Yes, MRAs, you’re right: Teaching men not to rape IS like teaching drivers not to run people over.
Where you go wrong is in assuming that teaching people either of these things is ridiculous. Learning about consent is a good thing for men, and for women. So is learning to drive before you get behind the wheel.
That’s why driver’s ed classes — which generally promote a “no hitting people with your car” doctrine — are a standard part of the high school curriculum, and why would-be drivers have to take a driver’s test before they get their licence. Running people over during the test itself is generally frowned upon, and may preclude you from passing it.
Should we assume that MRAs would also prefer it if men didn’t have to pass driver’s test in order to drive? Are they so insulted by the notion of anyone telling them what to do that we should abandon any and all moral and practical teachings aimed at boys and men?
Are they still pissed off at their mothers (and/or fathers) for insisting, when they were young boys, that they not run around punching people? Are they still angry that their parents forced them to start using the toilet instead of shitting their pants?
I suppose these questions are better left up to the professionals.
In the meantime, here are a couple more iterations of this ridiculous meme. The first one I found on AVFM’s Facebook page a while ago. I don’t remember where I found the other one.
Oh, goody, it went through with no problems. Phew!
I just feel like shaking these guys and asking “why do you hate women so much?” Because really, isn’t that the root of all this? If they didn’t hate women, they wouldn’t get their feathers all ruffled trying to discuss rape. They wouldn’t have a problem with feminism, either. 🙁 So much unnecessary hate. It hurts my brain and my heart.
how about brain bleach?
https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608036136891515138&pid=15.1&P=0
or this: https://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=ytff1-yff26&p=toonces%20the%20driving%20cat%20video&type=
(not sure how to embed)
Of course, the irony is every last one of the people who say that are pro-rape and likely to be rapists themselves (or are admitted rapists, in Roosh’s case). Well, half-ironic and half-totally expected, anyway.
@Flying Mouse
Ah, good, thankyou for the update links. I should have checked that before flying off the virtual handle, heh. ^^; Whoo, berserk buttons.
And in other news, this actually happened:
http://happyplace.someecards.com/im-just-a-bill/new-hampshire-lawmaker-rips-fourth-grade-classs-bill-for-a-new-state-raptor-to-shreds/
Yea, just some kids wanting to learn how laws are made, getting schooled by some asshat who like to take jabs at reproductive rights as often as possible, no matter the context.
If that’s true, their ideas aren’t coherent. We need to teach people how to cross the road safely because, even with the best driving lessons, mistakes can happen in the fraction of a second and that’s all it takes. Car accidents happen fast, and are accidents.
If men are raping deliberately, then it isn’t comparable to car accidents.
Welp, they’re learning how laws are made, all right.
@katz
Right?! Hopefully this will encourage them to get more involved and change the process…given how many douchecanoes are currently in charge.
Over in Congress:
Next on the docket, a bill to raise taxes on [insert any mundane item].
“Rabble rabble! All my taxes already go to fund abortions!”
Even if we ignore the many disanalogies, rape apologia and support for male victims of rape is generally incompatible*. Does a man who was raped while he was drunk and sexy† bear similar responsibility for what happened to him as someone who was hit by a car because he jumped out into traffic?
*Unless you also hold that men and women are radically different in that men can’t control themselves. This is both untrue and a pretty horrible and belittling thing to believe about men.
†Or too unobservant to notice a roofie, or trusted the wrong person, or accepted favors from the wrong person, or was flirting with someone he didn’t intend to immediately have sex with, or was in the wrong neighborhood at the wrong time, or whatever bullshit reasons these assholes think justify rape.
Cars have a legitimate purpose and an inherent flaw in that purpose is that careless people may end up being hit (if the driver can’t avoid it). As a society we have decided the convenience of cars outweighs the risk of accidents and we teach everyone how to avoid causing or suffering harm. By contrast, there is no accepted benefit to people going around raping careless people, so it is wrong to even label the victims as careless. Wandering into the street is careless because that is a designated space for cars and the normal operation of cars poses a risk. There is no designated space for sex without consent which a person could carelessly wander into and find themselves mistakenly victimized by a person going about proper, acceptable behavior.
[quote]Should we assume that MRAs would also prefer it if men didn’t have to pass driver’s test in order to drive?[/quote]
Well I did know a guy once who was, well not quite an MRA but did have some anti-femminist leanings and was a self-described Anarcho-Capitalist who was against government mandated driver’s licenses and laws against speeding or drinking and driving. Because if the police give someone a ticket for speeding, that government coercion and therefore the same thing as fascism and slavery. Instead you should just let the free market decide who can drive safely.
