They line up in front of a courthouse in southeastern France, from morning to evening, and have gathered in the thousands in cities across the country. They hold signs reading, “one rape every six minutes,” “not all men but always a man,” and “giving in is not consenting.”
They chant: “Rapist we see you, victim we believe you.”
Women across France are rallying in support of Gisèle Pelicot, a 72-year-old reluctant icon whose husband is on trial in the city of Avignon for systematically drugging her and inviting dozens of men, 50 of whom are now his co-defendants, into their home to rape her over nearly a decade.
The shocking case has sparked what many women in France call a long-overdue reckoning over “rape culture” and systemic sexism in the way the judicial system handles sexual violence.
guys always is an embellishment. it’s almost funny that not all men became not always men. obviously not always men but if you think the numbers are comparable you’re living in a fantasy land.
The numbers are also suppressed for men because we are not believed or taken seriously whereas women are typically believed by default.
I mean even considering that. if we magically learned the real numbers today there should still be a grand canyon between them. if you think it’s any close you’re either fooling yourself or biased by personal trauma.
just as a note: the argument I’m making is not based on any essential characteristics of men vs women. I’m not arguing men are biologically coded to SA more or whatever. it’s about societal conditions. conditions which, by the way, contribute to the problem you’re talking about.
What ratio do you think has any meaning? What if the meaning is just that men have a higher “success rate” for just being better at it or even just being scarier. What if it just means men are more often consenting where they otherwise shouldn’t be?
I don’t remember calling anything meaningless so I don’t get your first question.
also if men have a better success rate that makes them more of a problem, don’t really get what the argument is there
also don’t understand what you mean consenting where they shouldn’t be. you either consent or don’t. if you’re alluding to coercion that’s not consent and it shouldn’t be named as such. otherwise I don’t get what you mean at all.