BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Conversation >

Schrödingers Rapist, and the hunnerds of text nearby

  
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Char Aina
17:27 / 22.12.09
I went on a bit of a wander through the blogosphere's chat about rape culture last night, and I'm glad I did.
I'd like to share some of the stuff I was looking at, because I think some of you might find it valuable too and because you might have some thoughts I can gain something from.
I warn you now, it's a lot of reading. I've been reading for hours(including last night), and I'm still hacking through, with several articles still open on tabs right now.


The thread that got me started got me because my feed reader threw me this thread entitled “Of course there will be more Sodinis—there will be many more”. I was moved to click by a pretty shit opening post that called two excerpts 'point' and 'counterpoint' when they really weren't at all.
I stayed because the thread that followed was pretty interesting - on the subject of domestic violence and related topics - but what really got me hooked into my meandering study session was a post in another thread, linked to from the first.

The post was a really clear and simple (although not that brief) elucidation of "[W]hy women might end up coming across "cold" to men, EVEN IF they don't think of a guy as a potential rapist". I found myself wishing I had been exposed to that post when I was a self absorbed, sisterless fourteen year old fuckwit. I read on, and then read back, which led me to read the article at the top of the thread.

That article was by "Phaedra Starling"(not her real name), and was entitled "Schrödingers Rapist". It appeared as a guest post at the beginning of October on kateharding.net, and was blogged on MeFi the same day.

From there I have been following links and reading comments, and think I might be doing so off an on for another few days.
I'm fairly sure of that, because one of the resources I have barely touched is a live journal post with comments numbering about 5000 that so far has been really engaging(I'm about thirty posts deep. I would be deeper, but I don't really LJ, and have no idea how to navigate efficiently).
That thread was also linked from one of the MeFi ones, I think, though I am not entirely certain.

On rape and men (Oh yes, I'm going there)

There is a point in discussions of rape, when the discussion turns from the particular to the systemic, when the idea that, for example, many cultures have a value system that makes men believe they are fundamentally entitled to women's bodies (or time or attention, but mostly bodies), when the exceptionism starts to come out. Say it with me, now: not all men are like that.


I'm aware I'm not really taking much time to write this post, but I'm quite busy alongside my burgeoning blog-session and my workrate will never forgive me as it is. I'm putting this here in conversation on purpose because of that, and also because I want folks to read it.

Feel free to comment on any aspect of the articles I'm linking to, and to add your own. Don't feel disheartened if folks don't reply quickly, because there is a lot of reading in those links and it is that time of year.

The article that deserves the credit for making me post is here.

It all seems kinda obvious, and yet it still feels necessary and useful.


Your thoughts?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:28 / 22.12.09
Synergy!! Or possibly serendipity! But either way, cool! It's great that people are thinking about this stuff.
 
 
Char Aina
19:48 / 22.12.09
I've been thinking about these articles specifically for a day or so, but yeah. I think I've been thinking about the issues concerned off and on since I was that fourteen year old filled with internal screams and confusing urges.

I'm just glad people who can write it all down so clearly have the will to do so, and further that MeFi is such a well-run place that the discussions over there go as well as they have.

Certainly the whole thing is confusing and complex, but chat from folks like Empress Callipygos at MeFi and Phaedra Starling at kateharding.net help.

I've posted this thread(give or take) iin a few places, because I'm very interested to hear what other helpful things people might say.
 
 
Char Aina
19:55 / 22.12.09
One thought that hits and is now on my 'will prolly use that chat' list is from a MeFi poster in the thread called tzikeh:

From a column about the PBS documentary No Safe Place:
"Novelist Margaret Atwood writes that when she asked a male friend why men feel threatened by women, he answered, "They are afraid women will laugh at them." When she asked a group of women why they feel threatened by men, they said, "We're afraid of being killed."

Sums up the idea about the stakes being very different, if perhaps a little too briefly.
 
 
Char Aina
20:09 / 22.12.09
At the risk of dominating the thread...
Another excerpt I like, this time from the article:


So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:17 / 22.12.09
It's a great quote! I think it was in the Shapely Prose discussion that a chap said that he, essentially, felt that this sort of thing was going to kill spontaneity, and that he would rather maintain spontaneity and the possibility of magic in his life. Which, of course, was about how he felt, rather than necessarily whether it was a good or right thing for the other parties to experience. Spontaneity is one of those things like romance or chivalry, I think, which are often used to explain or justify a specific set of behaviours which are much more context-sensitive than the baseline expectations set by the term would suggest.
 
 
oryx
22:59 / 22.12.09
Christ. I hate thinking about this sort of thing, because it is as tedious and ubiquitous as it is repellant and intractable.

