a wide variety of freedoms women don't, and a few downsides as well - many of those downsides being steeped in a disregard for the feminine.

Feminism should aspire to uplift both to equality. But there's a hell of a lot more urgency to help women.

Of course, it would be hypocritical to then ignore the inequalities suffered by ethnic minorities and the LGBT+ community, so a genuine feminist needs to strive for an elimination of prejudice on all fronts. It'll probably never be reached in our lifetimes, but it's something to reach for.

Radicals - like pretty much any ideology taken to an extreme - are a very loud minority who have, sadly, put the label's reputation through a woodchipper in the eyes of a lot of people. Something that doesn't get much airtime is the fact that moderates fucking hate radicals. 'TERFs' for instance (Trans-Exclusionary RadFem) are rightfully reviled. I'll admit I don't know too much about the history of feminism - I think radfems have strong second-wave ties? There's definitely a few people who are stuck in the 1980s and just want to be Margaret Thatcher, fuck everyone else.

[Res]

Women are indeed important.

This isn't aimed solely at you, because it's been the general vibe from a few people in this thread, but it's a little disheartening to type up long and referenced comments in this thread, only for most comments to gloss over what's been previously written and state that women are, indeed, people.

I'm not sure how I feel about the deference to 'traits'. Honestly sometimes I feel as though the use of shifting male to masculine is just to gloss over that people want to criticize solely men. I get it, machismo is incredibly obnoxious. But is it really such a rampant view that it is indicative of an entire culture? A trait by itself is not a wholly good or bad thing without context, and if society is perceiving it to be so, then it is fault of the people within that society who hold that view, not as indicative of the culture in general, especially when you can pick on things like aggression or dominance against submission or compliance, especially when everyone is different, and draw a narrative between male and female from that unfairly in my opinion.

I feel like this comes down to a question of definitions, so we'll probably just go around in circles, although I do have to ask what percentage of a society has to hold a certain view before it becomes a part of the culture? I may be misunderstanding you, but yes, everyone is different, so the fact that we do have such heavy gender stereotypes present in western culture still - especially in the media - isn't that something to be fought?

Anyway, as a feminist, I'm certainly not out to criticize solely men, and I'd definitely not wish to associate with anyone whose purpose was to do that, either.

To take an example: my husband is short (5'6), he's soft-spoken; he's been teased and ignored for both those reasons, usually (though not solely) by other men. That's because a patriarchal society prefers its men to be tall and confident.

I'm a little skeptical of the Huffingtonpost for the second point. I have used it before, but it has strictly been pro-feminist and quite biased in that regard in my opinion. That said, I'm still going to argue against it even if men are less likely to pursue child custody. I don't necessarily agree with you that a child should mostly spend more time with their mother, but I feel as though this is really not a point that can be shown as an example of any patriarchy at the very least, and really destroying for the fathers who do want to attempt to gain custody that are disadvantaged. It's a real issue and I'm not sure many care, aside from the MRAs who are usually the ones to bring it up, maybe you don't have a good view of them or not, but I find it telling that instead of attempting to work together to bring equality to both genders from focusing on one of them each, feminists and MRAs have found themselves as incompatible enemies. Perhaps that's just my naivety.

Yes, you are right, I should have mentioned prostrate cancer too. The article was interesting, but couldn't it still be said that if the patriarchy was supposed to take care of men over women, it would favor the ones that affect men the most regardless of age over the one that affects solely women? Assuming that the patriarchy is furthering the privilege of men, (and not really sure how you can use masculine in this case) wouldn't they want to fix their "own" problems?

'Sexy' cancer? Who even makes this argument? I find that ridiculous.

So I guess my main contention is that I'm skeptical about this difference between masculine and male being valid. And I'm not sure that's something we're going to resolve, which is unfortunate. I perhaps had a little more to say (and i kinda don't want to get into rape culture now) but I need to sleep for now.

Just to clarify, I stated that children should spend more time with the mother if that is what they have been accustomed to; it's a small but important distinction. That is, of course, providing the children themselves do not express a preference, because I would hope that the parents could defer to their own children in custody cases.

Also, to be clear, it's the media that has labelled breast cancer as a 'sexy' cancer, I didn't make that up. ;)

Well, there's another issue in that your macho man isn't encouraged to show weakness or pain - which trips to the doctor indicate. So you have a society in which men are reluctant to seek medical help until forced to.

Anyway, I don't think we're necessarily at cross-purposes here, and thank you for responding to me.

Feminism should aspire to uplift both to equality. But there's a hell of a lot more urgency to help women.

