Men’s Rights Activists tend to be fairly blunt; when they express a noxious opinion – and oh so many of their opinions are noxious – they do it in the most obnoxious possible way. It isn’t enough for Paul Elam of A Voice for Men to blame victims of rape; he also has to call them “STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH[es]” wearing the equivalent of PLEASE RAPE ME neon sign[s] glowing above their empty little narcissistic heads.”
Warren Farrell is different. He takes a softer approach. He would never call a woman a bitch or a whore or a cunt. When he speaks, he manages to sound gentle and caring. He talks about the importance of listening to others. He sometimes even manages to give the impression that he cares as much about women as he does about men.
And yet his ideas are as noxious as Elam’s. He is as much of a victim blamer as any slur-spouting MGTOWer complaining about “stuck-up cunts” on an internet message board.
It’s just that he does his victim blaming with such carefully evasive language that he’s able to hide the noxiousness of his ideas – and to avoid taking responsibility for them when he’s challenged on them.
So it wasn’t surprising that a lot of the questions directed at him during his Reddit Ask Me Anything session the other day were attempts to pin down the real meaning of some of his more troubling pronouncements over the years.
A Redditor by the name of fiskitall asked Farrell about a quote from his Myth of Male Power that I also had hoped to see him clarify:
It is important that a woman’s “noes” be respected and her “yeses” be respected. And it is also important when her nonverbal “yeses” (tongues still touching) conflict with those verbal “noes” that the man not be put in jail for choosing the “yes” over the “no.” He might just be trying to become her fantasy.
Though worded with characteristic evasiveness, Farrell seems to be suggesting that men should not be prosecuted for raping women who explicitly tell them “no” if they think that these women are somehow giving them a “nonverbal” go-ahead. His “tongues still touching line” suggests specifically that he thinks a woman who kisses a man is essentially consenting to sex.
So how does he explain this quote? He starts off by trying to explain the bit at the end about fantasy:
the quote comes from the politics of sex chapter of The Myth of Male Power. The point that “He might just be trying to become her fantasy” comes after a discussion of how romance novels and, in my 2014 edition, books like 50 Shades of Grey–books that are the female fantasy–are rarely titled, “He Stopped When I Said ‘No.'” The point is that women’s romance novels are still fantasizing the male-female dichotomy of attract/resist versus pursue/persist, and the law is increasingly punishing that as sexual harassment or date rape.
Beneath the weirdly academic verbiage – all that crap about “the male-female dichotomy of attract/resist” and so on – Farrell is advancing an idea that is really quite insidious: the notion that the popularity of rape fantasies in romance novels and in books like 50 Shades of Grey means that women actually want men to disregard their “noes.” Not only that: he seems to suggest that it’s unfair to prosecute men who rape women because, heck, for all they knew the woman is into that sort of thing.
As I pointed out in a followup question that he ignored,
I’m not sure how the fact that women read romance novels means that they don’t really mean no when they say no. That’s fantasy, not reality. I play video games in which people shoot at me; it doesn’t mean I want people to shoot me in real life.
He continues, his language growing more confusing and evasive:
the law is about dichotomy: guilty vs. innocent. male-female sexual attraction is about nuance. the court can’t begin to address the nuances of the male-female tango. the male role is punishable by law. women have not been resocialized to share the risks of rejection by expectation, only by option. the male role is being criminalized; the female increasingly has the option of calling his role courtship when she likes it, and taking him to court when she doesn’t.
The only real “tango” going on here is in Farrell’s language, in his attempts to so muddy the issue of consent that he manages to suggest that rapists are the victims of women’s “poor socialization” and caprice. In real life, the “male role” is not criminalized; men aren’t jailed for asking women out on dates, or going for a kiss at the end of the night; they’re being jailed for overriding a woman’s “noes” and raping them, though in actuality it is rare for a rapist to see the inside of a jail cell.
And that last bit – his complaint that women have “the option of calling his role courtship when she likes it, and taking him to court when she doesn’t” – seems to be little more than a deliberately confounding way of expressing his frustration that women are allowed to say no at all.
the answer is education about each sex’s fears and feelings–and that education being from early junior high school. we need to focus on making adolescence a better preparation for real love within the framework of respect for the differences in our hormones.
