New to /MR sub and philosophy. Naturally, it made me more aware of feminism's "claims" (I am afraid to use that word...) Did I just discovered something after 30+ years?

iainmf · 2017-01-20T09:16:22+00:00

Violence in general has been decreasing in the west for a while now and most people are pretty safe.

In perception of crime surveys women often overestimate the risk and report being afraid at much higher rates than you would expect if you looked at the victimisation figures. It is worth considering, however, that women who feel afraid will change their behaviour. I've seen studies showing women don't go out at night as much as men do, for example. People who stay at home will not have the same rate of muggings etc as people who go out.

I'm a 'reals before feels' kinda guy, but I do think that we shouldn't ignore feels completely.

It's also worth thinking about how constant rhetoric about 'violence against women' and '1 in X will be victims' increases fear. Shaming people for 'victim blaming' also prevents discussion about preventative measures and sensible steps to make women can take to feel safer.

It's gotten to the point that some people psychologically harmed by being constantly bombarded with the 'women are victims' narrative. It isn't empowering them, it's weakening them.

girlwriteswhat · 2017-01-20T15:28:22+00:00

There are several significant personality differences between men and women (so much so, that when considered on a trait-by-trait basis, there's only a 10% overlap between the average man and the average woman).

The largest single difference is sensitivity (higher in women). When you remove this from consideration, the overlap increases to 24% (still not a big overlap, but removing sensitivity is enough to more than double it).

Another big difference is vigilance (higher in men), and apprehension (higher in women).

If you're wondering why I mention these two specifically, it's because they're both emotional responses to perceived or potential threats.

Women more often respond with apprehension (fear for one's safety, future, wellbeing), a response possibly amplified by their higher levels of sensitivity. Men more often respond with vigilance (emergency preparedness), and their lower sensitivity and greater emotional stability will dampen some of the visceral fear response.

Of course, there's plenty of variance within the two groups in terms of trait distribution (some women are more sensitive or apprehensive than others, and some men will be more sensitive or apprehensive than some women, etc), but in terms of averages, women are going to be higher than men.

Now consider the causes feminism focusses on (oppression, violence against women, discrimination against women, things that make women feel bad, etc).

It is likely that women highest in sensitivity and apprehension self-select feminism as an outlet or an explanation for their emotional states.

It's also worth considering that a great deal of feminist theory dovetails with the symptoms of Cluster B personality disorders (borderline and histrionic in particular), and that women are roughly 3 to 4 times as likely to be diagnosed with these as men are. Erotomania, delusions of persecution, feelings of being watched or controlled by others, delusions of reference, black and white thinking, and the perception of intentionality where it doesn't exist, etc.

All of these are consistent with quasi-conspiracy theories like "the patriarchy" and "systemic gendered violence against women", which assign motivation and intention to social phenomena. "Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear." --some famous feminist, I think it was Brownmiller.

Try explaining to a really hard core feminist that men "manspread" on the bus because of their external genitalia, their narrower pelvises and their higher center of gravity, and they'll tell you you're just an apologist, and that men actually do it in order to assert their patriarchal dominance over public spaces, and to essentially keep women in their place.

And then add to this the "if it bleeds, it leads" mantra of the news media. Humans are programmed by our biology to seek out and identify potential threats. It's how we survived as a species for the vast majority of our evolution. We have a thirst for scary news, and things that frighten us really stick with us.

So we have a mainstream media that is eager to publish all the "bad news", especially concerning women because of our innate drive to protect them from harm.

Because of gender roles dating back to hunter gatherer days (and likely before), women have adapted in such a way as to tend to respond to threats by identifying them and alerting the group. Men have adapted in such a way as best to respond to threats by identifying them and taking action to neutralize them.

So we have news publishing the scariest statistics, and always digging for scarier ones, particularly where women are concerned, and we have men in positions of power often promising to take action to protect women from dangers that may not exist. Everyone feels very comfortable with this arrangement, because it feeds our innate drives and personalities.

Lethn · 2017-01-20T10:41:33+00:00

The only time I have seen women getting attacked by men as a genuine pandemic the way feminists describe is either in Islamic countries, places with a majority Muslim neighbourhood or alternatively in places like Africa where there is basically nothing to protect them. There is just simply no instances on the scale of what feminists claim where this is an issue in western countries but of course you'll know having done research that they constantly try to claim that there's a rape culture on university campuses and that it's the equivalent of the war torn congo which was what they say when they quote these bullshit 1 in 4 and so on statistics about rape.

Rape in America in particular has actually gone down over time overall.

