A conversation about conversations about bigotry

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by Relm Zephyrous

A. I got the topic up that was truly at hand, Snake believed that as long as there are more than 0 that think this way it doesn't matter how many do,

Here's hoping I don't word this the wrong way. Not an attack on you personally, Relm, just my position explained.

...Yes and no. That simultaneously is an accurate reflection of my opinion, and an inaccurate one.

It's accurate in the sense that, yes, so long as more than zero men believe that a woman's clothing constitutes implicit consent to sexual activity, that is disgusting and we should all be appalled and condemn that. I think that's the obvious part, though. The tricky part is next.

It's inaccurate in the sense that, there are always going to be deviants and criminals and sociopaths. Even without rape culture contributing to things -- even in a hypothetical 'perfect society' in which men and women had always been equal participants, in which accusations of rape were treated with the deference deserved...there would still be men who'd break away from the established cultural standards in this theoretical utopia and have no problem indulging in the abhorrent. I don't think even the most sterling of progressive thinkers could dare promise a world where rape simply never happened, though I'd be fascinated to read the perspective of someone who thought it could be done.

There's few groups that are as universally frowned upon as Nazis these days, but that hasn't stopped a crazed minority with their Neo-Nazi movements. Similarly, even in an ideal culture where privilege was a thing of the past, individual rape victims would still exist. I can't imagine there's realistically a way to eradicate any kind of crime, unfortunately enough. In an ideal world, the perpetrators would generally get caught, the legal penalties would be far more severe, songs and movies wouldn't celebrate rape, perpetrators would be viewed as scum of the Earth, societal standards of so-called 'romance' wouldn't dictate the existence of consent where none actually existed, everyone would be thoroughly educated to ask for consent before engaging in said activity, and all kinds of services would be available to benefit victims.

...But I imagine that, in reality, there'd always be a percentage -- a small percentage -- of men who'd just be, as I'll refer to them here, Fucking Dipshit Assholes. It doesn't matter what kind of culture you immerse Fucking Dipshit Assholes in, they'll always be Fucking Dipshit Assholes.

The key is that they should constitute a very small percentage of the population. And, under no hypothetical circumstance, should they ever constitute a majority of the populace of men -- let alone 83.5%. In any poll. Of any sub-population of men in society.

You see, the issue of semantics we're having, Relm, is that you're repeatedly questioning the authenticity of the statistical data, and I'm saying that in this case the authenticity of said data doesn't really matter. That's not because the mere existence of a single man out there, somewhere, who'd have really fucking abhorrent views on rape would be enough to send me over the edge. Oh, I'd hate that guy. We all should. But that wouldn't be enough to merit a broad condemnation of society as a whole, as I'm sure you'd agree.

The difference here is that 83.5% is such a high percentage that -- even assuming an obscenely high margin of error -- there's no justification for that percentage. Heck, I'd say ten percent -- which is a considerably smaller number than 83.5% -- is way too large a number. When you're polling regarding criminal tendencies -- and that's what this would be, insofar as men who answer the question affirmative are tacitly admitting under certain circumstances they'd view a crime as permissible behavior -- you're hoping that number is less than one percent.

The mere fact that, in apparently about 30-someodd colleges out there, 83.5% of men answered a question with "Yeah, sure, I'd argue if a girl's walking around dressed up like a slut, that means she wants to have sex and it's okay for a guy to coerce sex from her" is disturbing as all hell.

To take this one step further, imagine instead that the poll asked whether it was permissible to kill your neighbor's children if those children were trespassing on your yard. Then, imagine that in a poll -- any poll, of any neighborhood, anywhere -- indicated that 83.5% of the people thought, yeah, under certain extreme circumstances it'd be totally okay to kill a trespassing kid. Even if later inquiry revealed that the question was somewhat misleading and that half of the respondents botched the poll, that's still way too high a statistic, and we would feel comfortable making judgments upon the moral values of that neighborhood, because clearly the problem isn't just with an individual deviant or two, it's that the entire neighborhood seems to glorify killing kids. Now imagine that dozens upon dozens of other polls reinforced this general consensus, and you start to get the idea.

Taking that one statistic in tandem with all the other statistics we have available regarding rape...because statistics don't exist in vacuums and different polls can contribute to painting the same dominant picture -- it's clear that the problem here isn't just about an extreme minority of men engaging in deviant activity in an otherwise ideal society. The problem is that there's an entire culture perpetuating myths about rape, so much so that a statistically significant number of men -- including men who'd never consciously consider themselves rapists -- view coercive activity as 'acceptable' under certain circumstances.

That's a cultural problem, it's a byproduct of centuries of privilege enjoyed by men at the expense of women, and I'd hope we'd all agree that it needs to stop.

So, from that perspective, it doesn't matter whether the 'accurate' numbers are that 83.5% of men think that way, or 10% of men think that way. Even if the poll was so far off that seven out of every eight men who responded "Yeah, sure, if she's dressed that way she wants it" somehow misunderstood the question and really didn't mean that answer, that still means one out of every ten men a woman meets in her lifetime will have no problem viewing her as a willing sex participant based solely on how she is dressed. And that's far too high a percentage.

Getting back to why I found your original post, way back when, so offensive, it's because regardless of what you intended, the argument you were advancing happens to coincide exactly with the kinds of arguments used to downplay and minimize the impact of statistics concerning the prevalence of sexual assault. Claiming that the statistics are flawed really doesn't add anything to the conversation when, even assuming you are right and that specific question was worded poorly, far too many men would still answer the question affirmatively, and dozens of other polls exist that confirm massive societal misperceptions about how 'rape' and 'consent' are defined. As Nique noted, it's derailing.

Whether 83.5% -- or some lesser number, like 60% or 40% or 10% or even 2% -- of men truly do believe what the poll implies is subsequently irrelevant. That doesn't mean "it doesn't matter how many people believe this so long as more than zero do." It means that when any statistically significant percentage answers a poll that way, the only possible explanation is that our government has failed, our schools have failed, our media has failed, our legal system has failed, and we've all failed past and future rape victims, and that's simply unacceptable.