My vague and unformed thoughts on one point of the excellent op are as follows....

It is very difficult not to move from the particular to the systemic, because we all know it'll be a cold day in hell before demeaning and sexualised representations of women no longer exist, before we can pick up a newspaper and not read a story about how some man has killed/tried to kill his (ex)girlfriend/(ex)wife and/or their children, before a woman is not assessed by men on the basis of their perception of her sexual attractiveness ("I'd tap that" - oh please, "that" wouldnt "tap" you if you were the last man on the planet, so your opinion is actually irrelevant.) And on that last point - the situation is getting worse, not better. Where previously women could expect to have their sex life quietly ignored past a certain age, now we have "cougars" and "MILFs" - vile notions that perpetuate the indignity of men sexually assessing women.

Feminism has made a massive difference, of course, but it is women who have changed the most. Men, it would seem, have not changed to anywhere near the degree that women have. Convictions for rape, sexual assault and domestic violence are all going up, which on the one hand is fantastic, but on the other depressing, because surely the perpetrators of these crimes should have got the message by now? The fact that they have not suggests that it will take a bit more than a soupcon of social approbation to change these behaviours - not least because this social approbation is actually entirely at odds with the history of the status of women.

And on a purely personal note, I can assure you that right-on men are unfortunately not as common as we might wish. Not all men are rapists, of course, but many of them are complicit in a cultural milieu that legitimises a view of sex, and a view of women, that makes sexual and physical violence, in all its forms, an all-too-common female experience.
 
 
Evil Scientist
07:34 / 23.12.09
While you may assume that none of the men you know are rapists, I can assure you that at least one is.

That is one of those things that I really don't want to consider but that may well be true. Naturally, I'd like to think that my particular group beats the odds but...urgh.

Very good thread LC. There is lots of good advice for men through those links.

Men, it would seem, have not changed to anywhere near the degree that women have.

True. Granted the Comment sections of online newspapers tend to attract a certain type of poster, but one only has to read the CiF for a Guardian column about the sex industry to see that a large majority of the XY posters show a deep lack of understanding about this topic.
 
 
■
09:55 / 23.12.09
As someone who frequently stops by the Mail Online to skew their polls a tiny amount in a healthy direction, I thought you might like to know that 29% of people there currently disagree with the proposition "Should drunk men who force wives into sex face a rape charge?"
I think there's a daaaaaaaamn long way to go before we're going to convince people of the nuance of gender politics on this when so many can't even understand that forced sex=rape by definition.
 
 
Eek! A Freek!
11:31 / 23.12.09
I had written a big paragraph about how TV and Film helps encourage unhealthy attitudes in that "persistence pays" for males in many movies and shows, but it was rubbish and I deleted it.

Initially I wanted to post to this thread to say "I get it, really I do!" in an effort to, well, fit in a bit better, I suppose.

But then I really started reading the material more, tried to analyze myself critically, and came up short: It's eye opening to realize how complicit one can be, all-the-while thinking that you are "one of the good guys". It's given me a lot to think of.

I really want to thank Only Nice Things (Haus) for posting the link to Phaedra Starling's article in the new "Late Shift" thread and Life Critic for expanding in this thread.

So I will: Thank you both.
 
 
Char Aina
13:54 / 23.12.09
surely the perpetrators of these crimes should have got the message by now?

A big part of that, I feel, is that nobody is sending them the message.
How many adverts have you seen that say "Is your mate too drunk? Is she in danger of being raped? Shouldn't you have a word/send her home in a taxi?" And how many have you seen that say "Is your mate looking a bit rapey? Shouldn't you have a word/send him home in a taxi?"

One of the great points raised by someone in the comments thread of that article was that the generous stats Starling pulls out (if one in six have been so assaulted, assuming that each rapist is raping ten times, that means one man in sixty is a rapist) were phrased in a way that made hir think about how this is not really a women's issue, but a men's issue.

Women and men are the victims(although overwhelmingly women), but men are almost always the perpetrators.

Someone on MeFi suggested that we act to challenge and ostracise male friends who seem cavalier with people's sexual rights, and I am inclined to agree.

what about some campaigns saying that? Maybe we could make a poster and people could print them off and stick them up as they saw fit?
 