I confess I don’t quite know what he’s talking about here; as far as I can figure it, based on some of the things he’s written in the Myth of Male Power, the reference to “the differences in our hormones” is his way of suggesting that we should be more forgiving of boys when they make sexual “mistakes.” Boys will be boys!
the most dangerous thing that’s going on in some colleges is saying that a woman who says “yes” but is drunk can say in the morning that she was raped, because she was drunk and wasn’t responsible. this is like saying someone who drinks and gets in the car and has an accident is not responsible and shouldn’t get a DUI because she or he is drunk. we would never say the guy isn’t responsible for raping her because he’s drunk. these rules infantalize women and the female role, and criminalize men and the male role.
Well, no. They criminalize people who rape drunk people. A woman who is raped when she is drunk is not the equivalent of a drunk driver; she’s not the one doing the driving.
In his classic essay “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell described how political writers turned to evasive euphemism, and degraded language generally, in an attempt to disguise the sheer terribleness of the things they were trying to express.
In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements.
It’s easy enough to see that this is exactly Farrell’s game. He can’t say “men shouldn’t be jailed for raping women who say no, because a lot of women have rape fantasies, and so maybe they’re into it” even though this seems to be the most straightforward translation of his basic message.
So instead he talks about how “romance novels are still fantasizing the male-female dichotomy of attract/resist versus pursue/persist”; he complains that “ the male role is being criminalized”; he talks vaguely about creating “the framework of respect for the differences in our hormones.”
But in the end, what he’s saying is worse than Elam’s rant about “conniving bitches” with neon signs over their heads. He just knows how to make the indefensible more palatable to a general audience.
Meep meep
:]
@wewereemergencies
The thing is, I also feel really guilty about not being strong or brave enough to defend my family members; if I can’t defend myself, then I probably can’t defend anyone else. I feel like I’m letting everyone down for being this weak – especially my younger siblings.
@ ally
It’s not that you’re not strong or brave – it’s the situation that is incredibly f*cked up. YOU’RE NOT WEAK or cowardly or a failure for not knowing how to react to abuse. And I understand feeling guilty, but seriously I’d probably react in the same way – the point is, there’s nothing abnormal about it. I’m thirding the self-defence lesson thing for your own peace of mind, if nothing else.
I don’t really have much to add, but you are not cowardly or weak, even if you can’t defend your siblings – you’re human and NOTHING about the situation is your fault – even not knowing much, I can guarantee that.
“Both my fiancee and I have been raped. My fiancee enjoys sex scenes where I “force” her into sex with the difference being that we HAVE A SAFE WORD. Does that mean she “enjoyed” getting rape??? FUCK NO. You are absolutely disgusting for saying otherwise. ”
I am so sorry to hear you have been raped. No, I know she do not enjoy rape, and never did. I asked a question on sympathy. Noboby wants to be raped.
To everyone: I realize that you feel like I do not listen. I do hear you. I may disagree with some here on BDSM, but I hear you. I know I said I’m bowing out, but I cannot let a misunderstanding like that stand – I will not say, and have not said, that people enjoy getting raped.
“It’s fucking ignorant of you to in the first place *NOT* acknowledge BDSM is by far not always about inflicting or undergoing pain”)”
I agree that not all BDSM is about pain. I am not ignorant when I fail to say everything I know.
“That is a vile, vile, vile thing to say …it… reduces other people to mere monsters waiting for you to slip up and fuel their magical realms.”
I can see why you think that, but isn’t that similar to calling “Schrodinger’s Rapist ” a vile idea? It is good to be careful before trusting people. Which don’t mean everyone is unsafe. And isn’t it good that I asked it, so now BDSM people can answer the question and influence my opinion? To my mind, it is way better to answer it than to call it vile to ask. (Thanks, Breakfastman, for answering instead of being offended.)
“you’re basically sayi g that consensual activities are wrong because you find them oogy. Stop that, too.”
Please do not put words in my mouth. That is not the reason I dislike many activities that fall under the collective name BDSM. The simplest and most basic measure of ethics say: “Hurting people is wrong. I am a good person, because I hurt nobody.” Some BDSM activities hurt physically. (Note: I have not said “all”, but some. Please do not mis-characterize) Others hurt personhood/ dignity by humiliating, degrading or verbally insulting. (Note: Ditto.) Some hurt the mind by causing cognitive dissonance. I discussed some examples earlier how explanations of BDSM are often self-contradictory. (Note: Same as previous. I still don’t say all BDSM components are about hurting.)
