Ignoring eight studies, and cherrypicking the outlier that has the numbers you’d like to believe, counts as common sense, now?
Knowing that 12% of women are going to be raped isn’t the same as thinking your daughter is going to be one of the 12%. We think of reasons why our child has different odds-- we think of all the reasons that our daughter is less likely to be raped, and ignore the factors that put her more at risk.
All of us think it’s not going to happen to us or our kids, whatever bad thing “it” is. Parents send their kids to a school where only half the kids end up graduating, and they can’t conceive that their special snowflake is going to be one of the dropouts.
Aside from what was mentioned above, the “bases” metaphor fails in that different people can have different meanings for different people. If someone asked for consent for third base and got it,* how are either of them to know what’s been consented to?
As opposed to being stared at in an “Are you from Planet Kindergarten” way.
In “Missoula” the father of a daughter defended Beau Donaldson,who confessed to rape. When he was asked how he would feel if it had been his daughter, he answered “that’s comparing apples to orange. My daughter and Allison are very different girls.” (I’m paraphrasing) Allison was raped by a childhood friend while asleep. There was no reason for her to be on guard. She was spending the night with the nice boys and girls. She and her girlfriend slept over because everyone had been drinking. They were behaving responsibly.
“All of us think it’s not going to happen to us or our kids, whatever bad thing “it” is.”
Actually, today’s heli parents are the exact opposite. Wear sunscreen. Wear your seatbelt. Wear a bike helmet.
But those same heli parents don’t sweat sending their female kids to Syracuse? Where the daughter’s chances of being raped are more than three times the chance of an inmate at Attica being raped?
Heli parents are OK with sending $60k to Syracuse since all the other $60k a year schools present the same risk?
You can admit that this study is cr*p but still think there’s a problem. That’s what I think.
Actually, no, because that isn’t true. I just asked my daughters if these phrases were still around and they said absolutely, that many, if not most, kids use them. They also said that definitions vary from person to person and that girls use it to define how far they go with a guy. 2nd in a hand, 3rd is oral. Kind of throws all your arguments out the window doesn’t it?
So, a girl and guy are making out and the girl sticks her hand down the guys pants without asking. This happens ALL THE TIME. Is the girl committing rape? Does it matter that many times the guy is probably ok with it? Since she didn’t ask, she didn’t have consent, right? Does a hand around a penis even count as rape? Is it any different from a finger in a vagina? I’m told it is not unusual for drunk girls to do that to a guy at a party when they aren’t even making out.
They said that girls say both. Girls get to bases with guys that correlate to 2nd is an HJ and 3rd is a BJ. They will also say that they let a guy get to X base.
ETA- the online definition says that an HJ is considered by some to be 2rd base, not 2nd. I guess that is what they mean when they say different people have different opinions about what it constitutes re each sex.
I am not sure what you mean by that. I gave an example of a type of event that I would not correlate with rape and was told that it was an outdated term that was derogatory, antiquated, and not used anymore (since the 50s, according to someone). I then pointed out that it was still commonly used and was told that it was sexist because only men “get to bases” and women are objects. I then pointed out that women also get to bases with guys as the object and now you are making some other counterpoint that I do not understand.
Are you saying that because a women is performing the sex act on a guy that it is sexist because she isn’t getting pleasure? If so, then why isn’t a guy performing a sex act (outside of intercourse) on a woman also sexist because he isn’t getting pleasure.
If that is the case you should study about women and pleasure because a lot of women like performing sex acts in addition to receiving them.
@alh re: 389/ I guess it would have to be 3rd. The first definition I got when I googled said that manual or oral stimulation of either the male or female genitals was 3rd. Maybe someone should invent one. In real baseball there are 2 kinds of home runs.
I don’t look at it that way. I look at it as if the two participants are on the same team in the metaphors. One’s the baserunner and the other one the coach
What a wonderful thread. I’m pleased that after reading this, my son will now have additional examples of how depraved and insane college life can be if you don’t keep your nose in the books. Yea !!
My word. People use euphemisms to talk about graphic subjects and then there are two pages of bubble gum feminism on why sports metaphors are sexist. Man, that is amazing.
Here is a question for all of you “reeducate the stupid men” crowd. Define an attempt to digitally penetrate a vagina. Explain, in writing, when a sexual advance becomes an unwanted sexual advance, becomes rape. Or admit that you want the option of post facto punishing conduct that is not initiated by a woman. You can speak in terms only understandable to nuanced, hyper intelligent females. I will get my wife to translate.
Since the emphasis in the quote was lifted directly from the original, I feel justified in asking for clarification on something that was clearly so important to the argument.
