Lots of broken personality detectors going around I see
.
I got reminded of this when reading a @Misogynist Vegeta thread about the meaninglessness of feminist terms like "sexual assault" and how they are just meant to demonize men and give every woman a claim to have been "victimized". In that thread, I argued that, although this hadn't reached the mainstream yet, the constant broadening of what rape and sexual violence in general mean might've been a massive mistake by feminists, considering that it just gives others something to be turned around and used against feminist narratives of female-only victimhood. It hadn't trickled down to mainstream understanding yet, where people's understanding of rape and sexual assault is still that of male strangers brutally raping women on the street just because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but when you look at papers like these, you can see how uncomfortable a good number of feminist researchers are at the numbers that actually pop up once you broaden all dimensions of what constitutes rape (the actions themselves, tactics, victim-perpetrator relationship and so on) and start asking both men and women.
For example, this study's subjects were 50% female. The full text isn't publicly available and isn't on Sci-Hub either, however, the fact that gender differences are not once mentioned in the abstract, nor is any effect of gender shown in any of the tables we can see on ResearchGate, makes me think that the all-female team behind this study... hadn't found any differences there. That must've been uncomfortable, given that, since one of them is from RAINN, you just know they were all ready to reveal all the "marital rape" that happens because married men are entitled misogynists...
One piece of evidence that that is exactly what happened is how, in the table with open-ended answers describing the perpetrators' tactics and reasons for what they did, you see the exact same amount (five each) answers talking about doing it to a "he" as about doing it to a "she".
.I got reminded of this when reading a @Misogynist Vegeta thread about the meaninglessness of feminist terms like "sexual assault" and how they are just meant to demonize men and give every woman a claim to have been "victimized". In that thread, I argued that, although this hadn't reached the mainstream yet, the constant broadening of what rape and sexual violence in general mean might've been a massive mistake by feminists, considering that it just gives others something to be turned around and used against feminist narratives of female-only victimhood. It hadn't trickled down to mainstream understanding yet, where people's understanding of rape and sexual assault is still that of male strangers brutally raping women on the street just because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but when you look at papers like these, you can see how uncomfortable a good number of feminist researchers are at the numbers that actually pop up once you broaden all dimensions of what constitutes rape (the actions themselves, tactics, victim-perpetrator relationship and so on) and start asking both men and women.
For example, this study's subjects were 50% female
. The full text isn't publicly available and isn't on Sci-Hub either, however, the fact that gender differences are not once mentioned in the abstract, nor is any effect of gender shown in any of the tables we can see on ResearchGate, makes me think that the all-female team behind this study... hadn't found any differences there. That must've been uncomfortable, given that, since one of them is from RAINN, you just know they were all ready to reveal all the "marital rape" that happens because married men are entitled misogynists...One piece of evidence that that is exactly what happened is how, in the table with open-ended answers describing the perpetrators' tactics and reasons for what they did, you see the exact same amount (five each) answers talking about doing it to a "he" as about doing it to a "she"
.