 
Char Aina
13:58 / 23.12.09
many of them are complicit in a cultural milieu that legitimises a view of sex, and a view of women, that makes sexual and physical violence, in all its forms, an all-too-common female experience.

I think I am, yeah. I am conflicted about it, but I think I do make jokes and partake in media that doesn't exactly help.

To be sure, though, what are you talking about?
 
 
oryx
16:12 / 23.12.09
*I think I am, yeah. I am conflicted about it, but I think I do make jokes and partake in media that doesn't exactly help.

To be sure, though, what are you talking about?*



What I have in mind is the all-lads-together attitude that makes men laugh when someone cracks a joke about Rebecca Adlington's or Paula Radcliffe's appearance. No-one ever says Jenson Button has too many teeth, or that Ronaldo looks like he's had his face waxed, but its ok to take the piss out of female Olypians because of how they look.... The "only joking" catcalls when a woman is walking down the street.... The odious culture of lads mags, and their entirely uncritical reception by men (and yet fashion magazines cause women to feel so bad about themselves they develop eating disorders and all the rest? I think not, somehow).... The casual conversations about which of Girls Aloud (or whoever) you'd like to bang.... The assumption that penetrative sex is the highest accolade a woman can receive from a man.... The assumption that a woman who is "disobedient" in some way to gender stereotypes (hers or yours) just needs a good fuck and that will sort her out.... The presumption that femininity is masculinity's complement, and that for masculinity to be a virile, successful, competent, active force, femininity must be passive, acquiescent, weak, and in need of a protector.... The assumption that all women want male attention, and that your positive assessment of her physical appearance is a compliment - even if you have never met her before, and all you are doing is staring approvingly and lasciviously at her chest/arse/whatever.... The idea that men can go around nightclubs and public transport, groping women at will because, well, all he did was stroke her arse, why is she so upset? That doesnt constitute violation, surely?....

Stick a fork in me and turn me over. I'm done now.
 
 
Char Aina
16:45 / 23.12.09
Okay, well then no, largely. You're not describing me very well there, and I'm trying to be generous to your description.

I do occasionally make transgressive jokes, and I have enjoyed domination based erotica and personal encounters, and I have also bought art by artists whose personal views - both in and out of their art - could be described as troubling. That, I feel makes me complicit in the promotion of certain ideas, even if I feel I am 'still a good guy'.

Beyond that, I am also aware that some of my behaviour could be seen as troublesome, and has likely caused some discomfort on the part of others. This is probably par for the course being young and dumb, but specifically with regard to 'coercive sex' or 'persistence', I think a lot of men have at least behaved in a way that could be described as borderline.

Ringing the bell five or six times is still a bit creepy, even if you would never break down the door.
And yeah, theft/sex metaphors have their limits, but I am actually thinking of a time when I have rung a lady's doorbell five or six times, having been invited up a couple of hours earlier. Thinking back on that me, that was excessive, and might well have been construed as a lack of respect.

cf.
So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.


But back to your post.

The world you describe seems to be one you don't accept any part in. Would that be accurate?
Or do you feel that you too are complicit in the cultural milieu that legitimises a view of sex, and a view of women, that makes sexual and physical violence, in all its forms, an all-too-common female experience?

How best do you think such a culture can be tackled? How would you advise one of the 'good guys' to approach being less complicit?

(I'm not sure, but I think the whole concept of 'good guys' might be part of the problem...)
 
 
oryx
20:42 / 23.12.09
Or do you feel that you too are complicit in the cultural milieu that legitimises a view of sex, and a view of women, that makes sexual and physical violence, in all its forms, an all-too-common female experience?

How best do you think such a culture can be tackled? How would you advise one of the 'good guys' to approach being less complicit?

(I'm not sure, but I think the whole concept of 'good guys' might be part of the problem...)



Good questions, all.

1. Am I "complicit" - historically, yes, I have been. For instance, I found it easier to let the bloke who came into the room I was sleeping in at my sister's student digs and locked the door behind him have sex with me than to kick and scream and try to stop him. However, I do think there is a sense in which both women and men have internalised the ill-treatment of women and it is seen as "normal." So I don't think complicity is the same as agency. Complicity here is merely fitting in with existing social attitudes, of not bucking the trend.

