Dan: “except i’m attempting to cut through this. i understand some men use this as a way to excuse their own inexcusable behavior; i do not disagree with you.
what i object to is the failure to recognize the fact that this is already transparent, and has been rendered as harmless as it is going to be. ”
Harmless to whom? Men or women?
Dan: “the notion that all such sensibilities arise from ideology or conspiracy, however, is mooted by a simple observation of reality: women and men are different with respect to sexual consequences. the social rules will reflect these to some degree. inequality, in this respect as all others, is not ultimately a result of ideology, it is the reflection of reality.”
And this is ok?
Dan: “i agree that distortions inhere in how this reflection is expressed, but the fact is acting, dressing, behaving like a woman who does not seem to respect these underlying dynamics, which everyone can feel and does feel, is recognized as such on an animal level.”
Isn’t the above statement yet another which excuses men’s behavior?
Dan: “it may not mitigate or excuse criminality, but why is it objectionable to point out that it does contribute to it?”
Oh it isn’t objectionable to point it out. What is at the core of Mary’s issue with Heather is in pointing it out that Heather saying what she does is saying that we, as females, have to live with the idea that all men are predators and will both harm us physically and berate us verbally (whore, slut, tramp, etc.) whenever they want – so just accept that being a female comes with very risks. Couldn’t that also be pointed out?
I should think that men wouldn’t appreciate that kind of labeling… basically as one of being potential rapists and boors.
That freedom i.e., either drinking a bit too much, being free to wear what she chooses is dangerous at a social gatherings. Are you, by suggesting that “it is what it is” and nothing will ever change just continually relegating females a different standard of freedom than is afforded to men? Suggesting it is “reality” or to get use to it there again excuses the males. It’s no different to saying females will have to constantly be on guard for their safety both physically and emotionally in being around men because they WILL attempt to rape us. That women must behave in “this” way and only this way in order to be safe from men? Is that a cool way to live? I think not.
Can “reality” be changed? I think it can and should. If one segment of our humanity’s freedom to experiment is put at risk for just being a woman then what are we REALLY saying about that other segment of humanity – the men?
Heather’s type of double-standard thinking is what continues to feeds into the militant feminist’s agenda = “ALL men are dogs, ALL men are potential rapists.” A label in which some of the men rail at in this thread. Yet, the attidudes they express really seem to add to the perception.
I, for one, would like to think that all men are not dogs, or evil predator rapists and that there are guys out there who, rather than take sexual advantage of a drunk girl because “it’s” available with little or no work, will wait until she sobers up to have sex so she remembers what happened which will in turn save HIM from being accused of rape.