Of course, it would be hypocritical to then ignore the inequalities suffered by ethnic minorities and the LGBT+ community, so a genuine feminist needs to strive for an elimination of prejudice on all fronts. It'll probably never be reached in our lifetimes, but it's something to reach for.

Yes!

[twice]

This isn't aimed solely at you, because it's been the general vibe from a few people in this thread, but it's a little disheartening to type up long and referenced comments in this thread, only for most comments to gloss over what's been previously written and state that women are, indeed, people.

I understand this isn't just for me, and I respect your feelings toward this. But the thread is a discussion. More or so our opinions.

Just because my opinion isn't an essay, doesn't mean it doesn't count or doesn't matter. And not like I only had one sentence, I had written other things as well in my post.

Just saying.

[Time the Crestfallen]

That feeling when you get ignored in a thread about feminism...

Hush woman! The men are talking now! XD

Feminism is one of those things I'm kind of irresolute towards. I agree with the general principals of feminism, but their are a lot of bad apples and awful things advocated for under its name that forming one solid opinion on the entirety of feminism feels rather difficult.

I think where a lot of people go wrong is trying to defend or attack feminism as a singular entity, such as saying all feminists are horrible but only using the worst kinds of radical feminists (the kind who unironically advocate for extermination of whites/males) as examples, which would be like saying that everyone on reddit is a misogynist because of r/RedPill or all Christians are evil because of the Westboro Baptist Church.

Feminism, in my opinion, is so large and covers so much stuff that realistically speaking, it should only be criticised in terms of the sub-groups within it i.e. radical feminists can go die in a fire, intersectional feminists make some good points but I don't agree with the overall statement etc.

And of course, the internet has shot reasonable debate in both its knees and left it twitching on the floor in a puddle of its own blood, but that's a debate for another time.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Phillius

[Res]

I understand this isn't just for me, and I respect your feelings toward this. But the thread is a discussion. More or so our opinions.

Just because my opinion isn't an essay, doesn't mean it doesn't count or doesn't matter. And not like I only had one sentence, I had written other things as well in my post.

Just saying.

I didn't mean to discount your opinion, and I don't think everyone has to write an essay.

It's just a little odd to be a woman in a thread discussing women's issues and to have men come in and say 'women are cool/important/whatever' as if it's a necessary statement to make (maybe it is, maybe there are people who'll come in and state that all women aren't important, or something). I mean, I hope it's an opinion everyone holds. I wouldn't go into a thread focusing on men's issues and state that men are important because I would assume that was implicitly understood. But, maybe it isn't.

intersectional feminists make some good points but I don't agree with the overall statement etc.

I'm intrigued; can you give any examples of what you don't agree with? I agree with the rest of your post, just wondering about this phrase.

[Time the Crestfallen]

I'm intrigued; can you give any examples of what you don't agree with? I agree with the rest of your post, just wondering about this phrase.

Oh, pretty much nothing was mean't by that. I was just throwing out the most common opinion I've personally heard on those two as examples.

[twice]

I didn't mean to discount your opinion, and I don't think everyone has to write an essay.

It's just a little odd to be a woman in a thread discussing women's issues and to have men come in and say 'women are cool/important/whatever' as if it's a necessary statement to make (maybe it is, maybe there are people who'll come in and state that all women aren't important, or something). I mean, I hope it's an opinion everyone holds. I wouldn't go into a thread focusing on men's issues and state that men are important because I would assume that was implicitly understood. But, maybe it isn't.

It's alright.

I made that statement to let others know that's how I feel on the subject, nothing more to it really.

[Life]

I find it funny that when I brought the fact that the wage gap was a myth months ago in the White House topic, people jumped down my throat. And yet now...

As I've always stated, I'm for equality, not equity. But I am realistic about it. Men and women are different and should be celebrated for their differences. And that's what really grinds my gears about third wave feminism because it promotes a hypocritical stance.

Third wave feminism basically says that women should be allowed to do whatever they want... but men are not allowed this luxury because they are pigs. It is sexism against men, plain and simple.

[Parrhesia]

You must be encountering the wrong kind of feminism. Moderate feminism's pretty enthusiastic about ensuring men don't be shamed for showing emotion/dancing/whatever hypothetical.

[Original Alear]

but no men's shelters.

I don't know what you mean by this. I haven't done any volunteer work recently, but I know there used to be men's shelters (I'm not sure if they were exclusively for men, but some of them there would only be men staying). And there's a homeless shelter I used to walk by on the way to a train station, and while I never went inside, there were guys who would stay there.

[Res]

Huh, I didn't realize, either, but the directory of shelters in my city has at least 4 men's only shelters (I live in a big city, so I only scrolled down the first page).