I’d say that fines for unsafe driving could be interpreted as exactly that, as it would mean that only rich people could get away with being regularly unsafe.
But, your Honor, she didn’t say she didn’t want to get run over!
Also, yes girls and women are taught what precautions, people and devices they can rely on to be safer and reduce the risk of rape. And then PUAs call those “cockblocks” and teach each other how to get around them.
College is a terrifying experience if you’re a male?!? Pet a cactus ya big baby.
Yeah, Problem One with this analogy is pretty obvious, and Problem Two is that the thing they’re comparing to recklessly running across a busy street outside the designated pedestrian areas is… pretty much existing while female.
It’s just like the “leaving a pile of cash out” metaphor or the “leaving your car unlocked” metaphor. You’re a female, so obviously your very presence just screams for someone to violate your bodily integrity unless you deliberately cloak your femaleness or have someone keep on eye on it for you. It’s assumed that anyone who could get away with violating you will want to do so. And then they’re shaming you for not assuming that too.
It’s hilarious that they’re trying to be snarky with the phrase “victim blaming” when really there’s no more perfect definition of that term than this meme. Hilarious and terrifying.
@Tina S Heeheehee, I’ve never heard that one before, may I borrow it?
I’m sorry, but … is that crossing guard Bill Cosby? *squint*
@M – It was perfectly logical to me. Why wouldn’t you conclude that the story ended with “slap on the wrist and much victim blaming?” That’s how things usually go. The only reason I remembered a news story from 2013 was that there was outcry and an effort to correct the mistakes, because those are rare.
That’s depressing. Might be time for a drink.
Sigh… at least one police detective in Australia thinks that being in a park alone during daylight is not allowed for women, and that if they don’t want to be murdered, they shouldn’t be alone in public.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/20/masa-vukotic-had-the-right-to-be-in-a-park-alone-victoria-police-must-apologise-for-saying-she-didnt
I don’t think they’re right. Most drivers don’t see someone crossing the street and immediately try to hit her, possibly run her over repeatedly and then speed away laughing and/or bragging about it.
Though if there were a driver like that it would most likely be an MRA.
… And he only said “Girls” and “Females,” never (as far as I heard, unless I missed something while I was facepalming) “Women.” Fucking asswit.
Kudos to the interviewer for at least trying to call him out on that and emphasising the word WOMEN, though.
“But officer, it’s not my fault! She just ran out right in front of my penis!”
Yup, ladies must take responsibility for their actions (existing while female), but men are just dicks on wheels (“if I see a tunnel, I’m speeding right for it! I’m a hunk of machinery, I can’t step on my own brakes”).
Oh, the never ending douchebaggery.
Yes, if you’re such a persistent, aggressive asshole that literally everyone in your class wishes you were gone, you might have to sit out of a group discussion, at no impact on your grades or the rest of your educational experience.
Way back in prehistory when I was in college, there were students who wanted to commandeer every class discussion to rant about their favorite political theory. There were students who wanted to natter on about random thoughts that popped into their heads. There was one student who wanted to spend class standing on her head whenever she was in a “headstand mood.”
All of these people were tolerated until they started to interfere with the students who were actually there to learn, at which point they were asked to shut up or leave. Is this controversial now?
Considering the history of jaywalking adds another level of silliness to this meme.
http://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history
“The photo of the crosswalk with a crossing guard holding a stop sign is just perfect for this. I’m not sure there’s a better illustration of telling drivers not to run people over.” Yep. Of course the irony is completely lost on them again. The MRAs who made these pathetic memes forget that drivers ARE taught not to hit pedestrians! that they are made to read a rule book that not only teaches you who to give way for, how to overtake, how to park, how to do a three point turn, but also teaches you to stop at things called pedestrian crossings and to give way pedestrians on the road you are turning into. In fact it is mentioned no less than 13 times in the rule book (in the Australian ones, at least). Also, people have to pass a knowledge test before people can get behind the wheel. Not forgetting the driving test, of course. So it is strongly emphasized that running over people is wrong and that those who do so are held accountable and go to jail. Of course, you will get some people who drive like entailed morons, but without those laws, traffic deaths would be much higher. MRAs are also forgetting that pedestrians are also taught to take precautions while crossing the street (while at the same time forgetting that women already take precautions to avoid rape). Accidents do happen and people sometimes run across the road. But we don’t victim blame people getting run over, do we? But rape is never accidental, yet victim blaming is extremely common. So why can’t we teach men (since they are the vast majority of perpetrators) not to rape? But that would be misandry, of course.