2. How should the culture be tackled? Heh. If I could answer that I'd earn a fortune as a consultant at the Home Office. I think feminism has lost its way a bit - as women have gained ground socially and politically, they have, in parallel, found their bodies and their appearance held up to scrutiny to a far greater degree than ever before. That needs to be challenged. I also think that the social approbation towards men who behave badly is helpful, especially when married with social and policing policies that enforces a very real consequence.

Regarding the "good guys" - all I can say is, take pride in being one of the moral minority.

All of that is a bit vague, but like I say, coming up with concrete actions against a pervasive social issue that has, in all fairness, been an integral part of life for thousands of years, is never going to be easy. I do think that recognising the issue is a major step forward, especially given how many people don't think the problem exists, and one of the reasons I'm so impressed with this thread is that it articulates the problem very clearly.
 
 
Evil Scientist
07:28 / 24.12.09
How best do you think such a culture can be tackled? How would you advise one of the 'good guys' to approach being less complicit?

My personal opinion is that you have to accept that you might have to get a little confrontational. Showing obvious distaste when a mate says something out of line. Actually raising it as a topic of discussion when hanging out. That kind of thing. I'd like to think that there are plenty of men out there who wouldn't act as they do if they understood quite how threatening their behaviour appears.

If I learnt nothing else from the "Golden Age" on Barbelith it was that I had a lot of issues regarding women and a whole lot of misconceptions regarding how it is for women to live in society.

I'd be a big, fat liar if I said all of that junk had magically vanished in the intervening time but knowing about it and being able to recognise and check behaviours, in yourself, that appear threatening to women is a start. "Spreading the word" to other men in your life and calling them on their behaviour is probably a good idea too.

(I'm not sure, but I think the whole concept of 'good guys' might be part of the problem...)

It is, a big part. Men who think that they're "owed" something, or that they're morally better, for not instantly trying to get into a woman's pants are just as bad. In many ways they're the harder ones to deprogram (again, speaking as someone who used to think of himself as a "good guy").
 
 
Char Aina
14:02 / 24.12.09
the "Golden Age" on Barbelith

[offtopic biafra-nixon=true]

Fake Camelot,
Before everything went wrong...
Nostalgia for an age
That never existed!

[/offtopic]
 
 
Char Aina
14:21 / 24.12.09
I'm not sure I meant those kind of guys, ES. Maybe I did, though? I guess it all starts from a similar place, trying to 'prove' you're not like those bad people by fighting those bad people.

Gross oversimplification, yeah, but I'm still wrapping presents.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
18:32 / 24.12.09
I think the nice guy syndrome is pretty well documented - in essence, it's characterised by expecting to be rewarded (usually with sex) for not being one of the bad guys Maybe that's what ES is talking about?

(Strictly speaking, I believe there were two golden ages of Barbelith, so one can choose either or both to be nostalgic about - so, there was no Camelot. There were Camelots! What a lovely thought...)
 
 
Char Aina
01:18 / 25.12.09
I'm not really talking about Nice Guys a la Nice Guy Syndrome, who aren't really all that nice. They self-label as Nice Guys, and yet are a bit un-nice in reality, which isn't really what I mean.

I was responding to:
It's eye opening to realize how complicit one can be, all-the-while thinking that you are "one of the good guys". It's given me a lot to think of.

I have come to believe that we are all racist, and I reckon the idea that somehow you're not in need of examining your beliefs regarding race (But I'm an Anarchist! I believe in personal freedom!/But I went to school in Brixton!/But I'm half Kenyan!) can itself lead to, well, unexamined ideas about race, that then lead to behaviour that could well be classed as racist.

In much the same way, I wonder if feelings like that expressed above by EAF might be the root of folks not examining their actions and beliefs with regard to sexual politics(is that the right term?) and gender. I think congratulating yourself on being a good guy, as I have done and still occasionally do, might slow or stall your self-examination process.

(I also think that it leads to a knee jerk defensive reaction when then confronted about behaviours/beliefs, because you hear "you are a bad guy!", which does not work well with your sense of self)

But I don't need to check myself!
I help out at a rape crisis centre!/I'm a member of the women's library!/I'm the only boy in a family of six sisters!/Whatever else makes you feel complacent or secure.


The Nice Guy thing is definitely a related issue, but it wasn't really what I was getting at.


Am I making sense? I am drunk and have been dancing...
 
 
Char Aina
02:12 / 25.12.09
Sexual Assault Prevention Tips Guaranteed to Work! (more)
 
 
Papess
11:03 / 25.12.09
I think congratulating yourself on being a good guy, as I have done and still occasionally do, might slow or stall your self-examination process.

