Girls dealing with boys' sexual behavior

[laughing dog]

It's the mere fact that she posted anything at all that inspires some posters to heap as much vitriol as possible on her head and to hyperventilate and mischaracterize her posts.

You have it ass backward. The whole point of the OP is fishing for a response so Floof can rant about how men (or certain posters) are triggered etc. It's bullshit, dunno why this forum allows it. It is as predictable as it is tedious.

It is. And if you don't take the bait she keeps trying until you do. Then she cries victim when and if you call her out on her shit. Happens every time.

Its a tired old game at this point. Its too bad that you can't just put her on ignore and be done with it.

I imagine the number of posters who are actually interesting in your whining and biased renditions of the alleged wrongs done to you are signficantly smaller than you imagine.

It would be better for everyone including yourself, if you just got over your butthurt or got treatment for it.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

No. Read again.

It's really quite startling, but somehow the patriarchy has allowed women to be asked about their feelings, but does not in any way engage with whether those feelings reflect reality. The feelings are enough.

Australia has a personal safety survey, and one of the questions in it is how safe someone feels home alone at night. Women consistently feel unsafer than men, despite the fact that men are more likely than women to have experienced physical and/or sexual violence than women (https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4906.0/)

It's also true that in general we live in one of the safest times in the history of humanity, but you would think the opposite by watching the media, and many think we live in horrible dangerous times.

Same goes for Stanger Danger. People fear strangers, but are far far more likely to be attacked by those they know. That goes for rape, murder, child abductions, etc.

Perception is not reality. And this survey COULD have taken a measure of the reality but apparently didn't care to, or did do so and held back the results because it failed to fit the desired narrative.

 

[Toni]

No. Read again.

It's really quite startling, but somehow the patriarchy has allowed women to be asked about their feelings, but does not in any way engage with whether those feelings reflect reality. The feelings are enough.

Australia has a personal safety survey, and one of the questions in it is how safe someone feels home alone at night. Women consistently feel unsafer than men, despite the fact that men are more likely than women to have experienced physical and/or sexual violence than women (https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4906.0/)

That sounds like an interesting topic for discussion.

Why don't you start a thread?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I pointed out something that you and your ilk seem to have a huge mental block about, that it's easy to attack a woman, online or off, when they say things that trigger the insecurities of entitled, oblivious males.

I don't discriminate by gender when some idiot says something bigoted, be they male or female, online or offline. If you do, I feel bad for those around you.

How would you know? The culture I'm describing is invisible to those who benefit from it. Do you recognize that you live in a culture that allows you massive leeway in who you can disrespect and abuse with little or no consequence, regardless of whether you yourself abuse anyone?

Probably not, because if you did, you wouldn't be so defensive whenever anyone mentions it.

It's quite possible to see that one is the beneficiary of something unfair. The problem here is that the evidence presented for this unfairness doesn't hold up--you're using a disparate result to "prove" evildoing and we don't agree.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Australia has a personal safety survey, and one of the questions in it is how safe someone feels home alone at night. Women consistently feel unsafer than men, despite the fact that men are more likely than women to have experienced physical and/or sexual violence than women

Another thing that comes into this, and most things where gender is involved is the social expectation and bias that men are agents (and aggressors) and women non-agents (and victims). That works against both genders in many ways and could partly explain the findings you point to.

 

[Toni]

No. Read again.

I've read the article linked in the OP as well as the links contained within that article.

Nothing was reported about incidents that happened to them. It wasn't a survey question they were asked. It is in they very easily could have been asked. Missed opportunity eh?

But apparently you did NOT read the article linked in the OP:

When asked, “How do you know a guy likes you?,” an 8th grade girl replied: “He still wants to talk to you after you [give him oral sex].” A male high school student said to a girl: “If you [give me oral sex] I’ll give you a kiss.” Girls are expected to provide sex acts for tokens of affection, and are coached through it by porn-taught boys. A 15-year-old girl said she didn’t enjoy sex at all, but that getting it out of the way quickly was the only way her boyfriend would stop pressuring her and watch a movie.

Girls and young women describe boys pressuring them to provide acts inspired by the porn they consume routinely. Girls tell of being expected to put up with things they don’t enjoy.