But I also realised how one topic appears to be so recurrent: Women are AFRAID, very concerned about their physical integrity. It never occured to me. I read it again, and again and again. It appears to never stop.

Now you've fallen for the oldest trick in the book that feminists use, research the background of people who are saying this. Many of these supposed 'feminists' are actually professional activists, they require themselves or others to be perpetual victims, I'm pretty damn sure having researched them so heavily they rely on activism for their income. They either scam gullible people out of there money due to pity or they go and beg the government for grants, they have no other legitimate skillset, or alternatively they go and write shitty man-hating articles for places like the Guardian and Buzzfeed.

Another sneaky thing they do is they have changed the definition of rape and sexual assault so much that now even them feeling slightly panicky or offended by something a man does ( Or doesn't as is often the case, they use sexual accusations to get back at men that don't date them ) whether it be looking at them the wrong way or the more recent trend 'manspreading' and so on that is now according to them enough to get people into trouble.

Then there's also the 'Cyber violence' bollocks, now a really interesting case you should look at is Jordan Peterson. He's a professional psychologists so he deals with these types of nutters for his work and what the feminists and SJWs have done is decided that since nobody is oppressing them enough or being violent to them words are now the new violence. When people say something 'mean' and tell them to fuck off or they criticise what these people are doing this is now considered physical violence in their eyes.

Yes, it sounds batshit insane and it fucking is, but this is what they're doing, so when you here these people screaming about how they're being sexually assaulted and how they are being threatened by neo-nazi's chances are it's just some poor sod who got on their bad side by making a glib remark or criticising them openly.

Still don't believe me? Check this out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzA4dCT4X0I

This woman went batshit insane over a man making a joke at his own expense, she is now immediately doing the rounds and literally asking people for money because she can now play the victim card after having her screaming section and acting like she got sexually harassed and there will be all these morons who will probably go "Oh poor woman, here take my money" without doing a single bit of research into her.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRnRw45AfxiQbPBBLF9P4uQ - This is her channel, not how immediately in the aftermath she has started making videos because she knows what gullible people there are on this.

However, this woman is an amateur, the absolute queen of this kind of scam is Anita Sarkeesian, she did the exact same thing with gamergate except much more successfully. Not only did she convince all of the mainstream media that gamergate is basically a borderline terrorist organisation that ran her out of her own home ( All lies or exaggerations ) and make hundreds of thousands from her kickstarter out of gullible people and barely producing any of the videos that she promised to. She actually entered into a deal with her media organisation 'Feminist Frequency' with Intel.

http://www.reaxxion.com/3912/intel-proudly-announces-diversity-initiative-with-anita-sarkeesians-feminist-frequency

Wait, I'm really confused by this intel thing, it seems like they've done this before? I'll need to see, sorry, bit off topic there but anyway though I'd give you some background into these people. It looks like somebody tried a fucking re-post on this awhile back, always check the dates, hmm. For those who don't know there are re-post spammers here and I wonder if they've adopted a new tactic of trying to get us to think old news is current to get us to click on their shit, all kinds of stuff out there.

TLDR: It's not 'women' that are constantly afraid, it's feminists and they need to have a terrifying threat or enemy to fight against so that they can keep making money as professional activists.

mikesteane · 2017-01-20T12:26:29+00:00

Are like 95% of women getting attacked on a regular basis?

Men are more likely to get assaulted than women. That is a fact, feels are something entirely different.

mwobuddy · 2017-01-20T13:13:09+00:00

Psychologists and sociologists have long been aware of significant sex effects around risk perception.

The general rule is that men UNDER estimate risk, and the younger the man the more likely and more egregiously he does so. Women, on the other hand, generally OVER estimate risk, and not by a small margin. Unlike men, who tend to get more conservative with risk estimation with age, women's fear tends to slightly increase with age. It's not evenly spread, too, so fear of rape and fear of their children being victimized are two areas where women are off the charts fearful, with their perceived risk being literally nowhere near the actual risk.

There's a lot of components to this, from their generally smaller size, to social training (Lock your doors at night, honey, I want you to be safe!), to feedback effects where they get together and ramp each other's fear up, etc. but it's most definitely not confined to just crime. Women are more conservative with loans, with starting businesses, with leaving relationships, with leaving jobs, when asking for raises, with large purchases, etc.

And, part of this irrational and drastically inflated fear is fear of men. Almost half of women indicate they are scared of men in general. Over 2/3 say they are scared of rape. You want to know why we have a fully blown rape panic every few decades, or why "rape culture" is such a tenacious concept when literally none of the stats support that contention? This is why. What they really want with all this caterwauling is validation of their fear, and they won't be happy until we're all wringing our hands together.

