>>If politeness enables rape, couldn't we just stop enabling it by decreasing politeness?
A very relevant question. And I think it is very difficult. Women have been told for ages that they are supposed to drop all civilized behavior and scream and fight like desperate animals if someone oversteps their sexual boundaries. And still, mostl…
>>If politeness enables rape, couldn't we just stop enabling it by decreasing politeness?
A very relevant question. And I think it is very difficult. Women have been told for ages that they are supposed to drop all civilized behavior and scream and fight like desperate animals if someone oversteps their sexual boundaries. And still, mostly, they don't. So I think that as things are, women can't be as selectively impolite as is asked from them.
What I propose is more or less that men should help women more to both be polite and safer. Saying "it's not that I don't like you, but we don't know each other" should be easier than it is.
>>In my experience, males who use this kind of subtle force are never manly. They're not the , they're softbodied and either effeminate or nerdy in some way. Denied of sexual success, they pressure, drug, or otherwise nonviolently-coerce women.
They say high-status men who get a lot of sex completely consensually are the most common rapists (David Buss says it, among others). It makes sense to me: Men who consider themselves desirable have an easier time telling themselves that an uneasy woman surely wants them after all. Like Roman Polanski (who indeed was never a frat-bro sportsball stereotype, but who nonetheless had great access to willing women). I think high-status rapists rape for convenience. They are used to things being easy, so why not this time?
>>Regarding aggression both re: males ('violence') and re: females ('rape'), I carry myself in public as someone entirely capable of both, and try to keep them as close to the surface as possible.
I instantly find this description symphatetic. It somehow resonates with my suggestion that good guys should distinguish themselves from bad guys. Men are dangerous. The more men that let that show, the safer women are. If a woman gets the impression that "this man could kill me in an instant" the next question will be: "Do I trust him?". That increases safety. More honest flaunting of male strength, less pseudo-civilization, please!
Ah, I was unclear. I meant "decreasing male politeness". I also realize that I'd been subtly glossing the word 'polite' when reading your use of it. I'm not sure what word you're using in your head before translating it into English, but "polite" doesn't really mean anything, anymore. Long ago it meant something cognate with 'polished', but shifted from skill/refinement to class to niceness to something else. When a woman who is afraid is 'polite' in my mind this is a different concept and perhaps a different word than when a man is 'polite' to a social inferior (an employee, child, or perhaps even a woman). A scared "i'm waiting for someone" (as a reason not to get in an elevator with a man) is not essentially similar to "you look great" (in response to the query 'does this dress make me look fat?'). What I was proposing is that men be less 'polite' as a way of making things plainer overall in society.
I think male politeness spares us a lot of duelling. That must be a good thing?
>>I'm not sure what word you're using in your head before translating it into English, but "polite" doesn't really mean anything, anymore.
Ha ha, unfortunately, things are looking no better inside my head. I tend to think in English when I think of abstract things. I can translate the word into Swedish, but it gets no better.
I think the definition of politeness is something like "every attempt to spare feelings and to allow people to save face". Both the man who avoids saying "you look fat" and the woman who avoids saying "you look scary" are doing that. They are both avoiding to reveal the negative perceptions they are holding.
>>If politeness enables rape, couldn't we just stop enabling it by decreasing politeness?
A very relevant question. And I think it is very difficult. Women have been told for ages that they are supposed to drop all civilized behavior and scream and fight like desperate animals if someone oversteps their sexual boundaries. And still, mostly, they don't. So I think that as things are, women can't be as selectively impolite as is asked from them.
What I propose is more or less that men should help women more to both be polite and safer. Saying "it's not that I don't like you, but we don't know each other" should be easier than it is.
>>In my experience, males who use this kind of subtle force are never manly. They're not the , they're softbodied and either effeminate or nerdy in some way. Denied of sexual success, they pressure, drug, or otherwise nonviolently-coerce women.
They say high-status men who get a lot of sex completely consensually are the most common rapists (David Buss says it, among others). It makes sense to me: Men who consider themselves desirable have an easier time telling themselves that an uneasy woman surely wants them after all. Like Roman Polanski (who indeed was never a frat-bro sportsball stereotype, but who nonetheless had great access to willing women). I think high-status rapists rape for convenience. They are used to things being easy, so why not this time?
>>Regarding aggression both re: males ('violence') and re: females ('rape'), I carry myself in public as someone entirely capable of both, and try to keep them as close to the surface as possible.
I instantly find this description symphatetic. It somehow resonates with my suggestion that good guys should distinguish themselves from bad guys. Men are dangerous. The more men that let that show, the safer women are. If a woman gets the impression that "this man could kill me in an instant" the next question will be: "Do I trust him?". That increases safety. More honest flaunting of male strength, less pseudo-civilization, please!
Ah, I was unclear. I meant "decreasing male politeness". I also realize that I'd been subtly glossing the word 'polite' when reading your use of it. I'm not sure what word you're using in your head before translating it into English, but "polite" doesn't really mean anything, anymore. Long ago it meant something cognate with 'polished', but shifted from skill/refinement to class to niceness to something else. When a woman who is afraid is 'polite' in my mind this is a different concept and perhaps a different word than when a man is 'polite' to a social inferior (an employee, child, or perhaps even a woman). A scared "i'm waiting for someone" (as a reason not to get in an elevator with a man) is not essentially similar to "you look great" (in response to the query 'does this dress make me look fat?'). What I was proposing is that men be less 'polite' as a way of making things plainer overall in society.
I think male politeness spares us a lot of duelling. That must be a good thing?
>>I'm not sure what word you're using in your head before translating it into English, but "polite" doesn't really mean anything, anymore.
Ha ha, unfortunately, things are looking no better inside my head. I tend to think in English when I think of abstract things. I can translate the word into Swedish, but it gets no better.
I think the definition of politeness is something like "every attempt to spare feelings and to allow people to save face". Both the man who avoids saying "you look fat" and the woman who avoids saying "you look scary" are doing that. They are both avoiding to reveal the negative perceptions they are holding.