The unintentional misandry of Christianity and Islam

[Underseer]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/407927-gop-women-issue-strong-defense-of-kavanaugh

Above: Republican women defend Supreme Court candidate Kavanaugh by arguing "What boy hasn't done something like this in high school?"

Lady, the answer is around 80% of all boys. Studies show that around 1 in 5 women experience some sort of rape or sexual assault. Chances are, that translates to around 20% of boys/men doing these things. That means it is likely that 80% of all males have never done anything remotely like that. While 20% of men is too fucking high, it's a hell of a lot less than 100% you self-hating twatmuffin.
​

Ahem. Pardon me for running off on a tangent in responding to that idiocy.

Anyway, there's a whole category of related arguments that I keep hearing from Christians and Muslims, that basically boil down to the assumption that all men are rape-monsters, and frankly, I find that assumption really fucking offensive.

Muslims argue that women have to wear ridiculous fucking tents in public because men are all rape monsters and if we are ever exposed to a woman showing a bare ankle, we will rape her.

Christians argue that this or that man should be found innocent of rape because the victim had too much to drink and thus was "asking for it." This premise/assumption is so prevalent in Christian-majority countries that the above is considered a valid defense in criminal rape cases, and countless rapists have been found innocent because of this argument and arguments like this. Again, the argument itself assumes that because I am a man, I am a rape monster and if you expose me to a drunk woman, I won't be able to control myself and my male hormones will force me to rape her.

This is obviously the exact sort of patriarchal bullshit that feminists complain about, but in their rush to subjugate women and blame women for everything and men for nothing, Christians and Muslims have (I hope unintentionally) accepted a premise that I find deeply offensive to men.

As mentioned above, around 20% of men in America have committed some form of rape or sexual assault not unlike what Kavanaugh is accused of doing (and the defenses offered by Republican politicians suggest that they believe the allegations). So at best, we can say that one in five men are slobbering rape monsters. As also mentioned above, 20% is too fucking high, but it's a hell of a lot less than 100%. The premise is false, extremely offensive to any man with an ounce of morals, and it promotes a set of societal attitudes that makes it more likely that men get away with rape or sexual assault, which is of course extremely harmful to women.

 

[steve_bank]

The paradigm I grew up with was teen boys pursuing sex was boys being boys. Girls who actually wanted sex, a natural impulse as with boys, were sluts. A boy who had multiple partners was a stud, a girl was called easy easy.

Is that a result of Abrahamic misogyny? Probably at least in part. The idea that female genetic impulse to mate and procreate was somehow a corrupting influence on men and had to be restrained. The worse case roday is Saudi Arabia.

 

[Underseer]

The paradigm I grew up with was teen boys pursuing sex was boys being boys. Girls who actually wanted sex, a natural impulse as with boys, were sluts. A boy who had multiple partners was a stud, a girl was called easy easy.

Is that a result of Abrahamic misogyny? Probably at least in part. The idea that female genetic impulse to mate and procreate was somehow a corrupting influence on men and had to be restrained. The worse case roday is Saudi Arabia.

That's awful, but one thing underlying it that bugs me is the idea that women are to blame and men never are, which again, implies that men are all rape monsters who will launch into a hormone-driven rape-frenzy in the presence of an exposed forearm or a drunk woman.

 

[phands]

Not sure it's all that unintenional. The whole lunatic Adam and Eve and snake and fruit story squarely puts the blame on the woman. The structures built around that clearly put men in charge and define women as servants/property/chattels.

 

[repoman]

Was this really about maintenance of property by male lineage? At some point usually just the first son got most of the inheritance of property, so plenty of males were also screwed in this hierarchical structure. These rules stopped squabbles and the devastating side effects were seen as acceptable.

If the baby came out with a tag showing who the father was, then this would not have been necessary.

So what about other cultures as they moved from hunter gather to settled with large wealth concentration, what primogeniture and cloistering of breeding age females by high ranking males also practiced?

 

[steve_bank]

Sex education was and is awful/ Up through the early 20th century a girl could get married knowing nothing about sex.

Christians always opposed sex education as education liberalized in the 60s. In the 50s/60s I had no sex education, it was learned in peer groups. Later as an adult I learned I was not alone in my generation.

The idea that breast feeding in public is some how offensive is utterly bizarre.

Children need explicit open education about sex and sexuality. It removes the mystery and the idea of sex being miscievious.