If you want a neat party trick, memorize the stats on child abduction, because they are almost certainly guaranteed to be several orders of magnitude lower than you probably thought they were. In Canada, roughly 350 kids are abducted every year, which is a minuscule fraction of the children in the country, and if you dig into that figure, roughly 300 will be abducted by their own parents in a custody dispute, so only about 50 are abducted by actual strangers. That whole "stranger danger" thing is so drastically overblown that is a fully blown moral panic at this point. Free range kids advocates are my total heroes for trying to puncture this baloney fear bubble.

Muesli_nom · 2017-01-20T14:24:20+00:00

Are like 95% of women getting attacked on a regular basis? In my world view, it's a non issue.

Women are being told to fear those attacks a lot more than men are, so that colours things. Generally speaking, women are also physically weaker than men - another brick in that wall that seems to constitute this "unreasonable female fear", because it's a power differential that we cannot really get rid of. Then, consider that men and women have different hormonal makeup. As far as I am aware, testosterone tends to make men more likely to take risks: For us, certain potentially harmful actions simply do not feel as bad as they apparently do for people without that testosterone to back them up. "Yes, well, fuck it - let's do it anyhow" is an infinitely more male sentiment than it is a female one.

If we go by data, men get attacked more often (I am, however, too pressed for time atm to bother searching out that particular info - sorry!), but as outlined above: Appearance and feels count for a lot in human perception, raw logic isn't going to cut it. So if you're concerned with the actual statistics, you'd be spot on. If it's about a woman telling you she feels unsafe, I see no reason to not believe her.

The crux is how far we go to indulge that felt fear when there's no tangible evidence to support it, though. Want me to chaperone you through a dark park at night? Sure, why not. If women are calling for male curfews so they can feel better walking home at night? Go fuck a destrier.

mwobuddy · 2017-01-20T14:51:28+00:00

http://www.martin-van-creveld.com/frauenparkplaetze/

Women need to be protected against male violence at home (never mind that, statistically, in every country where the question has been researched, female-on-male domestic violence was found to be just as frequent as male-on-female violence; see on this the work of the late Murray Straus). Women need to be protected against rape. Women need to be protected against sexual abuse. Women need to be protected against sexual harassment. Including, it seems, being greeted with the words “hey, beautiful” instead of some more conventional way. Women need to be protected against “gazing” “staring,”, and “leering.”

But that is only the beginning. Delicate souls that they are, women need to be protected against “’objectification” and “verbal abuse.” Women need to be protected against cunning pimps who first promise them the earth and then enslave them. Women need to be protected against photographers who promise to turn them into models but do not deliver. Women need to be protected against having their naked pics published on the Net (I hereby formally grant permission to anybody who has a pic of mine to do so; I shall even be happy to provide him or her with one).

Women need to be protected against “economic terrorism.” Women need to be protected against wicked, but charismatic and clever, men who first promise them marriage and then disappear with their, the women’s, money, or turn out to be married already, or both. Women need to be protected against male physicians, psychologists, gurus, university professors, teachers, coaches, and masseurs, all of whom, which God forbid, first cause them to become “dependent” on themselves and then try to “exploit them by having sex with them.

Women need to be protected against their own preference for convicted male criminals (as shown by the fact that such criminals tend to have more offspring than average, mostly because they have more partners). Women need to be protected against the possible consequences of their taste in dress and comportment (they are, it seems, too dumb to understand those consequences on their own). So stupid are some women that they only understand that they have been “raped” years after the event, and often after some lawyer tells them they can make money by suing. Once they do, they have to be protected from confronting their alleged attackers in court and also from having their own names revealed. Women need to be protected against “offensive” speech, including, no doubt, this essay. So numerous are the things women must be protected against that I found it impossible to put them in any kind of logical order. In short, women are seen—and, what is much worse, see themselves—as complete idiots incapable of looking after themselves.

However, there is a catch. Men are physically stronger than women. As the fact that they commit most violent crimes shows, men also tend to be considerably more aggressive and more assertive on the average. By some accounts, this is likely to remain the case not only in our world but even in one where our place is taken by computers. That is why, when the chips are down, only men can protect women against other men; also why, throughout history, countless men have died to protect women whereas the opposite has rarely ever been the case. The more protection women demand and receive, the more dependent on their protectors and the less equal and free they become.