Third wave feminism is actually pretty inclusive; if there's a men-hating wave of feminism (although that's usually been confined to a percentage of feminists rather than the wave as a whole) it's probably second-wave feminism. Third wave's aiming to be more encompassing of all races and religions and aims to break down gender stereotypes to be more accepting of feminine women and non-binary people.

To be honest, it feels like any conversation on feminism in which the majority of participants are men ends up devolving into 'the wage gap is a myth' and 'too many men are falsely accused of rape'. And both are such a tiny part of feminism (and the second is pulling the focus back on men). There are so many other things that feminism means to me.

[Moira]

Huh, I didn't realize, either, but the directory of shelters in my city has at least 4 men's only shelters (I live in a big city, so I only scrolled down the first page).

Third wave feminism is actually pretty inclusive; if there's a men-hating wave of feminism (although that's usually been confined to a percentage of feminists rather than the wave as a whole) it's probably second-wave feminism. Third wave's aiming to be more encompassing of all races and religions and aims to break down gender stereotypes to be more accepting of feminine women and non-binary people.

To be honest, it feels like any conversation on feminism in which the majority of participants are men ends up devolving into 'the wage gap is a myth' and 'too many men are falsely accused of rape'. And both are such a tiny part of feminism (and the second is pulling the focus back on men). There are so many other things that feminism means to me.

I also feel like there's too much discussion on different definitions of feminism, which distracts from a lot more issues that could be discussed, feminism as a term has just become so muddied. I think these are valid discussions, but I see so much energy poured into when I feel like it's not worth it.

Also in regards to feminism only being about women's issues, many of issues men face that have been brought up in this topic, I feel that a good amount of feminists recognize and support solutions to these problems, but it doesn't make sense for women to spearhead the movements to find solutions to them. To me, it makes sense that most feminists who are women would focus on problems affecting women, as that is the most relevant to them. And of course, issues pertaining to men should be spearheaded by men, because they are the ones directly affected by them.

Edited September 17, 2016 by Moira

[Time the Crestfallen]

Huh, I didn't realize, either, but the directory of shelters in my city has at least 4 men's only shelters (I live in a big city, so I only scrolled down the first page).

Third wave feminism is actually pretty inclusive; if there's a men-hating wave of feminism (although that's usually been confined to a percentage of feminists rather than the wave as a whole) it's probably second-wave feminism. Third wave's aiming to be more encompassing of all races and religions and aims to break down gender stereotypes to be more accepting of feminine women and non-binary people.

To be honest, it feels like any conversation on feminism in which the majority of participants are men ends up devolving into 'the wage gap is a myth' and 'too many men are falsely accused of rape'. And both are such a tiny part of feminism (and the second is pulling the focus back on men). There are so many other things that feminism means to me.

And even then most of the really egregious hate comes from Tumblr, which is kind of like using Stormfront as a measuring stick for Conservatives.

Also in regards to feminism only being about women's issues, many of issues men face that have been brought up in this topic, I feel that a good amount of feminists recognize and support solutions to these problems, but it doesn't make sense for women to spearhead the movements to find solutions to them. To me, it makes sense that most feminists who are women would focus on problems affecting women, as that is the most relevant to them. And of course, issues pertaining to men should be spearheaded by men, because they are the ones directly affected by them.

I agree with you on this, but the problem is that there's pretty much no platform for discussing men's issues. Even if you ignore how online discussions of men's issues are treated as a joke, serious attempts at making changes aren't given much pause for concern either.

[Moira]

And even then most of the really egregious hate comes from Tumblr, which is kind of like using Stormfront as a measuring stick for Conservatives.

I agree with you on this, but the problem is that there's pretty much no platform for discussing men's issues. Even if you ignore how online discussions of men's issues are treated as a joke, serious attempts at making changes aren't given much pause for concern either.

Yeah I definitely think they could use more attention, and I feel like a lot of times when they're trying to be discussed mens issues are brought up in contrast to womens issues. I haven't done much activism so I can't honestly give any good ideas about how to give the issues men face more of a platform

[Crysta]

What platforms are being sought and what mens' issues need addressing?

Serious question, btw. I don't doubt they exist but there's a lot of vagueness.

[eclipse]

I like to think of myself as egalitarian - everyone gets treated equally (badly). Bits of my dream include domestic abuse shelters that would be able to cater to anyone, no matter gender/orientation, children in custody battles go to the parent(s) that will do the best job of raising them, and gamers don't have to worry about being harassed about their gender when using voice chat.

EDIT: Men's issues include being taken seriously when filing domestic abuse/sexual assault claims, and certain custody cases. On the social side, I think it would be great if a man could cry during a sappy scene, without having to worry about how society will view him.

