The contest for the Most Ironic Use of the Term “Nice Guy,” When Applied to Yourself –otherwise known as the MIUTNGWAY Award – is heating up. The previous front runner – the Tumblr guy who compared his inability to get laid to the Holocaust – now faces a serious challenge from a Redditor calling himself DogmaDog.
The other day Mr. Dog wandered into a discussion of the SlutWalks in the Feminisms and offered his two cents: he declared them “stupid,” and suggested that they won’t really help victims.
And then he started in on his own tale of woe.
I know I’m going to be shit on for saying what I’m about to say, but please hear me out.
Not a promising start, Dog.
I’ve never raped a woman, and I’m the ‘nice guy’ who never took advantage of a woman.
Do you want an award for this?
But a girl I was infatuated with in high school blew me off and treated me disrespectfully. She ended up being raped one night, while intoxicated. I do not know how I am supposed to feel about it.
As Don Draper would say, “what?”
How do you think you’re “supposed” to feel? Did you accidentally dislodge the part of your brain responsible for basic human empathy?
Apparently, the answer to that is “yes.”
[H]ow do you suppose I am supposed to feel about this woman I knew who got raped? I mean, I’ve never taken advantage of a woman, but I don’t understand how my ‘friend’, this girl I went to high school with, could go out and party all the time, and in turn treat me, her classmate, as though I were an inferior person for not enjoying the atmosphere of drunkenness at high school parties.
As it turns out, you’re an inferior person for an entirely different reason.
That girl was a mean girl, no? And by being disrespectful toward men, and prejudiced toward men, wasn’t she asking men to behave badly toward her? The only men she gave attention and physical affection to were the ones who hurt her back.
So let me see if I get this: she didn’t go out with you, a “nice guy,” so she was therefore “asking” to be raped?
Naturally, this being the Feminisms subreddit, and not The Spearhead, some of the regular commenters took exception to Mr. Dog’s victim-blaming and his complete lack of empathy for the victim – especially strange, since Dog, who says he is suffering from an (unspecified) mental illness, considers himself “a victim, in my own way,” of prejudice towards those with mental health issues. This experience, alas, has not given him any sympathy towards other vicitms.
Indeed, it seems that DogmaDog didn’t misplace his sense of empathy after all; rather, he threw it out of the house and got a restraining order against it. Responding to someone who suggested he show a little empathy, Dog lashed out:
Your empathy can go suck a dick. Empathy does nothing to help my situation. I suppose that is just the excuse people give themselves so that they can feel like they are actually doing something.
You basically called me an inferior human being because I can’t or won’t empathize for my friend who was raped. Well, ask yourself this, smart-ass, have you ever really wondered what good your empathy does? It does nothing. …
In reality, you are doing nothing but attacking me, and I may or may not have a ‘complex’, even though I don’t know what that is, but I can guarantee you, I HAVE NEVER RAPED ANYONE!!!
The sound you hear is me banging my head, ever so softly, on my desk. Empathy is what connects human beings to one another, what allows them to understand one another on a deep level.
When people are suffering – as you are, Dog, in dealing with your mental illness – a little bit of empathy from someone else can make all the difference in the world.
If you can’t feel even a little bit of sympathy for this woman you were once “infatuated” with, you’re not a nice guy at all; you’re an even bigger asshole than those drunken high school partiers you disdain. You may never have raped anyone — as you’ve repeatedly insisted, as if this should win you a prize – but “in your own way” you’re thinking like an abuser. Your lack of empathy for the victim, your continued bitterness towards her for turning you down, your sense of wounded narcissism; none of this is healthy, for you or for anyone who comes into contact with you.
You need help, dude. Please, please get it.
Johnny_b, we have another commenter here who just LOVES the flashing cash in a bad neighborhood and getting mugged analogy when talking about how women dress. Or waving steaks in front of starving people, that’s another classic. Try harder.
That… kind of makes sense, actually. You basically want women to be able to flaunt their sexuality and tease men with it while at the same time saying “no, you can’t have this and there’s nothing you can do about it”, almost daring some idiot who can’t control himself to do something. At the very least, it seems rather mean-spirited.
Theft is different to assault, for heaven’s sake.
When you say “flaunt their sexuality”, what do you mean by ‘sexuality’. Do men have one?
Yep, every time I see a man with his shirt off I think “There goes someone flaunting their sexuality at me again, teasing me with it, all the while saying “No, you can’t have this and there’s nothing you can do about it”, almost daring some idiot who can’t control herself to do something.
