Seen on the street in Kyiv.

Words of Advice:

"If Something Seems To Be Too Good To Be True, It's Best To Shoot It, Just In Case." -- Fiona Glenanne

“The Mob takes the Fifth. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?” -- The TOFF *

"Foreign Relations Boil Down to Two Things: Talking With People or Killing Them." -- Unknown

“Speed is a poor substitute for accuracy.” -- Real, no-shit, fortune from a fortune cookie

"If you believe that you are talking to G-d, you can justify anything.” — my Dad

"Colt .45s; putting bad guys in the ground since 1873." -- Unknown

"Stay Strapped or Get Clapped." -- probably not Mr. Rogers

"The Dildo of Karma rarely comes lubed." -- Unknown

"Eck!" -- George the Cat

* "TOFF" = Treasonous Orange Fat Fuck, A/K/A Dolt-45,
A/K/A Commandante (or Cadet) Bone Spurs,
A/K/A El Caudillo de Mar-a-Lago, A/K/A the Asset., A/K/A P01135809

Friday, September 28, 2018

What Most Men Don't Get

Via Balloon Juice:
I wish every man in the entire world would read this. Men, walk in our shoes for just 30 seconds by reading this post. Guys ask why women are so pissed off. Even guys with wives and daughters.

Jackson Katz, a prominent social researcher, illustrates why. He’s done it with hundreds of audiences:

“I draw a line down the middle of a chalkboard, sketching a male symbol on one side and a female symbol on the other.

Then I ask just the men: What steps do you guys take, on a daily basis, to prevent yourselves from being sexually assaulted? At first there is a kind of awkward silence as the men try to figure out if they’ve been asked a trick question. The silence gives way to a smattering of nervous laughter. Occasionally, a young a guy will raise his hand and say, ‘I stay out of prison.’ This is typically followed by another moment of laughter, before someone finally raises his hand and soberly states, ‘Nothing. I don’t think about it.’

Then I ask the women the same question. What steps do you take on a daily basis to prevent yourselves from being sexually assaulted? Women throughout the audience immediately start raising their hands. As the men sit in stunned silence, the women recount safety precautions they take as part of their daily routine.
  • Hold my keys as a potential weapon.
  • Look in the back seat of the car before getting in.
  • Carry a cell phone.Don’t go jogging at night.
  • Lock all the windows when I sleep, even on hot summer nights.
  • Be careful not to drink too much.
  • Don’t put my drink down and come back to it; make sure I see it being poured.
  • Own a big dog.
  • Carry Mace or pepper spray.
  • Have an unlisted phone number.
  • Have a man’s voice on my answering machine.
  • Park in well-lit areas.
  • Don’t use parking garages.
  • Don’t get on elevators with only one man, or with a group of men.
  • Vary my route home from work.
  • Watch what I wear.
  • Don’t use highway rest areas.
  • Use a home alarm system.
  • Don’t wear headphones when jogging.
  • Avoid forests or wooded areas, even in the daytime.
  • Don’t take a first-floor apartment.
  • Go out in groups.
  • Own a firearm.
  • Meet men on first dates in public places.
  • Make sure to have a car or cab fare.
  • Don’t make eye contact with men on the street.
  • Make assertive eye contact with men on the street.”
― Jackson Katz, The Macho Paradox: Why Some Men Hurt Women and How All Men Can Help
One example of this in action: Decades ago, the State of Vermont tore down its unattended highway rest areas after a couple of women were kidnapped from them.

I've not heard of a man needing to have his big brother come by and stare down a workplace harasser. I know women who have done that.

But hell, elect a clown to the presidency who has had a long track record of sexually harassing women and it should not have surprised anyone that he would pick one of his peeps for the Supreme Court.

28 comments:

J4rh34d said...

Those "safety precautions" read like symptoms of PTSD. I know. I've got most of them too. And what does THAT say about our society?

dinthebeast said...

Note to guys: Women are human beings. Please get over it.

-Doug in Oakland

B said...

All fair points.

Doesn't mean ALL men are sexual assaulters.

Nor does it mean Kavanaugh is.

Some women lie about rape or assault. Some do though.

Doesn't mean every woman does.

Should we treat every woman as if they are liars? No. Yet you seem to think all men are assaulters or rapists.

That same double standard keeps popping up here.

CenterPuke88 said...

Er, B., slight problem here...

“Should we treat every woman as if they are liars? No.” Well, by refusing any suggestion to pause to investigate this matter, Linsey and his posse were about to do just that. They were ready to say one mans word trumps several women’s, until Flake had a crisis of conscience.

Now, as for “you seem to think all men are assaulters or rapists”, I find that a very interesting statement to make. You find that suggestion offensive, yet you have proven quite willing to make similar sweeping statements about certain communities.

Meanwhile, let’s apply the intended Judiciary Committee standard...if you are willing to swear, under penalty of perjury, that you didn’t commit a crime, they the court will take your word for it, if you are a white male and accused by someone other than a white male. Now we just need Linsey to clarify the standing order for who you believe over whom.

Jones, Jon Jones said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jones, Jon Jones said...

False equivalence foul.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AXyeKbw3tU

B said...

