Schrödinger’s Rapist.

Two very different yet thought provoking blogs:

Schrodinger's Rapist:
http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/

A man is a rape supporter if:
http://evebitfirst.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/a-man-is-a-rape-supporter-if/

The blogs are dealing with very different subjects. There's a semantic link, but beyond that, similarities end. Lumping them together here seems a bit strange/simplistic, and also contextually insensitive/unaware.

I understand the differences between the the blogs, they're only in the same thread for housekeeping purposes more than anything.

The second link is a bit of a badly categorised list, reads like it was wirtten in 10 mins

Although they make the points a little flippantly, the pertinant point remains, that casual attitudes towards rape are rife.

The blogs are dealing with very different subjects. There's a semantic link, but beyond that, similarities end. Lumping them together here seems a bit strange/simplistic, and also contextually insensitive/unaware.

This sounds like you are trying to cover your tracks.

Sure, to you the links are merely semantic, I bet that's the same reasoning you use while you are pounding through Shoreditch Park, naked, on all fours in the early hours of the morning.

I bet you wouldn't be so quick to admonish the blogger if he (yes, 'he') was white, would you ?

Rapist.

I never consented to you quoting me. That's the last time I let you buy me a drink.

I can't even find the words for why the OP is a total failure as a person.

That's a lot to draw from less than 100 words?

http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/

I thought was rather good, spot on in fact.

the second one; not so good.

It's combining the two posts and the pretty obvious mocking aspect that requires that response.

I can't even find the words for why the OP is a total failure as a person.

It's combining the two posts and the pretty obvious mocking aspect that requires that response.

That's a bit harsh and I'm certainly not mocking the subject matter.

I found the first one very interesting when I first read it last year and it certainly made me think and to modify my behaviour in certain situations.

The second one, I found interersting in that it's so black/white and that there are no grey areas. I only posted it with the first because it reminded me of it so I went back and read it again.

I thought they may make some interesting and thought provoking reading for a Sunday afternoon and perhaps, as there are many intelligent and interesting people on here, encourage some interesting and thought provoking responses.

I posted and deleted something earlier as I was hoping this thread would just quietly sink...

johnnyhotdog you must realise that the tone of your OP is at the very least ambiguous? That it might provoke a bad reaction, or at the very least wariness/suspicion in many people? If you are genuinely feeling "traumatised" have a little read around on the Internet, you can learn a lot. Including how "interesting and thought provoking" discussions of anything relating to rape are a rare breed indeed...

I posted and deleted something earlier as I was hoping this thread would just quietly sink...

johnnyhotdog you must realise that the tone of your OP is at the very least ambiguous? That it might provoke a bad reaction, or at the very least wariness/suspicion in many people? If you are genuinely feeling "traumatised" have a little read around on the Internet, you can learn a lot. Including how "interesting and thought provoking" discussions of anything relating to rape are a rare breed indeed...

Well, I do now.

I'm not one for a Daily Mail (or Antoine Dodsone for that matter) style approach to subjects and yes, I was very taken aback by both those blogs for different reasons.

Although I jumped in first being critical of (some aspects of) the OP, I can understand there was a harmless desire (pun intended) to merely stimulate some dialogue around the subject.

The irony is that the first linked article is trying to make blokes think about how their actions can be perceived in certain contexts, and yet the OP kind of failed in that regard.

Still, you live and learn.

The irony is that the first linked article is trying to make blokes think about how their actions can be perceived in certain contexts, and yet the OP kind of failed in that regard.

Point taken.

I am indeed a silly sausage and I apologise if I've offended anyone. That definitely wasn't my intention.

btw I wasn't being sarcastic about reading more stuff, good on you if you can keep learning.

This thread's probably a more positive and inclusive example of successfully raising gender-political awareness than things like the 2nd linked article (which does, however, have some interesting stuff in the comments).

My first comment was a bit harsh but what you wrote was so completely insensitive, seemingly making light of the blog posts, that I just sat staring at it, without words.