Actually I don’t. I wonder why the hell he can do that and not have people automatically assume he’s after sex, while my bare chest is considered indecently sexual to the point where lots of places have laws to ensure I stay covered up
I don’t think it’s mean-spirited to wish for the end of stupid double standards regarding the sexuality of one’s body and behaviour.
That… kind of makes sense, actually. You basically want women to be able to flaunt their sexuality and tease men with it while at the same time saying “no, you can’t have this and there’s nothing you can do about it”, almost daring some idiot who can’t control himself to do something.
This isn’t “my sexuality,” it’s my body. I’m not “flaunting it,” I’m hanging out, or studying for exams, or shopping, or whatever. This is my flesh. I can’t not live in it. That’s not “daring someone to rape me,” that’s my existence as a creature.
I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve been catcalled in public by women just because I’m not wearing a shirt.
I don’t know what constitues “slutty” to you. To most people, it’d be overtly sexy, revealing clothes.
I didn’t ask what you thought I meant by slutish. I didn’t ask what most people meant. I asked for your definition. Really simple.
But thank you for proving part of my point… it’s not definable, because each person has their own definition, and so women have to try to figure out what every single man they might encounter thinks is, “slutty” and avoid it. That might mean not wearing anthing but a high-collared blouse, ankle-length skirt, and bonnet; all in subued colors, if they were in Colorado City, Arizona. Then they have to hope they don’t bump into a Wahhhabist Muslim when they get to Kanab, Utah.
But if you read my post above, I don’t necessarily agree with that officer. I said that he thought he was giving honest advice about behavior that puts women at risk.
No, you just made a direct comparison to locking one’s car, as an example of equivalent advice. That’s tacit support. Which you supported in this reply: It’s about the owner of the car vs. the owner of the body doing things which are risky. It’s not a perfect analogy, I’ll admit. Maybe a better one would have been “walking around a high-crime neighborhood flashing jewelry and wads of cash”. Or the ones you provide below:
So, you think that being a Sorts fan means one should never wear anything which has the name of one’s team on it, lest one encounter someone who hates that team.
Because I moved from very abstract, to the specific. Bakersfield is a city nearest to Los Angeles, and has no local ML team. Wearing any team logo there ought to be presumptively safe. You however seem to think the sportss fan is to blame for being assaulted, no matter where it happens.
Wow, way to be an arrogant jerk. I admitted I wasn’t an expert on education, which is why I specifically said “this is what I’ve heard”
No, it’s a way to point out that you are couching your opinion as fact, with weasel words to cover your ass. When you admit you don’t know what you are talking about, and present it as if it were something provable… you need to back it up.
Since you don’t seem to think this is the case I am letting you know that I am less likely to take your words, absent citation, as matters of proven fact. Which is what I told you. You may not like my tone… whoop-di-do. I wasn’t insulting your intelligence. I don’t know that the same can be said in reverse.
To just expect us to take your word (self-admitted to made from ignorance) as gospel, and then get your skivvies in a twist when we don’t, that’s arrogance. You have no track record, your credibility is still to be determined, and you are demanding to be taken as it were already established.
That’s arrogance.
Compare and contrast:
Johhny_B said
BTW, for what it’s worth, I never said nor implied that women (or men for that matter) “deserve” to be attacked for what they’re wearing, and I’d never support someone who believed that.
And then he said, in response to this:
Johnny_b, we have another commenter here who just LOVES the flashing cash in a bad neighborhood and getting mugged analogy when talking about how women dress. Or waving steaks in front of starving people, that’s another classic.
That… kind of makes sense, actually. You basically want women to be able to flaunt their sexuality and tease men with it while at the same time saying “no, you can’t have this and there’s nothing you can do about it”, almost daring some idiot who can’t control himself to do something. At the very least, it seems rather mean-spirited.
No support, real or implied, for someone who believed that.
JohnnyB: And again, with the trope that rapists are merely idiots who can’t control themselves. Have you ever thought that maybe, if they control themselves enough to stalk victims, select the right time to attack, prepare, avoid leaving evidence and then evade capture, maybe — just MAYBE — they can control themselves enough not to rape at all? After all, when we talk about murder, evidence of premeditation and planning absolutely destroys any claim of “self-defense” or temporary insanity. Why shouldn’t the same rule apply to rape?
Also: flaunting one’s sexuality by looking attractive isn’t any more mean-spirited than flaunting one’s wealth by driving a nice car, living in a nice house, and wearing smart clothes. Unless, of course, you believe women have less of a right to their own bodily integrity than men’s right to exclusive possession and use of their cars, homes and valuables.
