Women: Would you rather be stuck alone in a forest with a man or a bear? By now you’ve no doubt seen the intellectual discourse making the Internet outrage circuits. The fact that many women have picked the “bear” as their answer has enraged many.
I've never sexually assaulted or murdered anyone. I don't know anyone who has, because I don't surround myself with such people. That's why it's unfathomable to me that anyone would choose the bear. Can we create a breakaway society of people who aren't sexual assaulters/murderers and people who don't blame men for everything? I'm tired of being blamed for the crimes of others.
I think it's wrong to blame men for everything, but specific ones do present a danger, we have to be realistic about that. The men in my life I'd not only prefer to be stuck in a forest with, I'd be grateful.
A man can be a bear but that must be a the opportune time as when defending his family or friends or a person in danger from another bear. Chivalry seems to be extinct. My college fraternity stressed chivalry; when a woman enters a room or comes to your table, the men stand, men will open doors and hold that door, a man tips his hat when passing a woman and he never wears a hat at the table. I don’t wear a hat often but will give a gesture of tipping the hat and the response is usually of surprise and pleasure but I do live in the South. Long before the fraternity life, my father instilled those qualities in me, he was raised in the South. I have long been of the opinion that women are if not equal to men but actually better, stronger and more capable than men in many ways.
I think we need stronger laws. It's a very serious crime that should have severe consequences. I think that state and federal government should increase mandatory minimums for rape and sexual assault. There needs to be more money spent on test kits and investigation because a lot of these crimes do not get solved. The number of crimes reported vs the number of convictions is startling. Either a huge percentage of people are filing false reports which while some such cases must happen are not sufficient to explain the discrepancy between the reporting numbers and the successful conviction rate. More likely we have a serious problem with getting convictions for rape and sexual assault. If the number of women being assaulted is ever going to drop these perps need the be identified and do serious hard time for their crimes. As it stands the crimes are rarely punished and when they are punished it is often not with severity to match the damage caused to the lives of others. I don't think there is the political will to make this the priority it should be. Maybe that will change but I don't see the will in either major political party at present to tackle this. They will find excuses to back burner the issue. They always do.
"Statistically, of course, the logical answer should be: man. Bears, as many have pointed out, are extremely violent and don’t hesitate to rip your skin off. Odds would place your survival rates higher with a random man than a random bear."
?
Ok, I'm autistic, so I'm confused. Is this some sort of sarcasm I'm not getting?
I live in bear country. I have had more unexpected bear encounters than I can count. I have been startled, but NEVER afraid of or threatened by any bear I have ever encountered. To be fair, they have all been black bears, a species that prefer to avoid people, although they can be pretty darn stubborn about leaving when caught in the midst of pillaging the garbage can. Bears are not violent. Even grizzly bears prefer to avoid people.
It is possible to learn about bears and be able to make a reasonable prediction about their behavior.
Every encounter with a man in an isolated area is a crap shoot. That is why I will not go hiking without either my boyfriend or my dog.
a question/subject like this as tiresome and viral as it has been vaguely pondered in background in my own awareness deserves just the compassionate equilibrium you bring to it ✌️
Good essay. There is another aspect of the danger women can face from men - one that is rarely spoken of being ubject to a kind of feminist omerta. It is one that and this is one that perhaps looms larger in liberal Western cuilture than in more arranged-marriage cultures: " It is cowardly of feminists to be in denial that some women – particularly young women - are attracted to aggressive males like moths to a flame. Like this seventeen year old British girl: “[if a boy] could kill someone or people thought he could then yeah I’m not gonna lie, he’s gonna be more attractive to me.” The dangerous heartthrob spiv is a staple of just about every soap opera ever made. Some kinds of violent misogyny can even be ‘woke’: rap artists boasting of subjugation and even rape of their 'bitches' can be lapped up by adoring college kids." https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/life-in-the-shadows-of-metoo
Might this be a measure of societal morality? It seems to me that if a large portion of a population feeling unsafe, it is an indictment of the whole society (not just the men). Both trust and understanding are necessary for all individuals within a society to flourish. Collectively, we need to find ways to engage and communicate effectively with both compassion and authenticity.
In 2011 Olga Moskalyova, 19, was out in the Russian wild with her stepfather. A bear attacked and killed him, and then it began to maul Olga.