I will not let go of the “hurting people on purpose is wrong” standard. But that don’t stop me from caring even about people who cause pain to others on purpose. All I want for BDSM people are healthy, mutually respectful relationships in which they feel no fear and which cause pleasure, not (emotional, mental or physical) hurt . If they think they already have it, that wish should cause them no offence.
@Fibinachi: You say I should not judge people’s statements on their feelings as right or wrong. The wrongness is not in feeling what they do, but in not admitting that they have mixed feelings, and seemingly wanting me to call all sides of their feelings positive. I realize – and care about it – that those mixed feelings have a negative part too. About sociopaths and psychopaths – you taught me the two are different, and then I looked up and saw some – not all sources confirm that. I only knew it after you said it.
(Really, by now I feel almost all accusations made against me are based on feelings, not fact. Which confirms my opinion that when the topic of BDSM comes up, at least some practitioners leave their reading comprehension at the door. Of course people’s sex lives are an emotional subject to them, but it does make it impossible to go forward in a conversation: They keep on telling me things I know, and cursing me for not knowing it.)
But to conclude: I am sorry for the pain you have had in your lives. When I hear you have been raped, my heart goes out to you. (I wanted to say more, but I know that it will be misinterpreted. If it would not have lead to further accusations, I would even have asked another question.)
Standard 2-point deduction for not sticking the flounce still applies. Your net score is 3/10.
“Accusations against you” as opposed to counter-arguments to your claims? Because you didn’t address any of the points in Fibinachi’s long post, especially the one about the limitations of language.
Or just that you are poor at explaining your issues with BDSM without antagonizing the people you are arguing with.
Gee, Retha, here are your words:
So, here you’re are saying that people who have rape fantasies that they enact during a consensual BDSM scene really aren’t safe and you don’t think they’d have so much sympathy for a rape victim and may just use that person’s story as fantasy material.
BDSM scenes are “rape-y.”
Here you just pretty much come out and say that kinksters are sociopaths.
BDSM is harmful to both mind and body, and you go into great lengths to list those things that you find so harmful about BDSM.
So, yeah, reading all those things? All those things together? No, you don’t actually come out and say it, but one does get the distinct impression that you do indeed find these things disgusting. Rape-y, unsafe, contradictory, hurtful, painful, cognitive dissonance, sociopathy. One does not normally write so many strong words without some feeling behind them.
And here’s the thing: you absolutely refuse to accept it when others tell you that there BDSM experiences are positive; that they are not sociopaths or rapists, and that their partners are not sociopaths or rapists. You are completely ignoring the experiences of these people. You are talking over them and telling their experiences are. This is completely illogical. This is not rational.
Really? You said that stuff because you genuinely wanted to ask whether people who use rape fantasies are more prone to be rapists or might use a confidence of having actually been raped as wank material? Really? That’s what you think you said? You might want to scroll up there, kiddo.
And no, it is not like scrodinger’s rapist. I can’t be assed to explain why – someone else feel free.
And no one is asking you to hurt someone on purpose. Although remind me never to come to you with a slinter that needs digging out or with da islocated shoulder.
So you want them to have these relationships but only if they meet your criteria for “healthy, mutually respectful”.
Reality alert: YOU don’t get to decide what is healthy or mutually respectful in a relationship! The people in the relationship are the ones that get to decide.
Now re-read Fib’s post. Again. Try to understnad it.
And stop being so fucking judgemental!
I just want to play a sad trombone for every part of this comment.
Maybe because some men actually are rapists, whereas “BSDM practitioners jack off to hearing about rape” is something you made up?
And FFS, no, it is not always good to ask questions, you JAQoff. If someone asked “How do I know all gay men aren’t child molesters?” or “What if black people are natural criminals?”, that person isn’t better for asking than someone who gets offended by the reply!
FFS. (There’s going to be a lot of FFS here.) Are you actually telling me that your morality doesn’t go beyond “that hurts, so it’s bad?” Most of us got past that when we figured out that shots are good for you.
If you’re not an anti-vaxxer, then you have room in your brain for the concept that it’s possible for something to physically hurt and yet not be a Bad Thing. You’d be able to understand the possibility that there might be other things like that if you weren’t so irrational about BSDM.