Starting with Frauenparkplaetze, the need for protection on one hand and equality on the other run at cross purposes. The resulting inability of women to decide what they want most—protection or equality—is the main reason why, whatever the common wisdom may say, they will never be equal with men.

mwobuddy · 2017-01-20T15:04:59+00:00

Bwecause women as a group stay home at night and watch SVU and the news, and when you repeatedly expose yourself to something and ignore the rest of the world you usually come to believe that what you see on TV is how most of the world works.

basically like 5 year olds.

Women are really, really stupid.

On the other hand, maybe they're really, really smart. Because what they're doing is using their gender status to coerce entire countries into changing laws and manipulating and destroying men.

All by saying "im scared!".

I've met one like that before. A woman from another country moved here, was going to college. She started a sob story, I found out she was obviously cheating on her boyfriend from her home country, making up bullshit stories about how her boyfriend gave her a condom that slipped out of her purse while I was helping her move out of the home of someoneone she was statying with, that someone was obviously pissed at her presence and wanted her out.

She entired a 40 year old disabled man to let her move in with him, probably sob story again. I was her best friend 2 days into knowing her. She asked me if I could marry her because she was sobbing to me about having to leave the country because her visa was about to expire.

In between all this, she tried to force me to get a facebook account by handling my computer and building an account with my name. I got her to stop, then she ggrabbed some cards on the table and was playing keep away. Really juvenile, but anyway I tried to grab them back, and she kept putting thme behind her back and as I tried to get them, she looked up in some sort of seductive manner, and quietly said "im scared", as she slyly smiled.

On the way back to the college she asked me if I wanted to touch her, and I was like N.O.

Anyway, after she tried to sob story her way into getting me to marry her and me cutting off contact, I ran into her 6 months later (so she lied about the marriage thing to stay in the country) and walked right by as if I didn't even exist.

Total sociopath.

I find it easier to believe that lots of women who are running the victimhood game are sociopaths using it as a way to achieve all the good things; fame, status, ability to berate others, and lots of other gullible women are feeding into it, etc.

Women are just like men; many of them are nice, even naive. Many of them are sociopaths as well. Take any archetypical example of a sociopathic male you can find in your mind, picture that, and then reskin it with a woman. What would be one avenue of sociopathy? Would it be pretending to be victim in order to get unwarranted and undeserved good treatment?

The one thing I think people don't get is that psychos and sociopaths are not spotted like some like a unicorn in a room full of human beings; they talk just like you, act just like you, in fact are better at it because they are not burdened by feelings of shame at duplicity or falsehood. They can be a better social person than you, and can outplay you and outsmart you because they have no reservations and pull no punches. They're not smarter necessarily, but they don't have a built in architecture of rules.

I liken it to the difference between pro gamers and casual gamers in real time strategy games or fighting games like mortal Kombat (google sirlin.net). Casual gamers often build up a host of mental rules that they often aren't even aware of, saying to themselves "this should behave like this/this is the best way", because they have developed a preference for it, and when someone comes along that crushes them by abusing the game's mechanics to their fullest, the casual player usually calls them a hacker or says the game is broken, etc.

The point is that we all have these rules, we have perceptions about how we think things should go. psychos and sociopaths don't have these, because while they can empathize, that is understand other people's motivations, they do not have empathy, that is, feeling others' pain and personalizing it. They are out purely for themselves and are armed with the lack of remorse and shame that prevents most of us from acting in "socially smart/high emotional intelligence manners" when those acts would not be truthful or honest.

Think of those types of women who are overly effusive and explode in giddiness at just seeing you, and actually succeed in making you feel like you're the most important person in the world at the time... and then watch them move on and do it to someone else.

They're like PUA, except they're in it to game EVERYONE, for everything they can get out of it. The cover story of fighting the good fight for women as women are horribly oppressed is a good one. If I was a sociopathic woman, that's what I'd do. No one could attack me because I have the perfect shield, calling attention to stats is misogyny, etc, etc.

I mention sociopathy because women are notorious for being the "stockholm syndrome gender", that is, they are notorious for switching sides to the male currently dominating the current society. I know it sounds like generalizing, but there's enough of them that do it that its statistically significant. Is that fear? Some studies claim that women like muscles because in impoverished areas they seek a highly yoked male for protection, so they subvert their desires or contort them into being attracted sexually to that male. Is it really fear driving it, or is it just "enlightened self-interest"?

Just look at divorce rates. Who initiates most of them? Look at the way women say "do as I say, not as I do" and promote women-> men behavior that would be called creepy, shameful, and even criminal if it was coming from men in general and going to women.

Look at the way males are shamed very concisely in the one area men are trained to value themselves by; how much money they have and how much sex they get.