I read a comment on the first post, where someone mentioned a study done on incoming univerity students where 40-ish% said they would "force a woman to have sex when she didn't want to" (paraphrase) but a much lower percent said they would rape a woman. This gets to the heart of why I think many people may have problems with the second post. If she had said, "These attitudes support the culture that allows rape" then I think more people would be able to look at the content of the list and see what she's saying.

Reading the comments of both posts, and seeing the statistics (at least for America) is hugely eye-opening. If you assume the math is right, and unless I read it wrong, something close to 1 in 6 men will rape or sexually assault (groping, forced kisses, etc.) a woman in his lifetime. That is staggering and horrifying.

As a woman, I can't get away from that. As a man, you should always remember that. And do everything in your power NOT to joke about or minimize the impact of rape on me, you, and society as a whole.

that first blog was very illuminating. I don't think you can infer that if 1 in 6 women get raped, 1 in 6 men are rapists, but I think that the blogger acknowledged this.

The whole thing is shocking - one of those things I just never think about because it doesn't affect me. The numbers are staggering (I'm assuming that they are correct). I would say that attitudes of many men I know are definitely sub-optimal (as is mine sometimes unfortunately*) and quite a few I can know are at the very least deeply sexist (possibly worse) under a veneer of equality - something that they never show in front of women, only in the company of men....

*I try pretty hard to not be sexist at all, but not always successfully...

^ Taking the first blogger's assumption that rapists are fewer (something like 1 in 60) as they will tend to assault more than 1 woman over their lifetime. But, whatever. I've also read that 1 in 4 women are sexually assaulted (UK-centric).

There is a huge margin of error in reporting, but even just taking something of that order of magnitude, it's horrific. We're all sociable creatures, we all know several people that have been raped, and a handful that have raped. And (some) people still think rape jokes are harmless...

my original comment/response to the OP started with "wtf?!"...

OP - I'm glad you edited your post. You may well feel disappointed with the lack of 'discussion', but something you may not have considered is that it becomes quite tiresome to try and educate/enlighten, especially in the arena of the internet where an issue you care deeply about is just another person's sport. Of course the ideal is that discussion -> awareness -> an improvement in the situation, but it can be a deeply unpleasant process. Of course this isn't exclusive to the topic, but it may help you to understand a little better when you read other things.

I've just read both links (in the OP).
I have known for far too long that I am a misanthropist and lacking in empathy, but I am astonished by the simplicity, stupidity and lack of humanity contained in the blogs.
There are, undoubtedly, some important issues raised, but none dealt with in a sensible or logical manner.

I do not dispute that one in six American women will be assaulted during their life, but could someone please explain the maths here;

""One in every six American women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. I bet you don’t think you know any rapists, but consider the sheer number of rapes that must occur. These rapes are not all committed by Phillip Garrido, Brian David Mitchell, or other members of the Brotherhood of Scary Hair and Homemade Religion. While you may assume that none of the men you know are rapists, I can assure you that at least one is. Consider: if every rapist commits an average of ten rapes (a horrifying number, isn’t it?) then the concentration of rapists in the population is still a little over one in sixty. That means four in my graduating class in high school. One among my coworkers. One in the subway car at rush hour. Eleven who work out at my gym. ""

The above paragraph is the product of either a very, disturbed mind that thinks it is regaining control by multiplying 6 by 10, or a deliberate/ridiculous non-sequitur.

It's a simple assumption. Why disturbed?
It could be that each rapist rapes 1 woman (yes, men get raped too, but sticking with this stat), which would put rapists at approximately 1 in every 6 men. Is that any better?
Or it could be an average of 2, or 20. It doesn't make a huge amount of difference to what the post is trying to communicate, does it? It's still a lot.

RAAIN published the 1/6 women is a victim of rape or sexual assault statistic.
The census estimates the female population of the US in 2008 was 154 million.
Which mean 25.5 million women will be raped or assaulted.
The male population is almost 150 million.
If we assume, for simplicity, that every sexual assault is reported and, for worst-case-scenario numbers, that every rapist will only rape 1 woman and then stop, then one out of every 5.83 men is a rapist.

This is where I got the 1 in 6 figure.

Tim, I think you're missing something there. She didn't show all her work so, what, you discount everything she's saying as that of something out of a disturbed mind?