FFS! The hyper-rational Spock act is bullshit under any circumstances but it’s just embarrassing coming from someone who is so obviously blinkered by emotion.
…You’re probably coming up with a theory that all BSDM practitioners are emotionally damaged broken birds who were abused, aren’t you?
@Ally S:
Even the last time my dad physically assaulted me, I just stood there and took it. I was 18 and actually much stronger than him, but I was too afraid to do anything to defend myself. I react similarly to emotional and verbal abuse. One time I did try to defend myself from his physical assaults, but he ended up putting me in a headlock and started to choke me. I wish I wasn’t so damn cowardly in the face of things like this.
That’s not cowardly, but a perfectly valid defense mechanism. Lundy Bancroft, in “Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men” explains that abusers escalate when their victim defends themselves or protects their boundaries. That’s exactly what your father did when you tried to defend yourself: he escalated because his control over you was slipping. You’re not cowardly at all, you’re doing the best you can in an awful situation.
@Retha
FUCK. YOU.
“No, I know she do not enjoy rape, and never did. I asked a question on sympathy.”
Oh really? What, exactly, did you mean by this then?
“People who enjoy playing at rape and kidnapping in their scenes love rape so much that I am unsure if they are safe people.”
You’re accusing us of being unsafe because we “love” rape. To two rape survivors.
And then you say it’s my reading comprehension? Fuck, some of the MRAs were better…
If my comment sounded oversimplified…
I just have no patience with adding in all the caveats that tend to favour rapists. It seems quite logical that if two people do get drunk and have sex because that’s how they want to go about it… no one’s going to be charged with rape. No one else knows, no one needs to care, and it’s certainly none of my business.
I’d rather play the wording game about ‘what is drunk?’ when we’re not living in a world where women are afraid to report their own assaults and rapes because they had a few drinks, and it was enough for them to be vulnerable but not enough for the court of public opinion to declare them drunk. But when it comes to sexual encounters when consent has any level of uncertainty, I wish people would be erring on the side of ‘not raping other people’, not on the side of ‘afraid to hurt feelings about sexual preferences.’
I’m also not taking away anyone’s ability to have sex while intoxicated, because if someone isn’t going to accuse the other rape, it’s a non-issue for that particular case. What I do is throw unconditional support to the victims I know personally, and this does affect my opinion. Maybe I should care more about not hurting the feelings of people who negotiate the nuance of consent, but you know, I’ve known enough people who were raped because their rapists knew that if they waited for the person to sober up, sex would not happen, felt the end justified the means, and were predatory enough to pick up women in states of intoxication further gone than they look to the casual viewer. And the bonus part? When a friend is crying on your shoulder because she doesn’t know how to tell her boyfriend she ‘cheated’ on him, even though she has no memory of the previous night.
I also don’t trust other people when it comes to judging how far gone someone is. I’ve had people tell me ‘she’s not that drunk’ when I found a young woman sleeping with her head nestled on a toilet bowl, who only responded after being shaken and yelled at, only to turn around and fall asleep on the toilet again. I still don’t know if another young woman lived… I might have been looking at a dead body at that point, but her vacant stare and total lack of response combined with her friends’ claims that she ‘didn’t have that much, she was fine!’ still haunts me.
So I’m rather cynical and crotchety about the whole thing.
But I’m not wrong.
Sexualising rape, sexualisizing violence, sexualising children/little girls/babies, sexualising molestation, childhood sexual abuse, or incest (daddy/daughter role play), and sexualising murder = NOT GOOD. These are horrible, horrible things. Two consenting adults does not make BDSM a good activity for women.
I didn’t call anyone names, call anyone stupid, tell anyone to shut up, fuck off, and die over their opinion. Such a reaction tells me there’s a lot of meat on that bone, BDSM and feminism do not go together. My criticism of BDSM focuses on women because My Feminism is devoted to women, as my life is to women’s causes. I also was keeping it short. I am well aware that male dom/female sub isn’t the ONLY pairing, but I used the example because it’s the most harmful and most common, which is no coincidence because it’s a manifestation of patriarchy.