She had her cell phone, she called her mom as the bear tore off parts of her. Three times she called, she called and told her mom when the bear left, called and told her when it came back with it's cubs, talked to her mom as the bear cubs ate her alive.
Indeed. The same women saying they'd rather be alone with a bear than a man are welcoming refugees from parts of the world where there is no concept of rape or sexual assault. All unchaperoned women are fair game.
Wikipedia: "A meta-analysis of 51 studies from 1994–2014 on the relationship between immigration and crime in the United States found that, overall, the immigration-crime association is negative, but the relationship is very weak and there is significant variation in findings across studies.[7] This is in line with a 2009 review of high-quality studies conducted in the United States that also found a negative relationship.[8]"
Ousey, Graham C.; Kubrin, Charis E. (2018). "Immigration and Crime: Assessing a Contentious Issue". Annual Review of Criminology. 1 (1): 63–84. doi:10.1146/annurev-criminol-032317-092026.
Lee, Matthew T.; Martinez Jr., Ramiro (2009). "Immigration reduces crime: an emerging scholarly consensus". Immigration, Crime and Justice. Emerald Group Publishing. pp. 3–16. ISBN 978-1-84855-438-2. Archived from the original on 24 February 2024. Retrieved 25 May 2016.
Rape and sexual assault has never been acceptable in European states, including those in North America. It has always been punished, often severely.
As you point out whole swathes of the world are indifferent to rape. The expected norm there is the woman is chaperoned by a male relative. If she is not then she is fair game.
As for intervention. The current climate is so anti-male in the west most men would be well advised to not get involved. Even if a rape is occurring. Daniel Perry in New York has been charged for intervening in a crime against a woman, and he is not alone.
If feminists were sincere about women's rights they'd be condemning a huge chunk of the world where women are regularly abused. They instead focus on minor tensions here in the west.
So because of a particular legal case you are advising men not to intervene when women are assaulted or in your words "even if rape is occurring" because the lawman may not be on our side. That is pretty darn cynical coming from someone who wrote an entire peice about caution being the path to mediocrity. If I ever find myself in a situation where I see a woman is being assaulted I intend to act in defense of those unable to defend themselves. I would probably make a fool of myself being as I am not the man I once was in the Army. Probably get the shit beaten out of me. Maybe even get my fool self killed. But it is preferable to doing nothing and living with that, knowing I could have tried to do something and simply chose not to because I did not want the to risk a district attorney going after me. I will never understand people who waxed poetic about how important "the sound of freedom" was and frequently discuss their love of wood chippers on social media and then they turn around and say that men should not intervene to stop a rape because we live in a "anti male culture". I admit I am not going out actively looking for these sad sacks who commit these crimes. Maybe that is a moral indictment of my character. But if I happen to be there if and when something like that is happening I hope I have the courage to do the right thing and put myself between that woman who is being assaulted and the sad sack doing the assaulting. I already carry enough guilt and shame for not being able to defend my mother as a boy from domestic violence. I don't want something else like that to carry around in my head for the rest of my life knowing I could have tried to do something even if I failed in the attempt.
As far as I am concerned any man who sees a freaking rape happening in front of him in real time and does not intervene because he was scared Alvin Bragg is going to come after him deserves to have his man card revoked.
I suppose it is easy for me to say this. I have no family. If I die attempting to intervene or am thrown in prison for intervening against a rapist no one is going to much care or notice my absence. The federal government will save about 45,000 dollars a year. Katherine will be down one yearly subscriber and my friends will have one less friend to game with and the world will go on. No one will be missing a husband or grow up without a father. So maybe it is easier for me to be blase about the consequences of attempting to intervene. I hope my moral calculus would not be swayed by such factors but I guess I could understand why some would choose their family over taking a risk protecting a stranger. But then again it could happen to someone we care about. And we weren't there because we were at work or not around for whatever reason and someone else could have done something and didn't because they didn't want to take a risk their family would be I think when you are talking about rape. People have a duty to intervene against a rape. You are explicitly stating men should not intervene in something as serious as rape on account of Daniel Penny being prosecuted. I think that is a sorry cop out of an excuse. If I go to prison for attempting to stop a rapist I can live with that. I intend to intervene if I saw something like that happening in front of me. As I hope any decent man would. And I hope if I saw that happening and did not intervene that I would be ostracized for not living up to my duties as a man and for not living up to my word on something so fundamental to decency. It's shameful to say something like that. You have the right to say it of course but I think it utterly rephensible to say men would be well advised to not intervene even in the event of something so serious as a rape because of the Daniel Penny trial. What kind of fragile man child nonsense is this. Daniel Penny said he had "no regrets" and the guy he killed in a chokehold for threatening passengers was not actively raping anyone. If Daniel Penny is your moral guide do you think he would discourage people from intervening to stop a freaking rape because of fear of prosecution. Sorry but if the government has fallen to the point that district attorneys are prosecuting members of public for coming to the aid of a woman being raped then we have bigger problems than fear of prosecution and disdain for the "anti male culture" I think what was just suggested is how things like Tahrir Sqaure happen. Just turn a blind eye and look away because you are frustrated. You know that whole bit about weak men and bad times. It could have been written for the bitter self serving mentality expressed in that comment discouraging men from intervening against rape. I am not going to let my willingness to act against something as vile as rape be governed by what the left wing fringe of feminists fails to condemn being done in other countries. W T F. That's freaking mental.
FYI the Marine in New York is Daniel Penny, not "Perry".
Thanks for the correction, I knew it was something like that. You raise some interesting points. But the original piece was about how men ought to do more. Like many I am tired of this mantra. While men are denigrated in the west, while many support importing men f on primitive parts of the world who are cool with abusing women, it is western men who must do more. It is a farce and increasing numbers of men are dropping out as a result.
As for Penny, he serves as a warning. Masculinity has been attacked for a long time in western nations. It is feared. So penny is more than an isolated case, he represents a trend. Your intervention may be harshly punished. That is not the sign of a society comfortable with masculine men. That's why many are retreating and refusing to help. Tragic, but predictable.
Well I find it contemptible that fear of prosecution is now being used as an excuse to not intervene against something as awful as a rape. Might as well just run up the white flag of surrender to the Taliban at that point if that's the mindset you want for the men of America. You can make your choices to sit on the sidelines. I will make mine and I hope that fear of a district attorney doesn't EVER weigh in my calculations on doing the right thing. I know all too well the kind of society we will live in if any significant number of men actually pay heed to the mindset you espoused. Saw it first hand in Afghanistan. It's no way to live. Yes there is a possibility that I may be harshly punished by the authorities. I may get killed or get beaten to a bloody pulp and not be able to live a normal life. But you better believe I am going to intervene regardless if I witness a rape in my proximity where I can physically place myself between the attacker and the person being attacked.
There can be no courage if there is no risk and you are saying the risk of prosecution is too great to intervene. Sorry but if we don't draw the line at intervening when we have the power to try to disrupt a rape attempt we are done as a society and no amount of cowering and hiding in a corner in fear of an alvin bragg will save us because sooner or later it will happen to someone we know and care about. And I think what you proposed is probably the most cowardly thing I have heard of since the Coward of Broward didn't intervene to try to save those kids.
I hope if ever in the course of the events of your life you have the misfortune of witnessing a rape that you have a change of heart in that moment and cast this cynical attitude aside in the moment and man up and do the right thing, or at least have the basic human freaking decency to call the police to get them to deal with it.
I don't think that is the dynamic. Younger men are constantly being told they are toxic, harmful and surplus to requirements. Fewer are marrying, and women are focusing more on career.
So the men seem to be withdrawing, not refusing to intervene as such. The key attribute is indifference. This is especially true of white men according to the figures although increasingly includes blacks and Hispanics too.
It is a feminized world. They are reaping what they sow. Tragic, but predictable. It is seen all through history. If men cannot find wives and do not produce kids, they withdraw and society collapses. That's why the church pushed monogamy so hard. The alternative created unstable societies and dangerous ones for women.
I don't pretend to begin to understand your reasoning. I don't think rape is women reaping the results of a feminized world. It is a problem as old as humanity. Probably it even predates modern humans as such behavior is observed in other primates.
I think the rosy veener you you see western civilization through is ignoring the fact that until recently marital rape was not viewed as a crime. We still have some troglodyte legislators who refuse to accept that it is a crime. We are only recently with the past century advanced beyond the point of refusing women the vote or other legal protections of citizenship. I don't think feminism is the cause. I think people who feel resentment at the gains in social standing of women over the past 100 years will grasp for excuses to advise other men to not do that which they know to be the right thing. My inability to get married shouldn't hold any sway over whether or not I intervene as a good Samaritan against a horrific criminal act in progress. I think telling men "The current climate is so anti-male in the west most men would be well advised to not get involved. Even if a rape is occurring." Is utterly rephensible and deeply cynical.
My loneliness and lack of success in relationships is a weak and cynical excuse to not try to do something when something so awful is occuring within my proximity to try to stop it. I was raised better than that.
I didn't say rape was them reaping what they sow. The indifference of men was, as I outlined.
I don't see anything through a rosy veneer. I just read history. And we have never been soft on rape. Centuries ago in England it was often a capital offence, for instance.
And spare me the lecture on marital rape. It is famously difficult to prove. Same for votes for women. Most people only recently got the vote. Most men in America and Britain only got it 20 years before females. You are shaky on history. The majority of women didn't want the vote because of the responsibilities that came with it. These are feminist revisionist talking points.
No one feels resentment about women's standing. We have accepted almost all feminist demands. It is women who are complaining, not men. Even some feminists have commented on this observation. Women are never happy, another basic observation even women admit.
Men gave them all they asked for, including job quotas. And now, in the West, women's happiness is in steep decline because they are not having kids and are now expected to work for a living. Their doing not men's.
The really troubling statistic that is bothering the feminists is women are now less happy than men, a first in history. Females have dipped below males in terms of happiness. Traditionally it was men who were less happy. This is also reflected in antidepressant prescriptions. Women take them at record levels. Modern life is not working for women it would seem. And it isn't rape that is depressing them.
As for men not getting involved. It doesn't matter what either of us think. The stats are there, and they are stark. Men are withdrawing from society. They are not marrying, they are not interacting socially with women, and increasingly they are not intervening in assaults. There is a growing body of video evidence of women being assaulted and harassed and no one intervenes. Tragic, but the sign of a low trust society in decline. It is also the norm in many parts of the world.
Good for you for wanting to help. I have done so myself in the past to assist women. My comments are not about me, or you. They are observations about society. It has changed. The treatment of Daniel Penny is just one example.
I've never sexually assaulted or murdered anyone. I don't know anyone who has, because I don't surround myself with such people. That's why it's unfathomable to me that anyone would choose the bear. Can we create a breakaway society of people who aren't sexual assaulters/murderers and people who don't blame men for everything? I'm tired of being blamed for the crimes of others.
I think it's wrong to blame men for everything, but specific ones do present a danger, we have to be realistic about that. The men in my life I'd not only prefer to be stuck in a forest with, I'd be grateful.
A man can be a bear but that must be a the opportune time as when defending his family or friends or a person in danger from another bear. Chivalry seems to be extinct. My college fraternity stressed chivalry; when a woman enters a room or comes to your table, the men stand, men will open doors and hold that door, a man tips his hat when passing a woman and he never wears a hat at the table. I don’t wear a hat often but will give a gesture of tipping the hat and the response is usually of surprise and pleasure but I do live in the South. Long before the fraternity life, my father instilled those qualities in me, he was raised in the South. I have long been of the opinion that women are if not equal to men but actually better, stronger and more capable than men in many ways.
I think we need stronger laws. It's a very serious crime that should have severe consequences. I think that state and federal government should increase mandatory minimums for rape and sexual assault. There needs to be more money spent on test kits and investigation because a lot of these crimes do not get solved. The number of crimes reported vs the number of convictions is startling. Either a huge percentage of people are filing false reports which while some such cases must happen are not sufficient to explain the discrepancy between the reporting numbers and the successful conviction rate. More likely we have a serious problem with getting convictions for rape and sexual assault. If the number of women being assaulted is ever going to drop these perps need the be identified and do serious hard time for their crimes. As it stands the crimes are rarely punished and when they are punished it is often not with severity to match the damage caused to the lives of others. I don't think there is the political will to make this the priority it should be. Maybe that will change but I don't see the will in either major political party at present to tackle this. They will find excuses to back burner the issue. They always do.
"Statistically, of course, the logical answer should be: man. Bears, as many have pointed out, are extremely violent and don’t hesitate to rip your skin off. Odds would place your survival rates higher with a random man than a random bear."
?
Ok, I'm autistic, so I'm confused. Is this some sort of sarcasm I'm not getting?
I live in bear country. I have had more unexpected bear encounters than I can count. I have been startled, but NEVER afraid of or threatened by any bear I have ever encountered. To be fair, they have all been black bears, a species that prefer to avoid people, although they can be pretty darn stubborn about leaving when caught in the midst of pillaging the garbage can. Bears are not violent. Even grizzly bears prefer to avoid people.
It is possible to learn about bears and be able to make a reasonable prediction about their behavior.
Every encounter with a man in an isolated area is a crap shoot. That is why I will not go hiking without either my boyfriend or my dog.
a question/subject like this as tiresome and viral as it has been vaguely pondered in background in my own awareness deserves just the compassionate equilibrium you bring to it ✌️
to bears and people alike
Good essay. There is another aspect of the danger women can face from men - one that is rarely spoken of being ubject to a kind of feminist omerta. It is one that and this is one that perhaps looms larger in liberal Western cuilture than in more arranged-marriage cultures: " It is cowardly of feminists to be in denial that some women – particularly young women - are attracted to aggressive males like moths to a flame. Like this seventeen year old British girl: “[if a boy] could kill someone or people thought he could then yeah I’m not gonna lie, he’s gonna be more attractive to me.” The dangerous heartthrob spiv is a staple of just about every soap opera ever made. Some kinds of violent misogyny can even be ‘woke’: rap artists boasting of subjugation and even rape of their 'bitches' can be lapped up by adoring college kids." https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/life-in-the-shadows-of-metoo
Yes. What is not sufficiently recognized is the man who can be dangerous to a woman is also the man who can be dangerous on behalf of a woman.
Might this be a measure of societal morality? It seems to me that if a large portion of a population feeling unsafe, it is an indictment of the whole society (not just the men). Both trust and understanding are necessary for all individuals within a society to flourish. Collectively, we need to find ways to engage and communicate effectively with both compassion and authenticity.
In 2011 Olga Moskalyova, 19, was out in the Russian wild with her stepfather. A bear attacked and killed him, and then it began to maul Olga.
She had her cell phone, she called her mom as the bear tore off parts of her. Three times she called, she called and told her mom when the bear left, called and told her when it came back with it's cubs, talked to her mom as the bear cubs ate her alive.
Buy hey, at least she wasn't sexually assaulted.
Indeed. The same women saying they'd rather be alone with a bear than a man are welcoming refugees from parts of the world where there is no concept of rape or sexual assault. All unchaperoned women are fair game.
...and yet refugees from such cultures are less likely to commit crimes than those who have lived here all their lives...
Is that a joke? What crime stats are you reading?
Wikipedia: "A meta-analysis of 51 studies from 1994–2014 on the relationship between immigration and crime in the United States found that, overall, the immigration-crime association is negative, but the relationship is very weak and there is significant variation in findings across studies.[7] This is in line with a 2009 review of high-quality studies conducted in the United States that also found a negative relationship.[8]"
Ousey, Graham C.; Kubrin, Charis E. (2018). "Immigration and Crime: Assessing a Contentious Issue". Annual Review of Criminology. 1 (1): 63–84. doi:10.1146/annurev-criminol-032317-092026.
Lee, Matthew T.; Martinez Jr., Ramiro (2009). "Immigration reduces crime: an emerging scholarly consensus". Immigration, Crime and Justice. Emerald Group Publishing. pp. 3–16. ISBN 978-1-84855-438-2. Archived from the original on 24 February 2024. Retrieved 25 May 2016.
not a large correlation, but it is negative...
Immigration brings alien cultures. One cultural marker is the treatment of women, which differs widely across the world. That is the point.
As noted in many countries sexual violence against women is not recognized at all. Palestine, for example.
Rape and sexual assault has never been acceptable in European states, including those in North America. It has always been punished, often severely.
As you point out whole swathes of the world are indifferent to rape. The expected norm there is the woman is chaperoned by a male relative. If she is not then she is fair game.
As for intervention. The current climate is so anti-male in the west most men would be well advised to not get involved. Even if a rape is occurring. Daniel Perry in New York has been charged for intervening in a crime against a woman, and he is not alone.
If feminists were sincere about women's rights they'd be condemning a huge chunk of the world where women are regularly abused. They instead focus on minor tensions here in the west.
So because of a particular legal case you are advising men not to intervene when women are assaulted or in your words "even if rape is occurring" because the lawman may not be on our side. That is pretty darn cynical coming from someone who wrote an entire peice about caution being the path to mediocrity. If I ever find myself in a situation where I see a woman is being assaulted I intend to act in defense of those unable to defend themselves. I would probably make a fool of myself being as I am not the man I once was in the Army. Probably get the shit beaten out of me. Maybe even get my fool self killed. But it is preferable to doing nothing and living with that, knowing I could have tried to do something and simply chose not to because I did not want the to risk a district attorney going after me. I will never understand people who waxed poetic about how important "the sound of freedom" was and frequently discuss their love of wood chippers on social media and then they turn around and say that men should not intervene to stop a rape because we live in a "anti male culture". I admit I am not going out actively looking for these sad sacks who commit these crimes. Maybe that is a moral indictment of my character. But if I happen to be there if and when something like that is happening I hope I have the courage to do the right thing and put myself between that woman who is being assaulted and the sad sack doing the assaulting. I already carry enough guilt and shame for not being able to defend my mother as a boy from domestic violence. I don't want something else like that to carry around in my head for the rest of my life knowing I could have tried to do something even if I failed in the attempt.
As far as I am concerned any man who sees a freaking rape happening in front of him in real time and does not intervene because he was scared Alvin Bragg is going to come after him deserves to have his man card revoked.
I suppose it is easy for me to say this. I have no family. If I die attempting to intervene or am thrown in prison for intervening against a rapist no one is going to much care or notice my absence. The federal government will save about 45,000 dollars a year. Katherine will be down one yearly subscriber and my friends will have one less friend to game with and the world will go on. No one will be missing a husband or grow up without a father. So maybe it is easier for me to be blase about the consequences of attempting to intervene. I hope my moral calculus would not be swayed by such factors but I guess I could understand why some would choose their family over taking a risk protecting a stranger. But then again it could happen to someone we care about. And we weren't there because we were at work or not around for whatever reason and someone else could have done something and didn't because they didn't want to take a risk their family would be I think when you are talking about rape. People have a duty to intervene against a rape. You are explicitly stating men should not intervene in something as serious as rape on account of Daniel Penny being prosecuted. I think that is a sorry cop out of an excuse. If I go to prison for attempting to stop a rapist I can live with that. I intend to intervene if I saw something like that happening in front of me. As I hope any decent man would. And I hope if I saw that happening and did not intervene that I would be ostracized for not living up to my duties as a man and for not living up to my word on something so fundamental to decency. It's shameful to say something like that. You have the right to say it of course but I think it utterly rephensible to say men would be well advised to not intervene even in the event of something so serious as a rape because of the Daniel Penny trial. What kind of fragile man child nonsense is this. Daniel Penny said he had "no regrets" and the guy he killed in a chokehold for threatening passengers was not actively raping anyone. If Daniel Penny is your moral guide do you think he would discourage people from intervening to stop a freaking rape because of fear of prosecution. Sorry but if the government has fallen to the point that district attorneys are prosecuting members of public for coming to the aid of a woman being raped then we have bigger problems than fear of prosecution and disdain for the "anti male culture" I think what was just suggested is how things like Tahrir Sqaure happen. Just turn a blind eye and look away because you are frustrated. You know that whole bit about weak men and bad times. It could have been written for the bitter self serving mentality expressed in that comment discouraging men from intervening against rape. I am not going to let my willingness to act against something as vile as rape be governed by what the left wing fringe of feminists fails to condemn being done in other countries. W T F. That's freaking mental.
FYI the Marine in New York is Daniel Penny, not "Perry".
Thanks for the correction, I knew it was something like that. You raise some interesting points. But the original piece was about how men ought to do more. Like many I am tired of this mantra. While men are denigrated in the west, while many support importing men f on primitive parts of the world who are cool with abusing women, it is western men who must do more. It is a farce and increasing numbers of men are dropping out as a result.
As for Penny, he serves as a warning. Masculinity has been attacked for a long time in western nations. It is feared. So penny is more than an isolated case, he represents a trend. Your intervention may be harshly punished. That is not the sign of a society comfortable with masculine men. That's why many are retreating and refusing to help. Tragic, but predictable.
Well I find it contemptible that fear of prosecution is now being used as an excuse to not intervene against something as awful as a rape. Might as well just run up the white flag of surrender to the Taliban at that point if that's the mindset you want for the men of America. You can make your choices to sit on the sidelines. I will make mine and I hope that fear of a district attorney doesn't EVER weigh in my calculations on doing the right thing. I know all too well the kind of society we will live in if any significant number of men actually pay heed to the mindset you espoused. Saw it first hand in Afghanistan. It's no way to live. Yes there is a possibility that I may be harshly punished by the authorities. I may get killed or get beaten to a bloody pulp and not be able to live a normal life. But you better believe I am going to intervene regardless if I witness a rape in my proximity where I can physically place myself between the attacker and the person being attacked.
There can be no courage if there is no risk and you are saying the risk of prosecution is too great to intervene. Sorry but if we don't draw the line at intervening when we have the power to try to disrupt a rape attempt we are done as a society and no amount of cowering and hiding in a corner in fear of an alvin bragg will save us because sooner or later it will happen to someone we know and care about. And I think what you proposed is probably the most cowardly thing I have heard of since the Coward of Broward didn't intervene to try to save those kids.
I hope if ever in the course of the events of your life you have the misfortune of witnessing a rape that you have a change of heart in that moment and cast this cynical attitude aside in the moment and man up and do the right thing, or at least have the basic human freaking decency to call the police to get them to deal with it.
I don't think that is the dynamic. Younger men are constantly being told they are toxic, harmful and surplus to requirements. Fewer are marrying, and women are focusing more on career.
So the men seem to be withdrawing, not refusing to intervene as such. The key attribute is indifference. This is especially true of white men according to the figures although increasingly includes blacks and Hispanics too.
It is a feminized world. They are reaping what they sow. Tragic, but predictable. It is seen all through history. If men cannot find wives and do not produce kids, they withdraw and society collapses. That's why the church pushed monogamy so hard. The alternative created unstable societies and dangerous ones for women.
Interesting times ahead.
I don't pretend to begin to understand your reasoning. I don't think rape is women reaping the results of a feminized world. It is a problem as old as humanity. Probably it even predates modern humans as such behavior is observed in other primates.
I think the rosy veener you you see western civilization through is ignoring the fact that until recently marital rape was not viewed as a crime. We still have some troglodyte legislators who refuse to accept that it is a crime. We are only recently with the past century advanced beyond the point of refusing women the vote or other legal protections of citizenship. I don't think feminism is the cause. I think people who feel resentment at the gains in social standing of women over the past 100 years will grasp for excuses to advise other men to not do that which they know to be the right thing. My inability to get married shouldn't hold any sway over whether or not I intervene as a good Samaritan against a horrific criminal act in progress. I think telling men "The current climate is so anti-male in the west most men would be well advised to not get involved. Even if a rape is occurring." Is utterly rephensible and deeply cynical.
My loneliness and lack of success in relationships is a weak and cynical excuse to not try to do something when something so awful is occuring within my proximity to try to stop it. I was raised better than that.
I didn't say rape was them reaping what they sow. The indifference of men was, as I outlined.
I don't see anything through a rosy veneer. I just read history. And we have never been soft on rape. Centuries ago in England it was often a capital offence, for instance.
And spare me the lecture on marital rape. It is famously difficult to prove. Same for votes for women. Most people only recently got the vote. Most men in America and Britain only got it 20 years before females. You are shaky on history. The majority of women didn't want the vote because of the responsibilities that came with it. These are feminist revisionist talking points.
No one feels resentment about women's standing. We have accepted almost all feminist demands. It is women who are complaining, not men. Even some feminists have commented on this observation. Women are never happy, another basic observation even women admit.
Men gave them all they asked for, including job quotas. And now, in the West, women's happiness is in steep decline because they are not having kids and are now expected to work for a living. Their doing not men's.
The really troubling statistic that is bothering the feminists is women are now less happy than men, a first in history. Females have dipped below males in terms of happiness. Traditionally it was men who were less happy. This is also reflected in antidepressant prescriptions. Women take them at record levels. Modern life is not working for women it would seem. And it isn't rape that is depressing them.
As for men not getting involved. It doesn't matter what either of us think. The stats are there, and they are stark. Men are withdrawing from society. They are not marrying, they are not interacting socially with women, and increasingly they are not intervening in assaults. There is a growing body of video evidence of women being assaulted and harassed and no one intervenes. Tragic, but the sign of a low trust society in decline. It is also the norm in many parts of the world.
Good for you for wanting to help. I have done so myself in the past to assist women. My comments are not about me, or you. They are observations about society. It has changed. The treatment of Daniel Penny is just one example.