And that is what makes you a "nice guy", doesn't it? If you or any man were to actually think about whether they are actually nice or not, perhaps the most we can say is that makes them thoughtful? I am not sure, really.

I get the feeling that men are just accepted as "nice guys" to begin with, while women have to prove they are "nice girls". It's just my subjective opinion with no evidence to back it up and there are a host of subtle complications, of course.

Even after a man assaults a woman, he is still accepted as a "nice guy" and the woman is left with all sorts of stigma to hash over, which implies to her that she is sullied and unfit in some manner now. There is no going back to being a "nice girl" for her, most likely.

Maybe I went in a different direction with this, but both terms "nice guy" or "nice girl", (which means completely different things for men than it does for women), both get on my nerves.
 
 
jentacular dreams
20:11 / 25.12.09
Thread of the year!
 
 
Papess
23:04 / 25.12.09
I am in total agreement, Gamma.

I just wanted to mention that the "Schrödingers Rapist" can also be someone in one's own family. Although I am certain people here are aware of this on some level, I don't think this has been mentioned in any of the links or posts. For me the possibilty of being sexually assaulted by a family member emphasizes the reality of "no safe place" for women.

In families, women are silenced just to "keep the peace" and stop causing everyone trouble. It makes an easy prey for a rapist when the target's support system can be so easily turned on them. A well liked, male family member seemingly wins out over the female whistle-blowing, shit-disturbing victim. She has so much more to lose when she discloses.

Imagine growing up afraid that every man in your family has alterior motives for giving you a hug. Or when you ask a male famliy member to not pat your ass, other family members tell you that you are making big deal out of nothing. Thus, the perpetrator can take advantge of the natural vulnerability of women within their own family.

Yeah, so...no safe place.
 
 
Char Aina
14:14 / 26.12.09
Yeah, Nice isn't very meaningful. I said Good Guy, which is also fairly vague and under-expressive, giving an idea of some notional 'white hat', which by definition will become something slightly different as each person hears it.

I'm waaaay too hungover to try and tease much out of it right now. I think I drank about a pub and a half last night.

Happy Baby Jesus, everyone.
 
 
Pingle!Pop
23:33 / 26.12.09
A well liked, male family member seemingly wins out over the female whistle-blowing, shit-disturbing victim. She has so much more to lose when she discloses.

Argh. This. But it goes way beyond just families. (Note: link is triggering as fuck. Talks about personal experience of even "radical progressive" communities almost always supporting abusers over survivors.)

I get the feeling that men are just accepted as "nice guys" to begin with

Question: who wrote, "Told by at least 100 girls/women over the years I was a 'nice guy.' Not kidding."? Answer: George fucking Sodini. Though whether that's an indication of "nice guy" as the default perception or merely the default fallback is a more difficult question; Kate Harding in that link goes into how, for example, saying "hey, you're nice but..." can be an awful lot easier than saying something more explicitly rejective and risking the abuse - sometimes dangerous - that can come as a result of doing so. Certainly it's likely to be my default reaction to sleazy men unless they do anything really obviously out of line, and I suspect most people's standards for obviously out of line are probably somewhat higher than mine.

... And yeah, to be a "nice girl" is -- well, basically impossible. One has to be entirely sexually "pure" - obviously one couldn't possibly be sexual and a nice girl! - and simultaneously entirely available to satisfy others' whims; here, for example, Chris Clarke details signing on to chat rooms for a few hours with an obviously female handle and staying silent, and receiving PMs which when not responded to resulted twice in the apparent female online identity being told she deserved to be raped.
 
 
Char Aina
19:59 / 27.12.09
"hey, you're nice but..." can be an awful lot easier than saying something more explicitly rejective and risking the abuse - sometimes dangerous - that can come as a result of doing so.

Yeah, I liked that bit. It does a good job of joining up some dots with regard to sleazy as fuck 'nice guys'.
 
 
Papess
14:50 / 28.12.09
Oh Pringle, that was triggering. Yes it does seem like it is impossible to be a "nice girl".

From your first link, Pringle:

and this is when i began to notice a pattern. when rape/sexual abuse/dv is revealed to the community. the folks who were basically only friends with the survivor. will remain friends with the survivor. the folks who were basically only friends with the abuser. will do the same.

but the people who considered themselves to be friends with both of them will in the end support the abuser. even if they were first friends with the survivor and through the survivor became friends with the abuser. those friends will remain friends with the abuser…

somehow people who know both of the parties very well. time after time decides that the survivor has ‘gone too far’ ‘exxagerating’ ‘being vindictive’ ‘being a bitch’ ‘acting like a victim’ ‘wasnt *violently* raped’


That I have observed too. I've seen it first hand here the Barb-commmunity, despite how progressive we appear to be. Not to go into full disclosure, (as I am well aware where that leads), just bringing home this unpalatable reality.