As I became more interested in feminism, I rejected BDSM, sex positive movement, porn, and some aspects of liberal feminism and “choice” feminism. I’m not saying people can’t participate in BDSM, I am saying that it’s not a feminist activity. So, quick run-down:
-male doms — the absolute worst, truly terrible people, sociopathic
-female doms — not good
-male subs — unhealthy, need to get out of those relationships for their own well being
-female subs — unhealthy, have been manipulated into enjoying their own oppression and are facing some severe physiological problems because of that, are being exploited and are in very real danger
@anyone claiming anti-kink is MRA logic??? What? Pro-kink means sexualising rape/violence AND advocating the same patriarchal gender roles that Warren Farrell pukes out constantly. (dominant, forceful male and submissive female.)
@Noadi
BDSM absolutely is sexualised violence. It “looks like violence from the outside” because it is just that. I do not believe BDSM = human sexuality, or that BDSM is innate, nor a preference someone is born with. BDSM is as much ‘human sexuality’ as rape is, i.e. it’s not. There are patriarchal and sociological forces at work here, which is why even you admit that dom male/sub female is the most common—not a coincidence, it’s a literal manifestation of misogyny. I believe only you can question your own choices and examine why you’re into being mistreated, or why violent sex is “fulfilling”.
@percunium
If a person engages in self-harm, such as cutting, we would say that it is harmful and that this person has depression. Are you saying that if a depressed person cuts but doesn’t do any ‘real harm’ because they didn’t die then what they’re doing is not detrimental to their well-being? I see no reason why cutting oneself/being cut by someone else for sexual pleasure, or being intentionally physically harmed during a sexual encounter is any different. It is harmful, and seems psychologically disordered. Yes, the self-harming person consented to being cut. Does consent automatically make something good? Nope. People consent to doing bad things all the time. BDSM is one of them.
@cassandrakitty
I didn’t say all women kinksters were subs. Ya’ll got no argument.
@Aylin
I think all BDSM is pretty fucking bad. Sorry for not being more clear, and focusing on sub women, whom I feel are in the most danger.
“Super-special extra thanks for calling my fiancee mentally unstable, by the way. I really enjoyed that part!”
Your’e welcome, and maybe they are. He or she has a partner who gets off on harming others.
“”“I said RubyRubyRuby’s comment on liking to see someone battered (the giving pain part, not the recieving) have not been contradicted yet.”
“So it’s utterly impossible to enjoy making your PARTNER happy??? My partner enjoys receiving pain, and I enjoy inflicting it BECAUSE SHE ENJOYS IT.”””
SO IT’S UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANIMAL HOARDERS TO KEEP AS MANY SICKLY, STARVING DOGS AND CATS AS THEY WANT IF THEY FUCKING ENJOY IT AND THE ANIMALS ARE FUCKING HAPPY IN A SHIT-COVERED HELL HOLE!?!?!??!
@hellkell
Self-harm is a symptom of depression.
@emilygoddess
I have no idea how “abliesm” fits in here. Unless you’re implying that sadism/masochism are psychological illnesses. Maybe they are. Why do people view mental illness as such an insult? I thought this crowd was more liberal and wouldn’t stigmatize mental problems or anguish.
@tinyroc
Kink-critical is not taking agency away from women. The greatest trick patriarchy ever played was convincing women to exist only to please and serve men by making it a “choice” and calling it BDSM.
@Retha
I agree with everything you’ve said, but Noadi gave her own astounding estimate that sub female/male dom is 60% of the community. That’s a majority. An epidemic. My original criticism stands: BDSM is patriarchal.
@titianblue
I am NOT Retha, and no one used the word “evil” for BDSM. I am not the “old Ruby prison-rape-is-good Ruby” whoever that is either. I would never say such a thing. My view is that rape has no place in society, in prison or otherwise. Seems like a core feminist value, if not one that pretty much everyone here on Manboobz seems to agree with. I would also say that the US judicial system is a deeply corrupt, racist entity based on capitalism/profit, and in dire need of reform.
@sparky
Do as you like. I don’t have an open mind, I have a critical mind. An open mind let’s just anything in. I’ll stand up for whatever I believe is right, no matter how much opposition there is or how unpopular it is. It makes me sad that feminists here aren’t critical of kink. Greatest trick patriarchy ever played.
@Ally S
Call me an armchair psychologist then, but I believe that people with a history of abuse or rape are drawn to BDSM because it lets them relive the abuse which they had no control over and were forced to endure, but in a way BDSM puts them in charge because subs “lead from the bottom.” They can (allegedly) relive victimization ‘safely’ but set the rules for dom/abuser to follow, and re-store those memories of abuse as something more palatable and less traumatic. I don’t think it’s a good thing.