I asked a 15-year-old about her first sexual experience. She replied: “I think my body looked OK. He seemed to enjoy it.”

7th grade girls are increasingly seeking help on what to do about requests for naked images. Receiving texts like “send me a picture of your tits” is an almost daily occurrence for many young girls. The girl asks: “How do I say no without hurting his feelings?”

It seems to me to be pretty obvious why the girls feel the way that they do. They are being pressured to provide sexual services to boys they don't know well and with no expectation on either side that the girl will or should or could enjoy sex or that she could say no and no hint of impropriety of the demand for blow jobs, etc.

But that's not what was reported. Oddly. This survey was about if they think it common, and not if it ever happened to them. Why do you think that is?


It leaves the question unanswered as to whether this is due to actual incidents they have experienced or witnessed, or due to media and culture hysteria, like with stranger danger. And the thing is, they could have avoided that question by actually asking these girls if they have experienced or witnessed this themselves. They didn't ask that. Or is they did, the data wasn't reported.

The article actually did quote girls describing things that happened to them. Perhaps they think it is common because it has happened to them and to their friends. But yes, I agree that not directly surveying the girls to determine how often it actually happens is a flaw.

The affects of having someone attempt to force you to engage in sexual contact against your will is quite damaging.

Do you imagine that anybody here disagrees?

I'm pretty sure that there is a great deal of disagreement about what consent means and what 'against your will' means among participants on TFT.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How would you know? The culture I'm describing is invisible to those who benefit from it.

Like all priestesses and visionaries, you are claiming special epistemic privilege and woe betide the heretics who ask for evidence for your invisible god.

So, rather than actually consider that you perhaps benefit, unintentionally and unconsciously, from a system that is designed to favor males, you must pull a Loren and decide that Floof is behaving out of some...religiosity?

I describe positions as religious when they are inherently based on faith with no regard for the actual evidence. Faith is the fundamental aspect of religion. Furthermore, strong adherents to a religion will often react to a challenge to those core faiths with a blasphemy type reaction rather than a rational discussion about whether they are true. Furthermore, there are multiple religions (ie, Buddhism) that have no gods--the lack of a god doesn't make it not a religion.

Calling out misogyny is not misandry. Saying that men should change how they behave around boys ffs! and recognize that whether or not they are parents, they do serve as powerful role models to boys and other men is not misandry and it's not saying that no man or few men are good role models for how men should behave.

But repeatedly falsely calling out misogyny is misandry in disguise. For example, the long-discredited issue of what men make vs what women make.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The affects of having someone attempt to force you to engage in sexual contact against your will is quite damaging.

Do you imagine that anybody here disagrees?

I'm pretty sure that there is a great deal of disagreement about what consent means and what 'against your will' means among participants on TFT.

That's not what I asked you. Do you think anyone, and I mean absolutely anyone including those you view as the worst amongst us here on this forum, disagrees with the text of yours that I quoted. And so, who and why? And if not, then why do you feel the need to keep repeating such statements as if they are revelatory to anyone here?

Also, anecdotes are not data analysis. They quoted some girls who reported some incidents. Given the bent of the writers, it may be that's all they could find, rather than a few examples. We don't know since they didn't measure (or reveal) the actual numbers.

 

[Toni]

I'm pretty sure that there is a great deal of disagreement about what consent means and what 'against your will' means among participants on TFT.

That's not what I asked you. Do you think anyone, and I mean absolutely anyone including those you view as the worst amongst us here on this forum, disagrees with the text of yours that I quoted. And so, who and why? And if not, then why do you feel the need to keep repeating such statements as if they are revelatory to anyone here?

Also, anecdotes are not data analysis. They quoted some girls who reported some incidents. Given the bent of the writers, it may be that's all they could find, rather than a few examples. We don't know since they didn't measure (or reveal) the actual numbers.

It doesn't matter if we all agree about something if we don't agree about the definition.

You claimed that the linked article did not give examples of incidents that happened to the girls:

Nothing was reported about incidents that happened to them. It wasn't a survey question they were asked. It is in they very easily could have been asked. Missed opportunity eh?

And then I quoted from the article to demonstrate that indeed, they did ask girls about incidents that happened to them. I'm sorry if you don't feel that it was enough. Narratives rarely fit into a survey questionnaire format.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Also, "I want you to tie me down under a glass table and shit over my face" doesn't exactly seem like first date conversation.