Maybe if you stopped wandering around in a feminist blog with tired, debunked fallacies you wouldn’t get people hurting your fee-fees with facts and statistics.
But, noooo… you have to come in here flaunting your privilege and acting all entitled to mansplain to those lady-brains how “the real (to white men) world works.
Sounds like you deserved it.
(If I’m being too subtle replace “feminist blog” with “bad neighborhood” (what ever that means), “debunked fallacies” with “skimpy clothes” and “people hurting your fee-fees with facts and statistics” with “rape.”)
Well, I think I can consider my question answered at this point. To those who did so in a civilized fashion – thank you. To the rest, I can only hope that medical science will one day advance enough to be able to remove the sticks from your asses and the chips from your shoulders. Later.
I see Johnny’s idea of civility is about as consistent as his non-support of “slut-shaming; she deserved it” sorts.
But can he stick?
And he still keeps trying to pick a fight on the internet… pathetic.
Apparently not.
Johnny me boy… I thought you were out of here?
You can call it picking a fight, but the fact is you made claims. I am responding to them. If you don’t want response, don’t make fact claims and/or at least be consistent in the things you day.
Because you’ve not actually addressed your apparent conflict between thinking NWO’s comparisons as eminently reasonable, and your total lack of support for any such position.
“But can he stick?”
They never can. Sigh.
@Johnny Pez Then perhaps there should be a law against you taking your shirt off. Clearly your manboobz are indecent and inciting sexual thoughts, can’t have that!
But we’re still cool with going without pants, right?
cynickal: If it’s too hot, then by all means it’s cool to go without pants. Tha’s why we ha’ kilts.
Rutee, I wasn’t so much shocked at the idea that MRAL could *identify* as a liberal than wanting to draw him out. I agree that there is a certain group of bad feminist hipsters out there, but I didn’t think they defined the ideology.
Johnny_b wrote,
“That… kind of makes sense, actually. You basically want women to be able to flaunt their sexuality and tease men with it while at the same time saying “no, you can’t have this and there’s nothing you can do about it”, almost daring some idiot who can’t control himself to do something. At the very least, it seems rather mean-spirited.”
I *know*! Every time I watched the men’s soccer team practice near my house, I would get so pissed! There they were flaunting all that half-naked sweaty manflesh and gorgeous pecs and abs, and they wouldn’t even give me the time of day! Fuckers were *daring* me to rape one of them up the ass, the idiots! They should be more careful! Couldn’t they at least wear t-shirts?
“To the rest, I can only hope that medical science will one day advance enough to be able to remove the sticks from your asses and the chips from your shoulders. Later.”
Or, as they say in the Bible Belt, “I’ll pray for you.” / “May my personal assistant The Lord one day smite your house with mold and your body with pus, so you may learn the meaning of love and compassion. Remember, he loves all. Even you. So say I. Amen.”
Well, I think I can consider my question answered at this point. To those who did so in a civilized fashion – thank you. To the rest, I can only hope that medical science will one day advance enough to be able to remove the sticks from your asses and the chips from your shoulders. Later.
See, here’s the thing. We talk like chilly rationality is the best thing to have in all circumstances, and in a lot of cases it is. Maintaining decorum is a social good. Stepping back from a heated discussion to consider things in more depth is great. Who wants to be a slave to the passions? My religion and my philosophical heritage say that’s Bad News.
But when MRAs use this line as a debating tactic, it strikes me as cheap, like you’re scoring points on us by making us care about stuff. Caring about stuff doesn’t have to mean that we all have “sticks up our asses and chips on our shoulders,” it just means that the topic of debate is close to our hearts. For instance, if you describe my physical existence as “daring someone to rape me,” I can’t not care, because I can’t not have a body. I am this body.
Unpacked, you are saying that since I exist, I am daring rape. Why should I remain “civilized” in the face of such a barbaric statement?
His level of offense at things is also interesting. I pointed out that he was selling opinion as fact, and that he seemed to not care, and I was taking that into account henceforth.
That was beyond the pale. But saying people who disagreed with him were in need of medical intervention; beyond the scope of present practice, seems to be perfectly acceptable.
If dressing “modestly” kept rapists away, there would be no rape in countries where women take the veil.
Since there is plenty of rape in countries where women take the veil- in fact, at higher rates than you see in a lot of liberated countries where women wear “slutty” clothes- we can dispense with the notion that dressing “immodestly” attracts or provokes predators.
How many times do people have to datamine rape stats before MRAs just give this one up? It’s so debunked there’s no point in talking about it anymore. And they just keep repeating it, as if repeating it will make it true.
NF4ever: Maybe it’s not about stopping rape.