BDSM for abuse survivors is about as helpful as meth for a schizophrenic. I have had counseling, I would suggest counseling for abuse survivors. I know, how elitist of me.
@moldybrehd
BDSM is bad no matter how women get into the scene. Choosing and consenting to bad things doesn’t make them good activities. That’s that choice feminism thing again. A woman has every right to get gigantic breast implants like Lolo Ferrari and become a porn star, it’s still not a feminist choice.
@Fibinachi
“if people like being forced to do stuff they dislike or feel safe feeling fear or hang out with peaceful people who hurt… That’s not a contradiction”
What the fucking fuck? Cognitive dissonance…
@marinerachel
Wow, I’m sorry that happened to you, but it illustrates perfectly how BDSM is deeply misogynistic and so not about women’s pleasure. If people on Fetlife try to warn the community of rogue doms and rapists in their midst, the mods shut it down pretty quickly. Sounds decidedly anti-feminist and unsafe for women to me. Well, giving predators a pass is unsafe for everyone involved.
@Angelica
You must have a bad sense of humor. Especially if the global epidemic of violence against women coinciding with kink is at all funny to you.
“I like rape play. I occasionally like my partner to as realistically as they can manage to act it out, push me down, slap me in the face, throw me to the floor, call me a dirty whore who deserves to be put in her place in the course of roughly fucking me into a state of pure bliss while I pretend to not want it.”
Okay. I will dare to call this unhealthy and misogynistic. Why else would someone consent to being mistreated and physically assaulted, or like it? The rampant misogyny and sexualised violence part is not “pretend.”
“Simplifying these things to “liking to see someone battered” is fucking wrong”
Yeah. Not really. Sadists are viewing and jerking off to violent images of battered women as we speak. They don’t care about her pleasure or anyone’s psychological fulfillment.
“Dare come in here and call me insane or damaged or “not a real feminist” and patronizing me with your sexual conduct policing.”
Nobody said you’re not a “real feminist”. You are making a choice that is not feminist, participating in a culture that is patriarchal and anti-feminist, and have no desire to question this community or look within yourself.
“The (male) partners who gladly for their AND my pleasure pretend to rape me, are all unbelievably compassionate individuals”
Does not compute. Someone who gets off on battering people but is a great person? Not possible, and I sure as hell don’t want to meet guys like that. There are people who are sympathetic to rape survivors without wanting to relive that horrible experience with them.
@cassandrakitty
That accusation that a woman whose kink revolves around rape fantasies would use her friend’s trauma as spank bank material was a genuinely vile thing to say. Seriously, feel shame.
So it’s not possible that rape survivors attract predatory people who are terribly shitty like that?
Retha:
Oh noes, guys! Now we’ve been deprived of a profound insight from Retha because everyone is flinging “accusations” at her and misinterpreting her!
This is the definition of arguing in bad faith. If you think you’re being misinterpreted, work harder on your clarity. If you’re so sure people here are twisting your words without listening to what you’re saying, then leave. If you actually care about getting your point across, find a way to do it without the sweeping generalizations. And for heaven’ sake, stop with the preemptive “Well everyone is just going to be mean to be anyway HMPH *footstamp*!” It’s mildly cute in a five year old, less cute in an adult who claims to have critical thinking skills and who chides everyone else on the thread for being too emotional.
Retha:
Guys, turns out my tattoo artist lacks the most basic measure of ethics!
@Fibinanchi
Dark Souls II! I just purchased this! I’m waiting for it to finish installing RIGHT NOW. I am terrified (but excited!) because by all accounts this game is going to kick my ass in ways I didn’t even know it could be kicked.
Now that’s an ironic comment, given that it could just as easily be said about you. Also, tip from someone whose previous job description was “Editor” – if many people consistently misunderstand what you’re trying to say, the problem isn’t their reading comprehension, it’s your communication skills.
@RubyRubyRuby
Either learn to blockquote or use quotation marks. Also, no, it is not very likely that there are people who go around looking for rape survivors to be buddies with so that they can get off on their trauma. You are taking a theory meant to describe the process by which people who’ve been sexually abused are revictimized by other sexual abusers and twisting it in an attempt to justify your really very nasty earlier statement. Notice the complete lack of victims chiming in with support for the things you’re saying, despite there being many people here who fall into that demographic? There’s a reason for that.