If you want something that far out you probably should be looking for a partner on something like fetlife. My impression is that there it would be a reasonable first date conversation.

 

[Toni]

So, rather than actually consider that you perhaps benefit, unintentionally and unconsciously, from a system that is designed to favor males, you must pull a Loren and decide that Floof is behaving out of some...religiosity?

I describe positions as religious when they are inherently based on faith with no regard for the actual evidence. Faith is the fundamental aspect of religion. Furthermore, strong adherents to a religion will often react to a challenge to those core faiths with a blasphemy type reaction rather than a rational discussion about whether they are true. Furthermore, there are multiple religions (ie, Buddhism) that have no gods--the lack of a god doesn't make it not a religion.

Loren, I know very well what you do and to whom you do it.

I also know the meaning of religion and of faith.

IMO, you try to pull that shit when you don't have a good argument.

Calling out misogyny is not misandry. Saying that men should change how they behave around boys ffs! and recognize that whether or not they are parents, they do serve as powerful role models to boys and other men is not misandry and it's not saying that no man or few men are good role models for how men should behave.

But repeatedly falsely calling out misogyny is misandry in disguise. For example, the long-discredited issue of what men make vs what women make.

It is hardly misandry to point out that women doing the same jobs as men often earn less.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Narratives rarely fit into a survey questionnaire format.

This article and study's narrative seems to have fit quite well into this questionnaire. The measured perception and used it as a basis for articles further pushing that perception. Few here realized this was about perception until I pointed it out. They were going on about this as if it showed an actual endemic of boys harassing and assaulting girls. The narrative worked.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Loren, I know very well what you do and to whom you do it.

I also know the meaning of religion and of faith.

IMO, you try to pull that shit when you don't have a good argument.

Calling out misogyny is not misandry. Saying that men should change how they behave around boys ffs! and recognize that whether or not they are parents, they do serve as powerful role models to boys and other men is not misandry and it's not saying that no man or few men are good role models for how men should behave.

But repeatedly falsely calling out misogyny is misandry in disguise. For example, the long-discredited issue of what men make vs what women make.

It is hardly misandry to point out that women doing the same jobs as men often earn less.

Except it's based on a false definition of "same jobs". Apply three simple controls:

1) Years in the labor force rather than age.
2) Exact same field, not broad categories (no "doctor". Family practice pays a lot less than neurosurgeon!)
3) Actual number of hours worked--no "full time" category.

and 90% of the difference disappears. This is just the low-hanging fruit that's easy to measure.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It doesn't matter if we all agree about something if we don't agree about the definition.

That's true. But you didn't argue for a definition. You stated something without the definition, something you knew everyone already agreed on, as if they needed to be told.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

and 90% of the difference disappears. This is just the low-hanging fruit that's easy to measure.

But the 10% remains. The feminists have an actual point they could make if they put the propaganda aside and reason in good faith.

 

[laughing dog]

I think the most of this thread has examples of women dealing with men's posting behaviors.

 

[Rhea]

Speaking back against bigotry against a gender isn't the same as taking something personally.

So you are supporting Floof’s point, then? Brilliant.

 

[Toni]

Narratives rarely fit into a survey questionnaire format.

This article and study's narrative seems to have fit quite well into this questionnaire. The measured perception and used it as a basis for articles further pushing that perception. Few here realized this was about perception until I pointed it out. They were going on about this as if it showed an actual endemic of boys harassing and assaulting girls. The narrative worked.

Yes, it is pretty persuasive when you read what girls actually have to say about their own personal experiences.

Which you claimed were not mentioned.

 

[Toni]

It doesn't matter if we all agree about something if we don't agree about the definition.

That's true. But you didn't argue for a definition. You stated something without the definition, something you knew everyone already agreed on, as if they needed to be told.

And you are still trying to pick a fight about it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

and 90% of the difference disappears. This is just the low-hanging fruit that's easy to measure.

But the 10% remains. The feminists have an actual point they could make if they put the propaganda aside and reason in good faith.

10% remains after addressing the low hanging fruit. That doesn't mean there aren't other factors, just that they aren't so easy to measure.