Oh, right, and as for feminism, I refuse to identify as such because the really radical ones piss me off.

Edited September 17, 2016 by eggclipse

[Crysta]

EDIT: Men's issues include being taken seriously when filing domestic abuse/sexual assault claims, and certain custody cases. On the social side, I think it would be great if a man could cry during a sappy scene, without having to worry about how society will view him.

The weird thing about this is a lot of it stems from... a patriarchal standpoint/emphasis.

Which is generally not a thing feminists are fond of.

EDIT: As for me, I identify wholeheartedly with the feminist label regardless of the crazy, which I feel is very exaggerated.

Edited September 17, 2016 by Crysta

[Rezzy]

I like to think of myself as egalitarian - everyone gets treated equally (badly). Bits of my dream include domestic abuse shelters that would be able to cater to anyone, no matter gender/orientation, children in custody battles go to the parent(s) that will do the best job of raising them, and gamers don't have to worry about being harassed about their gender when using voice chat.EDIT: Men's issues include being taken seriously when filing domestic abuse/sexual assault claims, and certain custody cases. On the social side, I think it would be great if a man could cry during a sappy scene, without having to worry about how society will view him.Oh, right, and as for feminism, I refuse to identify as such because the really radical ones piss me off.

I absolutely refuse to use my voice online.

And amen to the domestic violence point. I would find the study I had linked for you in the X-men movie poster thread, for others to read, but I'm too tired, too lazy, and too on mobile to do it right now.

[eclipse]

EDIT: As for me, I identify wholeheartedly with the feminist label regardless of the crazy, which I feel is very exaggerated.

I strongly suggest looking at the "crazy" part, because that's what caused me to disassociate myself with them. My last straw was Brianna Wu.

[Deltre]

While I personally agree with almost everything put forth by more moderate feminists (ideas that I've personally encountered or people I've personally spoken with), I could never see myself actually identify myself as a feminist in this day and age because the fact of the matter is that most feminist figures in the public eye would fall under the umbrella of 'radical feminism.' I understand that many moderate feminists dislike these people as much as the rest of us, and that there are indeed less extreme examples out there of perfectly reasonable feminist figures, even mainstream ones. I understand that stance is a bit unfair, but ultimately I think it's the best decision for me personally. If I identify as feminist and then try to have a conversation about some of the issues that the moderates have up on the chopping block, I'm less likely to be taken seriously. No two ways about it really, labels carry certain connotations and the first thing that most people think of when they here 'Feminism' are not the more reasonable voices out there under the feminist umbrella. It's your Lena Dunham's and your Anita Sarkesians that come to mind first, unfortunately. And ultimately, I find that people are far more receptive to moderate feminism if you present the ideas without the label. As an aside, although I understand the need for a label as a name under which to unify, I really feel that radical feminists have somewhat hijacked the term. A lot of what I consider 'real feminism' (as if there is such a thing in this year) is great! In fact, a lot of it you'd think would be so obvious (a big one that gets me as the hilariously disproportionate rates of sexual harassment) that it's strange to think we're still debating over it. But I'd argue staying under one all encompassing label like this really, really hurts in the eye of the average man (or woman), who is probably not educated on the subject at all. Personally I'd like to see the rise of 'People for the Advancement of Common Sense' or 'Genitalia Be Damned - We're All Going to Die' but I know that's mostly just a pipe dream.

I've seen a few people bring up the term 'rape culture' a few times but I'd honestly like to see a dedicated explanation as to what exactly this is. Based on the things I see whenever this is brought up I feel like it's a huge misnomer and harmful to what I always thought was the intended point. Because the reality is, most men can in fact control themselves around women. Well, that may not be entirely accurate, but we're certainly capable of controlling ourselves to the point that we wouldn't insert ourselves into an unwilling participant. I just can't see an argument any other way. Where I do see problem, a huge one even, is in how people who are privileged and those in power look at these situations. Bonus points to ignorance if you're part of an older generation. Also, I'd like to remove police handling of rapes from this equation for the time being, because there's clearly something wrong there as well. I believe this is likely a (lack of) training issue in combination with the inherent power imbalance in any interaction with an officer, but I admit this is just a gut feeling, and inexcusable regardless. The only thing that ultimately matters is whether or not consent was 1. capable of being given and 2. actually was or was not given at the time of the crime.