Interesting that they both came back at the same time, isn’t it? I wonder what other blog is linking to this conversation.
” “Accusations against you” as opposed to counter-arguments to your claims? Because you didn’t address any of the points in Fibinachi’s long post, especially the one about the limitations of language.”
I did not bring Fibinachi up because the main point of that comment was not arguing, but to agree where I could and decrease anger. It was to say I know (despite how people read me, I am sorry if I was unclear) people hate to be raped; I know that not all BDSM is about about pain; I understand why my question was seen as vile; thank you to the person who partly answered the question; I do not dislike things based on personal taste but on a “hurting people on purpose” standard. (Something like an operation, or digging out a splinter do not have pain but solving the problem as a purpose, and the good healer will find no enjoyment in the pain but in solving the problem. I called “hurting people is wrong” the simple standard, but “hurting people on purpose” my standard.)
You are even right that many things that I called “accusations” were counter-arguments: They countered things I was accused of saying (that is why I called them accusations) but never said.
Fibinachi discussed some things which I actually said among his/her points, and I resolved to make that comment mostly to reassure with “no need to worry – I did not say that” things. By that standard, I did not come back that time to speak to Fibinachi. I would still like to talk to him/ her at a place where only the two of us are present and nobody else gets outraged or needs to be appeased (why anger people for no good reason?), but not here. I think even this comment will get angry responses.
Aylin said:
Nobody loves rape so much that they want to really be raped or liked to be raped. I am truly sorry for my vagueness at that particular point, and understand the anger. But some people (this is not a statement about BDSM people in particular) enjoy raping or are glad when someone else is raped.
Others fantasize about rape and play at it, which is a way of liking it more than I do (even playing at it is too much for me) – even though they do not want to be raped. Sorry, once again. I do not want to minimize rape.
@Rubyrubyruby: Good point that it is not you – or me – who told people to F off, or shut up.
I plan to leave, knowing that my words are twisted and people actively do not want to hear my argument. But before I do, I reassure some people who are under a wrong impression from what I said.
It is okay if people do not understand me or believe me. It is not okay if they think I support prison rape, nor if they suspect me of thinking some people like to be raped. So I am working on my clarity on some points, not others.
So the options are a. people don’t understand you, or b. people don’t believe you because (reasons). There’s no “people understand what you’re saying and disagree” option?
Damn, that’s some ego you have there.
@Rubyrubyruby, nobody told you to fuck off and die. We don’t do death threats here.
Retha, Rubyrubyruby, in case you don’t understand – we’re expressing the desire that you fuck off because we would like you to stop using poorly constructed illogical and sophist arguments to say that you believe that some of the regulars who post here are evil mentally ill abusers and self-harmers. And then to argue that because you didn’t, for example, use exact word “evil” that you didn’t say what you said.
So do the rest of us a favour and just fuck off.
Also, I have some apples going spare here, if we think all the teal deer would like them …
Do deer like peanut butter cups? Normally I’d worry about giving them tooth decay, but the teal ones seem like they could really use some sweetness in their lives.
“So the options are a. people don’t understand you, or b. people don’t believe you because (reasons). There’s no “people understand what you’re saying and disagree” option?
Damn, that’s some ego you have there.”
Huh? What is the difference between “b. people don’t believe because (reasons)” and ““people understand what you’re saying and disagree”.
On many points, many here misunderstand me. On a few points they don’t believe me, which is what they do on points where they understand me but disagree. Really, giving a negative, illogical comment by which you have to assume something negative about me even when I observe something as basic as this shows the lenses through which you choose to read me.
The difference is that “people don’t believe because reasons” means “I am correct, it’s just that you don’t believe me”, whereas disagreement implies that either/both parties may be right (or wrong).
Again, your inability to communicate clearly is not a sign that other people lack reading comprehension.
Retha & Ruby: you two are the best people and feminists ever. Here, have a cookie.
Now fuck off, you tiresome scolds.
Where you two get the stones to come into a space as relative strangers to dismiss others experiences and tell them not only are they wrong, but they must be damaged and mentally ill, I don’t know. You are really fucking rude.