There is a saying about friends being family we choose. The community we build around us for support and reprieve from what is sometimes a toxic lineage. When that fails, where is one to turn? There isn't anywhere or anyone I have found yet. Even victims turn on victims for their own redemption and acceptance.

Not to assume the "victim role" that is apparently so depised, even in this community, (we can only talk about victims here we can't actually be one, IME), but in the bat of an eyelash people will turn on a woman who discloses violence against her. One expects it from the usual suspects, but it is always a kick in the teeth when it comes from feminists, progressive, liberal-minded, socially active individuals, such as those here.

No safe place, no where to turn.

It is not a wonder to me at all, that some victims try to win favour again by recanting their claims, or refriending abusers. The isolation and ostracization are quite the punishment from communities and individuals that hold up a facade of understanding and support. One begins to think they are at fault, deserving and possibly just wrong about the matter. Those supports quickly collapse in the face of a real situation of violence and victimization. It is so much easier to deal with violence when it is not one of your friends who did it.

There are all sorts of excuses made for the lack of support, from the ones mentioned in the quote above: the survivor has ‘gone too far’ ‘exxagerating’ ‘being vindictive’ ‘being a bitch’ ‘acting like a victim’ ‘wasnt *violently* raped’ - to explanations that the victim is expecting too much from her community and friends.

One argument I always heard as a victim was that I was not faultless. Yep, that is right. A victim is not always pure and blameless in her life's doings. How convenient for those that choose to assault her.

Meh...until we can back up our words with actions and behaviours that match those words, nobody is "nice" in my books. The hypocrisy is shameful.
 
 
oryx
16:31 / 28.12.09
I couldn't decide whether this should go here or on the "untamed anger" thread. I tossed a coin. This one won.

I spent Christmas in the east midlands, and drove home to London today. For reasons that are not at all clear, as I was driving south down the M1, another driver, a man, took offence at me. He began gesticulating and swearing at me. I shrugged and carried on driving. He then followed me down the motorway, pulling into my lane and obliging me to change lanes, tailgating me, overtaking me and then slamming on his brakes right in front of me. This went on for about ten or fifteen miles, in heavy traffic.

His behaviour was aggressive, threatening, and dangerous, so I pulled off at a set of services and reported him the police.

And, you know, I can't help but think that if I'd been a man, or in a more masculine Range Rover rather than a small and underpowered Fiat Panda, he would have behaved rather differently.

I was reminded, again, of a thought that occurred to me years ago, a thought I've been trying and failing to shake off for a very long time - never underestimate the extent to which men hate women. This guy was so apoplectic at some perceived slight that he would risk his own life, and that of the teenage girl he had in the passenger seat (presumably his daughter), and other road users, rather than let a lady driver drive unmolested down the motorway.

And I am fucking furious about it.
 
 
Papess
01:09 / 29.12.09
...(presumably his daughter)

Hopefully his daughter. Then again...nevermind, it's a no win. *sigh*

You are probably right, Oryx. He most likely would have felt too threatened to behave in that way if waved a penis at him.
 
 
Char Aina
05:52 / 29.12.09
Wow. that fucking sucks. I'm glad you guys are alright, and angry at a distance for you.
 
 
Pingle!Pop
15:36 / 30.12.09
Agh, sorry, Papess. I noted how triggering that link was but didn't think about how triggering the rest of my post could be, which was stupid.

... And "nice": yeah, just about a useless word, at least as it's currently used - people's capability of being pleasant in untesting circumstances says very little about anything. I -- no, I don't have the energy to say much more than that right now.
 
 
Char Aina
17:15 / 31.12.09
Having this conversation elsewhere, and it's frightening how many people will straight out attack you for mentioning these issues.
I've been called paranoid and man hating quite a few times now, and that is becoming the least of it.
 
 
Papess
01:29 / 01.01.10
Please LC, please point in the direction of the much needed thumping.
 
 
oryx
18:34 / 01.01.10
Paranoid, man-hating....

+ "bitter" and "sex-deprived".....

Yes, I've heard all of them.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply