If It Happened To Men…

I was watching a ‘Big Ideas’ episode on child soldiers and one of the guest speakers mentioned that a member of an organization for female victims of war rape in the Congo said, ‘if it happened to men it would have been ended years ago.’

If it happened to men, it would have ended years ago.

Years ago.

Here are those stats again on rape in the Congo.


Rates of reported sexual violence were 39.7% among women and 23.6% among men. Women reported to have perpetrated conflict-related sexual violence in 41.1% of female cases and 10.0% of male cases.

Other studies put the rate of men in vulnerable populations (war prisoners) who are raped at 70-80%.

Not only are men being raped but NGOs are covering up the atrocity for fear of losing funding for female victims of war rape.

So if all war rape was happening to men, the quoted woman is absolutely right.

She’s right because it wouldn’t have been called an atrocity, no one would be bringing light to it, no one would care, no one would help. So, effectively, it would not exist.

Except for the men being raped, of course.

36 thoughts on “If It Happened To Men…

  1. How about “if men were mainly killed in wars, there would be no more wars”?

    It makes about as much sense.

    Obviously-moronic statements are fine, so long as the aims are to score points against the oppressor-class and to get the Sisterhood to nod their heads in sage, resentful agreement.

  2. These people are moral imbeciles. It’s that simple. They are defective. It is a character disorder they have no moral conscience. and all their moralizing does is cover their amorality

  3. I think this blog is therapy for me. Whenever I hear something mind-boggling… at least I feel like I’m not shouting into the endless void of nothing.

  4. They apparently also like to inflate the numbers of female victims. I don’t think that these women’s advocacy groups actually care about women apart from how it fits into an ideological agenda. If they did care, they would want to gather the most accurate statistics possible and weigh the “men hurt women” issues against all the other ways in which women are suffering. These NGOs aren’t just afraid of losing money for their cause… they are afraid of letting it go to something like AIDS, malaria, reforrestation, agriculture, economic development, etc.. These are causes that affect women the most but it’s hard to make the case that women suffer more than men or pretend that it’s men’s fault.

  5. It’s a statement so utterly over-the-top out of touch with reality, that you got to wonder: It must be possible to get them to look at this, to get them to question the ideology that could make them say something so plainly ridiculous.

  6. I got the following hateful email from a woman named Kathy Grandt, from Port Richey, Florida, after she had received a link to my Boycott American Women blog. Here it is:

    From: Kathy Grandt
    To: John Rambo
    Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 5:48 PM
    Subject: Re: Boycott American Women

    JOHN RAMBO IS A FUCKING ASSHOLE! HOPEFULLY HE DOES NOT LIVE IN THIS COUNTRY AND IF HE DOES, HE SHOULD BE SHOT IN FRONT OF A FIRING SQUAD MADE UP OF STRICTLY AMERICAN WOMEN!!!

    WOW. So if a man decides to NOT marry an American woman, he should be shot and murdered?

    THIS IS HOW HATEFUL, SEXIST, AND EVIL AMERICAN WOMEN HAVE BECOME. I suggest you write to Kathy and ask her why she is promoting MURDER of MEN? She is one sick woman, for sure. If anyone can track down where she works, we can also write to her employer and ask them why they are employing a woman who thinks it is okay to murder men.

    Here is her email: kwolv1@yahoo.com
    Here is her Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001131547214

    The name of her daughter is Christina Costantino, and her daughter’s Facebook profile is here: http://www.facebook.com/ccostantino1
    Christina’s email is: lilcc2002@yahoo.com
    I suggest you write to her daughter and ask her why her mother has such deep hatred for men that she thinks it is okay to murder men.

  7. “Obviously-moronic statements are fine, so long as the aims are to score points against the oppressor-class and to get the Sisterhood to nod their heads in sage, resentful agreement.”

    Are you talking about the caring feminist writers who used the Penn State tragedy to criticize the “boys clubs” (some irony!) and promote women.

    “Could Women Have Saved Penn State?”

    Never once did they mention that men would have certainly reported that happening to girls. Keeping to the dialogue is right!

  8. “I think this blog is therapy for me. Whenever I hear something mind-boggling… at least I feel like I’m not shouting into the endless void of nothing.”

    No worries its all just relative truth, right?

  9. So it would appear that victimization of men by men is almost equal to victimization of women by men in the Congo (24 women for every 22 men are victimized by men. While 16 women are victimized by women for very 2.3 men victimized by women. It is only women’s preference for victimizing other women that results in more women being victimized.

  10. This sort of thing is why I don’t have much sympathy for most complaints about “derailment” or “what about the menz?!” when people bring up male victims. So damned many people talking about female victims are already talking about- and insulting, belittling, or erasing- victimized men without ever acknowledging that they’re doing so.

    fondueguy,

    I remember that article. Considering how many women have stood by and tolerated the sexual abuse of THEIR OWN CHILDREN- to say nothing of women who commit such crimes themselves- the whole premise of it was just jaw-droppingly silly. And probably a cruel slap in the face to many people who suffered first-hand experience of just how wrong the author’s assumptions were.

    This whole subject puts me in mind of a ghastly article at Jezebel on the Penn State news a few months back about how, if the victims were girls, they wouldn’t be receiving the shower of concern and beneficence the boys abused at Penn State were clearly getting. I also saw quite a few people talking about how, clearly, the sort of cruelty female victims of sexual crimes are often subjected to would never be tolerated if it happened to males. Meanwhile, one of the boys whose identity got out was so severely bullied as a result that he had to drop out of school.

  11. Well bear in mind that when talking about the war going on in that area of the world for the most part the only time males are every brought up is when they are doing something terrible. Even now I’m convinced that the only reason people are talking about boys who are taken (or basically kidnapped) and forced to fight are only being talked about now because helping them translates into the official reason for wanting to do something about the problems in that part of the world, and that is to “help women and girls”.

    In other words I almost dare say that if we woke up tomorrow and all of a sudden only boys and men were getting killed in that part of the world (civilian and forced/non-forced combatant) we would not hear a peep out of that area.

  12. I am a Penn Stater but was not closely following the MRM when the Jerry Sandusky Scandal broke, so I followed it entirely from a Penn State perspective. It disgusts me to learn that feminist sites like Jezebel.com were claiming such things when it is so far from the truth. The insane amount of coverage stemmed from one thing and one thing only: The desire to bring down Joe Paterno and Penn State. Joe Pa, and Penn State by virtue of being closely tied with Joe Pa, were the object of grudges by many who work for the state government and in the media. Their intent was obvious in every single bit of coverage.

    The only time the victims were mentioned was in statements like “Penn State students are insane, this is about the victims, not Joe Paterno.” followed by a few hours of coverage on Joe Pa’s involvement and what was happening to him. As someone who was there, my fellow students showed a hell of a lot more concern for the victims than the media did. Yes, we did have a rally or two supporting Joe Pa, but we had many more fundraising events for sexual abuse victims, collecting hundreds of thousands, a huge huge candlelight vigil for the victims which had more people than any of the aforementioned rallies, and much more. All of that was barely mentioned in the media of course. The media’s victim concern was drummed up for the sole reason of destroying Joe Paterno and Penn State, that’s it.

    I know I don’t need to prove it to any frequenter of this site, but if anybody needs anymore evidence you can look at the Syracuse scandal that came out at nearly the same time. Male victims, minimal coverage. Or maybe you know, look at all the other male victims of abuse that get no coverage. Oh wait, you can’t, because they “don’t exist”. I wonder why.

  13. @CandidIgloo
    “The only time the victims were mentioned was in statements …”

    …….Is when they serve as fodder for the agenda. It is objectification in its purest form.

    @dungone
    “They apparently also like to inflate the numbers of female victims. I don’t think that these women’s advocacy groups actually care about women apart from how it fits into an ideological agenda.”

    And that ideological agenda is driven by a psychologicla agenda – in everything and in every way, woemn are the only real victims of anything, and no particle of fact can be allowed to intefere with that.

    “It’s a statement so utterly over-the-top out of touch with reality, that you got to wonder: It must be possible to get them to look at this, to get them to question the ideology that could make them say something so plainly ridiculous.

    Vintermann, they have a faith-based worldview and contrary facts are not enough to perturb it.

  14. It’s stories like this that have contributed to my eschewing what little faith I had in humanity from my person.

    Everytime, the discussion is always steered to helping women and how it affects them more. It’s just sickening that society’d rather give an inch to women while ignoring or minimising what men who have been hurt by women go through.

    Like I said: The number of resources and articles on boys bullying girls, girls bullying girls, boys bullying boys – Too numerous to count

    The number of resources and articles on girls bullying boys – Two. One written by me.

  15. I’m also seeing another logic problem, in that the primary effect of war is not rape, but MURDER. And that’s been going on for many, many years–often primarily affecting men–without end.

    So much for the “only men’s problems get addressed” theory. Of course, there are extremists in the feminist camp who will claim that rape is WORSE than murder, but that’s another topic entirely.

  16. @ Copyleft

    There are extremists in the _gynocentrist_ camp who will claim that rape is worse then murder.

    This is an attitude that existed long before feminism.

    It’s not that feminism created this ‘women first’ bullcrap, it’s that it failed to challenge it sufficiently.

  17. Typhoneblue: “It’s not that feminism created this ‘women first’ bullcrap, it’s that it failed to challenge it sufficiently.”

    And certain strains actually supported this to their advantage.

  18. “There are extremists in the _gynocentrist_ camp who will claim that rape is worse then murder.
    This is an attitude that existed long before feminism.’

    See also Jim Crow, lynching, Scottsboro Boys etc.

  19. Well, let’s be generous: When confronted, a lot of feminists will talk about the need to talk about violence against men.

    But their talk never goes beyond talking about the need to talk about it. Then, having established themselves as scrupulously fair and compassionate, they’ll switch the conversation back to the truly important matters, such as the epidemic of male construction workers who wolf-whistle when you walk down the street and the pro-rape messages embedded within vodka advertisements.

  20. The Guardian article linked was absolutely one of the most heartbreaking things I’ve ever read. Thanks for shining light on this.

  21. Celeste, that article was heartbreaking but the resopnse was very encouraging. Where male rape victims usually get dismissed as anomalies, as somehow less vicitmized, as less of an issue, and where it was reasonable to expect the same response in the case of that article, that is not what happened. People, especially women people, were horrified; they listened and took the information in and reacted with horror. And that was huge progress.

  22. TyphonBlue:
    I just encountered a group of thoroughly non-feminist people on a gaming forum arguing that rape is worse than murder because rape victims require more assistance than murder victims (why were they discussing this on a gaming forum? no idea, but it’s fairly common). They were seriously advancing this position. This is clearly a problem that runs deeper and more widespread than the extremist camp.

    This sort of thing almost makes me glad I had my faith in the goodness of humanity beaten out of me before I actually had a chance to develop any. I can only imagine how painful seeing this sort of thing must have been for an optimist like Hunter S. Thompson.

    Also, while I’m all for the application of specific terms, I really do think that anyone raising the banner of feminism needs to accept some blame, not merely for “failing to change” these attitudes, but for promoting and sheltering them under the guise of progress. Naturally they do not all merit the same kind of judgment as those who actively do harm, but they must nevertheless receive the justice of “a pin, a cork and a card” (to borrow Doyle’s phrase). Nothing less than the absolute taxonomy of ideas will suffice. To put it more simply, the ‘big tent’ is, by virtue of being a big tent, problematic. It must be burned and anyone caught up in its collapse deserves whatever they get for helping to prop it up. Of course, stopping there would be no proper justice. As you say, the prejudices they embody are far older and more widespread than their movement. It is an unacceptable failing on the part of movements for revolution and reformation throughout history that the bulk of society are never by any chance brought to judgment for their collective failings.

  23. “I just encountered a group of thoroughly non-feminist people on a gaming forum arguing that rape is worse than murder because rape victims require more assistance than murder victims…”

    Bizarre rationalization.

    What I think this really is is privileging sex above everything else. Sexual assaults are the worst thing evah because they are ….sexual!!!!!

    That out-seized emphasis on sex may be age-related. You said it was in a gaming forum? – age-related desu.

  24. I think they are saying that it is better to rape AND murder someone than to simply rape them. Well, murder DOES end all suffering!

  25. That’s a good point, but I don’t think privileging sex in that way is unique to young people (it may be unique to juvenile minds, but those are hardly limited to juvenile bodies). The ease with which anything sexual can completely derail mainstream political debate suggests to me that this is a cultural phenomenon. With regards to youth, the standards we set with the various ratings systems for media would certainly seem to encourage such an attitude (sexuality is far more strictly monitored and restricted than violence in mainstream entertainment, which says a lot about our culture’s attitude on the subject).

    One other way I can imagine someone coming to that conclusion is that sexual assault, unlike murder, leaves a victim who can talk about what happened to them and express how horrible it was. I think that probably does a lot to make it more “real” for some people.

    Aych:
    I did actually see some people pointing that out, although the only response they got was endless obfuscation. I think one of them might have been serious (gaming forums attract horrible people. I visit them for my daily equivalent of the five minute hate).

    Ginko:
    Never end an English sentence like that again. You can’t see me because the Earth is in the way, but I’m glaring at you right now. Anyway, it’s the wrong verb form for typing comments on a site like this.

  26. Hiding: It just confuses me, that’s all. How about euthanizing people who say they’ve been raped? Is that worth consideration? If so, it’s a really scary idea to me because… well, I have to explain…

    If “unenthusiastic sex after a glass of Merlot” counts as a rape (and I have been assured many times that it does), then I can recall suffering maybe a dozen or so rapes off the top of my head. There were also plenty of other times in which I had sex without saying a clear, unambiguous “yes,” and I’ve been told that’s rape as well. The worst thing is that my so-called “ex-girlfriends” and “one night stands” are STILL walking-around today, as free as the wind. I dare not come-forward to tell the police because they might doubt my story.

    I’ve been raped repeatedly by medical professionals as well. As an infant, I was told thermometers had been inserted inside my rectum on more than one occasion. Tongue-depressors were put into my mouth. Swabs into my nose and ears. I certainly did not consent to any of that. In fact, my parents were complicit in these repeated rapes.

    As an adult, I do not like having prostate or colon-cancer exams so I cannot say I am really an “enthusiastic” participant in those procedures. I’ve also had an endoscope put-down my throat and I wasn’t really “enthusiastic” about that, either. So these are more rapes to add to the pile. Furthermore, I have always had a feeling of dread whenever I entered a dental office, and the book “The Courage to Heal” assures me that such a feeling is definitely a sign that sexual abuse has happened to me at some point in the past. Since I was once under anesthesia for a wisdom tooth extraction, I can’t tell you with certainty if the dentist didn’t rape my unconscious body. (And why didn’t the nurse call the police? Maybe she raped me too? Or, at the very least, she had to have been complicit.)

    Finally, we mustn’t discount the possibility that there were plenty of other rapes that I can’t remember because I’ve pushed them deep into my subconscious mind. How many of those repressed rapes did I suffer without even knowing it? 5? 10? 50? 1,000? I have no way of knowing. Where did they happen to me? When? Prove to me that I haven’t repressed thousands of rapes by now? Or even millions of rapes? You can’t! In fact, your merest doubtful expression is enough to traumatize me all over again. You rape-enabling scum, you.

    So would murdering me have been preferable to suffering through all of the above?

    /s Heh. I’m being “insensitive” again, aren’t I? :)

  27. There’s generally an exception considered for medical procedures, but if you want a grayer area, try “discipline” that involves putting something in a child’s mouth like in A Christmas Story. I’m pretty sure that most young kids would prefer having a dildo in their mouths than a bar of soap, but only one of those will land a parent in prison for sexual assault (or at all).

  28. @Hiding
    “Ginko:
    Never end an English sentence like that again. You can’t see me because the Earth is in the way, but I’m glaring at you right now. Anyway, it’s the wrong verb form for typing comments on a site like this”

    Okay. It’s just Ocean Dwarf – 洋倭- gibberish anyway. Actually I was riffing on GI Korean where you add -da to the ends of sentences.

    Aych, that’s so much rape that we could press oil out of you.

  29. Ginko:
    Oh, I see. I know as something that the most annoying of annoying English-speaking anime fans (although they don’t hold a candle to how annoying the Japanese ones can be) do because they think it’s cool/funny. What a coincidence, “-da” would actually be the more appropriate ending in this case (I’ve never seen anyone using the more formal “-desu” form for this sort of casual writing. Even in formal writing it’s relatively rare). Of course, you’d probably want to make in “-nanda” or “-dakara” instead. It’s silly to put the verb “to be” at the end when it’s already there in English, anyway.

    Huh, I never knew even the Chinese called the Japanese short. That’s kind of hilarious.

    Aych:
    What are the people who go on about “enthusiastic consent” actually preaching? I’ve never seen them commit to anything concrete, so I’ve never been able to form much of an opinion on them beyond the fact that they don’t bother to consider people that can’t read body language.

  30. Dinosaurs: What are the people who go on about “enthusiastic consent” actually preaching? I’ve never seen them commit to anything concrete…

    You want my opinion? Well, here goes…

    Exactly whose consent are they talking about? And whose enthusiasm? They’re not talking about men’s consent or men’s enthusiasm. They couldn’t care less about them, in fact.

    It’s a gynocentric framing which always demands ever-higher standards of behavior and accountability from men while holding women to no standards and demanding from women zero accountability. They don’t expect men to be humans, they expect men to be human-shaped sexual appliances with conveniently-placed ON/OFF switches. And they don’t want women to be “partners” in sex, they want women to be holding all of the cards. Their notion of “consent” strays not one inch beyond the limits of the woman’s comfort zone. Anything beyond that is basically rape.

    And why do I think this? Because I’ve seen how the attitudes of Jezebel denizens change when the topic turns to couples in which the woman’s sex drive is higher than that of the man. That’s when they switch from “no means no” to talking about how there needs to be “compromise.” (Compromise? After a “no”? But “no means no”, remember? No means no! Right? Well, not any more. Not when the woman is hearing “no”.) In contrast, Dennis Prager once suggested on his radio show that wives should consider “compromise” if the husband says he isn’t getting enough. But he was roundly condemned by Jezebel feminists for being a pro-rape advocate. So that’s all you need to know about them: total gynocentrism.

    Whenever a feminist says ANYTHING, she typically doesn’t mean it to apply to both sexes. Her blade is never supposed to cut both ways. She means her words to be interpreted so that the outcomes are personally convenient for herself; she labels this outcome “equality” because it sounds nice and it makes her feel all warm & fuzzy inside.

    So that’s what “enthusiastic consent” means: HER enthusiastic consent, because you don’t need to worry about seeking the consent of an appliance. There is absolutely NOTHING in their worldview that would restrain a woman is abusive, selfish or lazy but there is plenty that would manufacture endless excuses for such behavior. But that’s just my opinion.

    So whenever they say stuff like: “Oh no no no, you’re all wrong, Aych. It’s ALL about equality!” you just need to substitute “equality” with “what’s convenient for me & my friends.”

  31. Aych and others:
    I’ll give one example. Since its from a BDSM blog, I’ll extract the relevent parts:

    “Last year I traveled a lot. Some of that travel was overseas, and while I was abroad I met a self-identified dominant. He and I clicked, and had quite a connection. I do not often have that connection with people, and so I was quite taken. We spent several days together. I even wrote about how awesome he was at one point. We played, I did some service stuff with him, and it was fantastic. We got on well, talking for hours, fooling around, playing. The third day we were together, we’d spent all evening and into the night playing and some of the play was quite sexual. I was in a very deep submissive headspace, and enjoying letting go, since this is so rare for me.
    The play became more sexual, and many hours into the play he was insisting on sexual intercourse. Which, actually, I wanted. However when I realized he was NOT wearing a condom I pulled away and said “I need for you to wear a condom, I don’t fuck without them.” He insisted it was OK, he just wanted a little “…in and out a few strokes, you know…” and I said “That’s not safe and you know it, just wear a condom, I have some…” He became more insistent, continuing the physical play and genital contact. After this back and forth exchange, him insisting more aggressively and my saying “No, don’t do that.” at some point I just stopped saying no and he penetrated me without protection. After a few strokes, he pulled out and said “See, no big deal.” and continued the play.”

    She goes on to say it was a full week later before it “began to sink in”. She gets herself tested of course for STD’s and comes back negative. She doesn’t initially say anything to this individual, but when she does confront him she accuses him of “taking advantage” of someone in altered mental state – ‘subspace’.
    Subspace, for those who don’t know, is a feeling involving the surrender of ones body and involves lots of endorphins and emotions.

    Now let me state bluntly that, to me, what happened here was a form of rather minor sexual assault, or if they had a “4th degree rape” charge I might go with that. He penetrated her for a few strokes without a condom when she only wanted to be penetrated with a condom.

    What interests me is her reaction to the whole thing. Apparently , at first -whether because she was “numb” or for whatever other reason – it was no big deal. Then weeks later she starts thinking and the more she thinks the more upset she gets as if it’s a spiral of indignition. To the extent that she throws rationality, and heck, personal responsibility totally out the window.

    I’m looking forward to the logical extension of this last argument of hers: “I was in a horny mood, your honor, and he took advantage of me!”. Yes, who knew that putting someone in subspace was the same as drugging them?

    And these people think they are going to tell us how to lead better sex lives? Heaven help us all.

  32. Clarence: oh, absolutely, excssive lust means she wasn’t in control of her faculties and the brute knowingly took advantage of her precarious mental state. Just as if a roofie had been slipped into her drink.

    Really, some women are oppressed by the burden of adult responsibilities and must be freed from them.

  33. Pingback: Si Le Sucediera a Los Hombres

  34. Pingback: ¿Los Hombres son Desechables? ¡Es culpa de los hombres!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>