4 ms·

> But you are the one coming up with this idea that it should be discussed with one gender or the other. To be clear: I'm asking you why you're not recommendin

> But you are the one coming up with this idea that it should be discussed with one gender or the other. To be clear: I'm asking you why you're not recommending this be discussed with sons first. I thought it was weird you mentioned educating daughter and didn't mention sons. > The idea that it should be all on men to make sure sex goes well is rooted in current concepts of gender and heterosexual norms that actively train girls to be reactive, not proactive. It is rooted in a patriarchal framing of the world. This framing is inherently incompatible with female empowerment. OK, I see. Though I think that you can encourage women to be sexual empowered & and men to avoid sexual assault. > The other thing is that putting it on men amounts to assuming guilt I don't understand this in the slightest. It sounds 100% like victim blaming. > What if we treat both men and women like people who likely need to politely negotiate a mutually acceptable arrangement to get their needs met? What if I have some advantage over you? Physical, economic, a weapon? There can't be a fair agreement if one side can threaten the other, even if that side is unaware of their advantage.

DoreenMichele 9y ago
I thought it was weird you mentioned educating daughter and didn't mention sons. I was speaking to a specific individual about educating their own child. That child happens to be a daughter. That's it. You are entirely fabricating this idea that I was talking about the need to educate girls, but not boys. My very first sentence is gender neutral: Teach your child that hugs and kisses require mutual consent. I only switched to female pronouns after that because I was addressing a specific person who had specified the gender of their own child. That first sentence stands well on its own for speaking to any parent, regardless of the gender of their child. It was intentionally framed that way because the message is gender neutral on purpose. There can't be a fair agreement if one side can threaten the other, even if that side is unaware of their advantage. Therein lies your problem. You fundamentally see men as predators and women as prey. This is an issue that isn't going to be resolved via some internet conversation. I could talk at you until I am blue in the face, you would continue to not understand, continue to accuse me of victim blaming etc. Most likely, there is no point in investing more of my time in this discussion. There can be no meeting of the minds here.
- falsedan 9y ago
  > You are entirely fabricating this idea that I was talking about the need to educate girls, but not boys. I would understand your position better if you said, "I would always recommend that we discuss this with sons first, and teach them how their actions enable sexual assault, even indirectly". I think that's not your position though… Indeed. I fundamentally think that men and women do not have an equal footing in society & that the balance of power is weighted heavily in favour of men. I feel like you want to avoid calling out this unfairness and loudly recommending that men help redress the imbalance by changing their behaviour & calling out disempowering behaviour in others. I see you are very comfortable in your position; I am new to mine and it's a learning experience.
  - DoreenMichele 9y ago
    I would understand your position better if you said, "I would always recommend that we discuss this with sons first, and teach them how their actions enable sexual assault, even indirectly". I think that's not your position though… No, it is not my position. Children are born innocent. Hanging societal crap on male children for the crime of being born male only perpetuates societal crap. Male children who don't yet even have a sexuality should not be getting the message right out the gate that "We know you are basically a rapey bastard, hell bent on taking advantage of women. So we feel a strong need to inculcate you with brainwashing to the contrary to try to mitigate your inherently evil nature." Yes, I am aware that men have a lot of money and power in the world that can constitute an unfair advantage. I am doing what I can to redress that. But, among other things, starting with the assumption that boys will always have an advantage perpetuates the problem. You may never agree with me. Even if you eventually do, that day is probably not coming any time soon. Investing more time in basically arguing with you probably does neither of us any good at all. I would appreciate it if you just drop this. I don't think this is productive.

DoreenMichele 9y ago

I thought it was weird you mentioned educating daughter and didn't mention sons. I was speaking to a specific individual about educating their own child. That child happens to be a daughter. That's it. You are entirely fabricating this idea that I was talking about the need to educate girls, but not boys. My very first sentence is gender neutral: Teach your child that hugs and kisses require mutual consent. I only switched to female pronouns after that because I was addressing a specific person who had specified the gender of their own child. That first sentence stands well on its own for speaking to any parent, regardless of the gender of their child. It was intentionally framed that way because the message is gender neutral on purpose. There can't be a fair agreement if one side can threaten the other, even if that side is unaware of their advantage. Therein lies your problem. You fundamentally see men as predators and women as prey. This is an issue that isn't going to be resolved via some internet conversation. I could talk at you until I am blue in the face, you would continue to not understand, continue to accuse me of victim blaming etc. Most likely, there is no point in investing more of my time in this discussion. There can be no meeting of the minds here.

falsedan 9y ago
> You are entirely fabricating this idea that I was talking about the need to educate girls, but not boys. I would understand your position better if you said, "I would always recommend that we discuss this with sons first, and teach them how their actions enable sexual assault, even indirectly". I think that's not your position though… Indeed. I fundamentally think that men and women do not have an equal footing in society & that the balance of power is weighted heavily in favour of men. I feel like you want to avoid calling out this unfairness and loudly recommending that men help redress the imbalance by changing their behaviour & calling out disempowering behaviour in others. I see you are very comfortable in your position; I am new to mine and it's a learning experience.
- DoreenMichele 9y ago
  I would understand your position better if you said, "I would always recommend that we discuss this with sons first, and teach them how their actions enable sexual assault, even indirectly". I think that's not your position though… No, it is not my position. Children are born innocent. Hanging societal crap on male children for the crime of being born male only perpetuates societal crap. Male children who don't yet even have a sexuality should not be getting the message right out the gate that "We know you are basically a rapey bastard, hell bent on taking advantage of women. So we feel a strong need to inculcate you with brainwashing to the contrary to try to mitigate your inherently evil nature." Yes, I am aware that men have a lot of money and power in the world that can constitute an unfair advantage. I am doing what I can to redress that. But, among other things, starting with the assumption that boys will always have an advantage perpetuates the problem. You may never agree with me. Even if you eventually do, that day is probably not coming any time soon. Investing more time in basically arguing with you probably does neither of us any good at all. I would appreciate it if you just drop this. I don't think this is productive.