Back to the point I was trying to make however, I say we look no further than the case of one Brock Turner - Former Harvard Rapist turned symbol of everything wrong with this nation's attitude with sexual assault. I'm sure many of us have at least passing knowledge of this farce of a case, but I'll try to explain it anyways. Brock Turner - Privileged Rapist was found sexually assaulting an unconscious woman by two other male classmates who did the sensible thing of detaining him and contacting the authorities. Fast-forward to a time when the media (perhaps the most powerful group of corporations in our country) gets wind of the story, and we see Brock Turner - Rapist being hailed as Brock Turner - Former Harvard Swimmer (who, more importantly, is a god damned rapist, but good luck finding that in the headlines). And then of course is the complete utter failure of a 'trial' where ultimately Rapist Brock Turner was sentenced to 6 months in jail by old, privileged, judge (again, a person in a position of power) Aaron Persky. And then Brock Turner The Rapist got out in three for good behavior, which I assume means he managed to put his dick down for the duration of the stay or not fondle any of the female guards like a rational human being capable of rubbing what are likely his only two bits of grey matter together to form a thought. Also, it's clear from interviews that his privileged father never took the time to sit down with him and talk to him about anything in the same stratosphere of proper sexuality. He can be quoted as saying (and God how I wish this were made up) "It's a shame to thing that he [brock Turner The Rapist] might have his future ruined for what amounts to 20 minutes of action." Clearly, the rapist doesn't fall far from the tree in terms of critical thinking ability.

But as much as this case would seem to validate the idea of rape culture, it's very important to note a few things. The first is that on the day of his release, the Turner residence was all but surrounded by protesters. This suggests to me that by and large, the public does not conform to the idea of rape culture and that it's mostly an issue of privileged men whose terrible parents never set any boundaries. You know, the type of kid who likely got away with absolutely everything growing up, and because daddy was a prominent figure somewhere they likely didn't have anyone else tell them that their current existence amounts to a conglomeration of human refuse. This applies to a lot of the people you'd be likely to see in a fraternity as well, many of whom probably come from similar backgrounds where they never really had to do much of anything for their success. These kind of upbringings are absolutely terrifying because they foster the idea that the world owes you something. But, the thing is this is such a small portion of the population it seems downright unfair to call it a problem of the culture at large when that is demonstrably false. And, honestly I'd like to double down here and say that the most accurate term I can think of is Powerful White Privileged Rape Culture.

As an African American male, let me be clear when I say I have tons of white friends I don't care what race or gender you are; cool is cool is cool. If you're cool with me, I'm probably cool with you too. But the final nail in the 'rape culture is a poor name for a real issue' coffin for me is another recent case that garnered mass attention. I'm of course referring to the Bill Cosby case, and let me start by saying yes, I believe he probably did it. If you haven't heard of this case, the short version is that prominent African American comedian, TV idol, and unfortunately probable rapist Bill Cosby had recently been accused by no less than 50 different women of committing sexual assault in one form or another. Ultimately he was exonerated due to lack of conclusive evidence, though as much as I would like the allegations to be untrue I can't think of any reason 50+ people with no known affiliation and nothing to gain would come forward without drifting hard into conspiracy theory territory. But the main thing to take away from this is that the media covered this story in a very different way than the Brock 'rapes unconscious women in an alleyway' Turner case. Now I know that the media has a tendency do whatever they can to draw attention to celebrities in the news, and bad news gets far more attention than good, but I can't help but feel that headlines surrounding this were far more to the point. While yes, I'm sure you could find examples of headlines such as 'Comedy Superstar Accused of Sexual Assault' and other examples of what I call 'soft language', it's hard to argue that their treatment of Cosby was far more brutal and by extension arguably more fair considering the circumstances. Hell, even in the case of said soft language, it at least makes SOME sense to mention Cosby's history (at least in terms of running the media as a business, which it is first and foremost) because it's part of what made him so beloved by all. Meanwhile I cannot think of one solitary reason that the Stanford Rapist, who is so painfully average in every facet of his being that there's an entire god damned mathematical function devoted to the guy, is still being reported as a 'former swimmer'. And that doesn't even touch on the fact that despite receiving a 'not guilty' verdict, the public has all but crucified the man. Again, this suggests to me that there's a very specific subset of people that the term 'rape culture' describes most aptly, but the nomenclature itself is so broad that it's misleading.

In short, I do believe that the ideas put forth by the term 'rape culture' have a lot of merit, but I find the term itself to be pretty bad at summarizing the idea it really stands for. America doesn't have a rape culture problem, it has a powerful privileged white male problem as our own history has shown us time and time again.

[Crysta]

I strongly suggest looking at the "crazy" part, because that's what caused me to disassociate myself with them. My last straw was Brianna Wu.

I've seen crazier and I still don't care.

It's like being in a political party: you will have the crazies. Always. Forever. I'm not gonna let them ruin it for me.

Edited September 17, 2016 by Crysta