Basement neckbeard virgin strikes at the heart of that and women apply it liberally in arguments. Just recall all the arguments where women have said "good luck getting laid", to shame men who disagree with them. They seek to use the most destructive insult, and they do it to other women as well. Is this the behavior of fear or of opportunistic psychopathy?

Not all of them are like this. Enough are that stereotypes have developed. It doesn't take many to lead the naive, more good natured people.

fluffyshuffle · 2017-01-20T17:46:34+00:00

I've noticed this too. It seems a lot of women are genuinely afraid of the world. I'm of the understanding that decades of feminism has painted women into a situation where their view of the world has been tainted by victimhood to such a degree that going outside carries with it a 1 in 5 chance of being raped.

I can't really explain it, but I notice it. And I understand the significance of that fear, as it fuels so much of the man-hating marxism we experience in the world. It's really saddening.

Neutral_User_Name · 2017-01-20T18:48:59+00:00

I'm a woman and I struggle a lot with this narrative that women are always terrified of being raped or assaulted. On the one hand, an overwhelming majority of the women I know have been sexually abused in some way - molested, assaulted, or raped - whereas it's not as widespread of an issue with the men in my life. But in almost all of these stories, the assault is committed by a close relative or a boyfriend/husband. That doesn't really match up with the idea that we're constantly in fear that every other man we meet might attack us. So I do think violence against women is an issue, but not in the way that some women present it like we need to be ever-vigilant for attacks.

equiposeur · 2017-01-20T19:21:32+00:00

This is known variously as the feminist "threat narrative", and "damseling."

DevilishRogue · 2017-01-20T19:50:37+00:00

Women are far less likely to experience violence but they are afraid because they do not see themselves as expendable. They see themselves as valuable. If something were to happen to them it would be significant and important. Men on the other hand do not see themselves as valuable, they see themselves as expendable for the betterment of women. If something were to happen to men it woul dbe unfortunate but not nearly so unfortunate as if a man were to complain about something happening to them.

HotDealsInTexas · 2017-01-20T20:21:03+00:00

The answer is very simple. Women are afraid because FEMINISM TELLS THEM TO BE AFRAID.

perplexedm · 2017-01-20T20:20:20+00:00

These days, women are never taught to be accountable for their actions. They live in 'no matter what' generation. So, they get into more problems that men who are cautious.

Feminastims blames men for all the problems in the world. Yes, it is turtles all the way down. That is why feminastism is a selfish cult which should be banned for progress of human civilization.

rg57 · 2017-01-20T20:44:42+00:00

Are like 95% of women getting attacked on a regular basis?

Of course not. This is a mass delusion that has been propagated by feminists to maintain their control over people, and people have been too nice and too polite to call them on the bull. And it's why 1 in 5 became 1 in 4, became 1 in 3, and will become 1 in 2, and eventually all women... even as the actual crime stats continue to approach zero.

dontpet · 2017-01-21T01:27:11+00:00

Next time you are out with a woman on the town and step out of the pub or out of the car notice which of you is checking the surroundings for that. The men I've asked about this say it is always them.

Women are generally only experiencing that concern for personal safety when they are without a male "protector". Males experience this continually. Could be women experience this insecurity more acutely due to size difference but also could be due to the relative change depending on the availability of a guardian.

hork23 · 2017-01-21T04:09:57+00:00

95% of women are not being attacked on a regular basis. However, about 1/3 of all women are in constant fear of sexual assault (similar enough I'd argue, for some reason the Gallup poll was removed). This video might help explain why. (edit:about at 19:00 to get to the meat) It takes a circuitous route of addressing it as all good discussions must lay the ground work beforehand to really understand the central topic.

To sum up the video, we're prone to making errors (false positives and false negatives) and that same process applies to other areas of life other than worrying about whether there's a panther in the woods stalking us. Women are far more worried about safety and make false positives errors far more often.

Since we live in the safest time period in the safest country (USA!), they are generating a shit ton of 'attacks on women' events when there is no such thing taking place. Why is this so prevalent compared to earlier times? The video does more justice than I would explaining it and would take much more text I think than is called for in a summation.

SkyGuppy · 2017-01-20T11:52:19+00:00

Don't be too quick to dismiss this aspect. As with much else I think it comes down to biology and evolution. Go back a hundred thousand years and and it is easier to understand this fear. A lone woman risks much trying to raise kids on her own. Getting raped by someone from another tribe while out gathering is a real risk and a problem, while the male rapists gets a chance to have offspring at very little cost/risk of his own.

Since women are also the limiting factor for population growth, evolution drives our biology into a situation where men are risktakers and viewed as more disposable, while the whole tribe feels the need to protect their women.

Comments