Mastodawn

Amy Diehl, Ph.D.1d ago

Study (N=2,689) of men (18-34) finds 95.1% reported using strategies to get a woman to have sex who they knew did not want sex & had not consented; 65% successful. Consistent physical pressure & verbal coercion common; overt force, physical restraint, pain also used. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08862605261432630

@amydiehl OK, but the paper was focused on that demographic:

"This research was designed to focus on men who admit having intentionally and knowingly sexually aggressed against a woman who they knew did not want sex nor consented to it, including strategies to overcome her reluctance, circumstances, motivations, and positive and negative outcomes."

I'm not coming to argue "not all men", but from reading the tooth one walks away with the idea that 95% of men force women to have sex, and that is not what the article says at all. What it claims is that of a population that admits to intentionally sexually aggressed woman, 95% report to use strategies to get a woman to have sex when she hasn't consented.

I mean, clearly the paper itself claims "not all men".

Tomás Hradcky 1d ago

@gabriel And you are definitely coming here to argue ‘not all men’.

As I say, not me, is what the paper says. You can read it yourself and make up your mind.

I think we need to understand the literature to be able to have strategies to curve this situation. It would be very different if we are talking of 95% of the population or if it the number is different.

Therefore it is important to clarify, in my mind, what the study actually claims.

Random Walsh 1d ago

@gabriel @TomasHradcky The nuance is important indeed. And this has nothing to do with "not all men". The study is not just about perpetrators' modus operandi, it's also about methodology (anonymity and non-judgemental approach), which are essential to understand if one is to grasp the fact that these men know what they're doing (otherwise they'd confess by accident, which they obviously don't). This tells volumes about their line of defense ("oh I lost control"). They don't lose control at all.

Random Walsh 23h ago

@gabriel @TomasHradcky Yet actually I'm quite surprised to read that "most men don't". For I'm afraid most men do. So my opinion on this is "while I think most men do, I also think that these study says the opposite (in which case I think it's interesting for the reasons stated above) , but at the same time it seems to say that most men are prepetrators". So honestly I don't know what to think ABOUT THIS STUDY (as far as masculinity is concerned I know what to think, unfortunately).

Random Walsh 22h ago

@gabriel @TomasHradcky But I'm pretty sure one doesn't have to be a masculinist to say or think that these study "doesn't say that". Tbh, before I commented, I was about to write "damn I knew it!". Discussion on this matter is legitimate. Should one be afraid to discuss this and that for fear that they might look suspicious ? Nobody here is impatient to take the study away with them and use it as an excuse to abuse women. All I see is people talking. So let's talk.

Irene (she/they, Sir/Mr.)10h ago

@ratel @gabriel as long as yall are "not" here to quibble about "not all men" you stopped reading before the directly relavant part:

"The study was described as exploring positive and negative interactions between men and women in sexual situations. The consent form indicated that the survey was men’s opportunity “to provide their side of the story given that we have heard so much from women” about male–female sexual interactions, repeatedly assuring them of their guaranteed anonymity."

So yeah, when framed as their chance to tell their side *without fear of personal consequences of any kind*, this is what they volunteered. This is a large and broad enough community sample to draw broad societal conclusions from. The researchers knowing in advance who and what they expect to find doesnt change the results or make these men suddenly victims of a smear campaign or anything else untoward. It means yes, measurably all men.

gabriel 10h ago

@Irenetherogue @ratel @TomasHradcky

Let's ask the authors, then, what they actually meant. Then we can move on and talk about what needs to be done to end sexual aggression.

Irene (she/they, Sir/Mr.)10h ago

@gabriel as far as what needs to be done, frame it as a good faith, sincere question and ive got a good faith, sincere answer ready to hand. Otherwise, youre just deflecting.

@ratel @TomasHradcky

gabriel 10h ago

@Irenetherogue As I've said before, I'm talking in good faith. Furthermore, I think that the particular interpretation of the 95% number, besides being wrong, puts more women in danger. Since it deviates the conversation from: "there is a portion of men who are dangerous aggressors" towards "men are irredeemable". The latter closes any possibility of conversation between men and women, which terrifies me to be honest.

Irene (she/they, Sir/Mr.)10h ago

@gabriel in no way does this data do any of that. This whataboutism is only serving to out you. Just stop.

Random Walsh 10h ago

@Irenetherogue @gabriel @TomasHradcky Obviously. And I read this part too. What I struggle to understand is neither this part (who sounds quite realistic unfortunately) nor the "most men don't" part (which I can't believe) but what the reader is supposed to understand with these two views in the same article.

Irene (she/they, Sir/Mr.)10h ago

@ratel youre quibbling over a small point and in so doing deflecting from/missing the larger picture while also serving to make the very point youre quibbling over. If your point is "yes all men" and your argument as that the data make that same point, you already agree with the authors. Move on.

@gabriel @TomasHradcky

Random Walsh 10h ago

@Irenetherogue @gabriel @TomasHradcky Of course I agree. Just wanted to be sure I didn't miss something else than those conclusions I've already read elsewhere, as I generally do with any other topic. No bad faith on my side either.

Duckbilled Plattypus.1d ago

Again, you don't know it's not also 95% of all men. A number you claim is shocking to you.

And yet, you continue to insist 95% is too broad an assumption that upsets you because women might be asserting it's all men or a lot of men. No one except you brought up 100% all men. Then you got upset about it.

Sealion much?

I love that you insist on being blocked. Like 95% of all #Replyguys who responded to this post. 👍

If it is 95% of all men, then this would also imply that _at least_ 95% of all men who had sex in the last two years had multiple sexual partners. I find this figure to be quite strange, given what other studies of sexual behavior of younger generations show.

Now, I am answering in good faith, because I think we are having a conversation. But if you feel differently, feel free to block, I do not need the validation of your attention.👋🏽

Joykill 23h ago

@gabriel @pattykimura

What does having multiple partners have to do with this at all? Rape can happen in monogamous relationships too, you ghoul.

Colman Reilly 21h ago

@joykill @gabriel @pattykimura it specifies that they did not have a prior sexual/romantic relationship with the woman to separate out relationships.

@gabriel i just want to say that i appreciate that you took the time to read it and post the clarification

@gabriel
#notAllMen is the problem where this argument is used "to deflect attention away from men".

Imho you're not doing that.

Obviously, even if only a small fraction of men are doing this shit (and we know it's not a small fraction), all men are obligated to do better to make it stop. You didn't say anything against that. I wish you were not attacked over this and we could focus on the problem at hand with knowledge of the real data 🙇‍♀️

Juno Jove 18h ago

@iwein @gabriel
The plea is rather "All Men until No Men", where #NotAllMen tries to turn the argument away from the systemic matter, absolving one or some individuals, while ignoring the fact that even "nice" men benefit quite significantly every day from a system that oppresses women.

Juno Jove 18h ago

@iwein @gabriel
Analogy:
Just as the northern hemisphere's economy and way of life still benefits quite significantly from the past era of colonization, even in countries that participated less in it.

@jupiter thanks for the clarification. I copy pasted from Wikipedia, but your language is more clear. We do agree, right?

Juno Jove 18h ago

@iwein @gabriel
I suppose :)
I wanted to add, not negate.

@jupiter
Thx. I definitely want to make sure that if I'm wrong on such issues, that I take the feedback and better myself 😁