And I'd have believed her, except for her inconsitencies and timing.

And it sure looks suspicious that the Dems always come up with someone like her at times like this.

But it is the inconsitencies in her story that destroy her credibility.

Sorry if that makes you feel bad.



Huey said...

"Should we treat every woman as if they are liars? No. Yet you seem to think all men are assaulters or rapists"

Here's where your logic went off the track. Nobody said that all men are assaulters or rapists. What they're saying is that they should all be TREATED that way. And that makes perfect sense. Because unless you can give women a foolproof, one-hundred-percent-effective method to tell, just from looking at a guy from a safe distance, whether or not he's an assaulter or a rapist, then they need to treat you like you are: have a cellphone and an escape plan and all the other stuff in that list.

You, and me, and EVERY OTHER MAN, are Schrodinger's Rapist. There's no way to tell who's going to do something bad until they do it. So in the false positive case, you get treated like you're a rapist and then it turns out that you're not, so she didn't need the cellphone and the escape plan and all that other stuff, and maybe she seems a little standoffish, but suck it up. Because the false negative case is where she doesn't think you're a rapist, and then you are. And the penalty for being wrong that way is so much worse.

Dark Avenger said...

What inconsistencies, B? And how did the Democrats arraigne it? With the help of Hilary Clinton?

B said...

DA: If you can't find the inconsistencies, then you are not as smart as you appear, or are as partisan as you do appear.

Or you are ignoring them,

yer smarter than that.

Dark Avenger said...

Actually, there are inconsistencies, but not on the part of Dr Blasey in question:

However, Judge Kavanaugh’s calendar entries show at least two weekend parties and one social gathering during the week. On July 1, a Thursday, he noted plans to go to “Timmy’s for skis,” slang for drinking beers, with three of the people Dr. Blasey said were at the gathering where she said the alleged assault occurred.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/09/28/us/politics/kavanaugh-ford-testimony-investigation.html

0_0 said...

I am sure Dr. Blasey has a clear conscience, although she should not have believed that she would remain anonymous. No Supreme Court nominee will be derailed by an anonymous accusation.

DiFi does not. I think it was disrespectful to the nomination process and especially Dr. Blasey to sit on this information for three months. If she had brought this up in July, Kavanaugh would not have reached the Senate hearing stage.

CenterPuke88 said...

0_0, so DiFi should have disregarded the wishes of the accuser? Why? It aeemes entirely possible something else might have occurred and this would not be necessary. Is it wrong to bring this up, simply because it delays the steamroller scheduled the R’s tried to follow?

dinthebeast said...

"If she had brought this up in July, Kavanaugh would not have reached the Senate hearing stage."

I don't believe that for a minute. Fergus was gonna have his secure vote against his prosecution and even McConnell advising him against Kavanaugh wouldn't change his mind, because protecting himself from the consequences of his behavior has always been his first priority.
Kavanaugh could be on video with heroin, dead babies and endangered species of animals and they'd still be trying to confirm him.

-Doug in Oakland

B said...

DA: If you discount Dr Ford's inconsitencies, then you are destroying your own credibility.
Ms for'd inconsitencies in her own story and other testimony break her credibility. Plus her timing.

I don't know, and you don't know. And we won't know even if the FBI does an investigation. If the Dems really wanted an investigation, they'd have asked for one weeks or even months ago...but they waited until the last minute in an attempt to delay the vote until after midterms. Simply put, they are using Ms Ford as a pawn.

If you believe anything else you must be stupid...which you aren't. You seem to be actually very intelligent. Which leads me to believe that you simply aren't being objective because of political viewpoint.



Dark Avenger said...

DA: If you discount Dr Ford's inconsitencies, then you are destroying your own credibility.

I’m not worried about credibility with someone who can’t respond with evidence when asked for it.

If you don’t make a case for your assertion with at least one link to something specific, what’s credibility got to do with it?

Glenn Kelley said...

Dr Ford says there were 3 people in the room .
The committee has refused to call him to testify . Why?

Grey One talks sass said...

I'm liking the fact that the calendar submitted to prove Kavanaugh's innocence proves Dr Fords story instead.

After watching the hearing, I believe anyone who still believes Kavanaugh is an honorable person is questionable themselves. Abusers have a smell and look to them and Kavanaugh reeks.

CenterPuke88 said...

The FBI has been restricted from getting employment records from Safeway, why? Those records would confirm details Prof. Ford provided, so why limit the FBI? It appears that the White House is also limiting who the FBI may interview...again, why? Donnie is digging his nominees grave.

The New York Crank said...

Thank you, EB Misfit, for reproducing the safety checklist. It ought to give any male reader a bit of pause. While I have seen each of those behaviors in various women of my acquaintance, it was the first time I saw them all together, at once, and consequently sensed for the first time the lurking threat that women must deal with each day.

Yours soberly,
The New York Crank

CenterPuke88 said...

And a tweet announcing there are no limits...we’ll see, cause if any were imposed, someone noted and/or emailed it.

0_0 said...

CenterPuke88, the accuser wanted to remain anonymous. I have not read or heard where she wanted delay. And delaying the release makes the release motivated by politics not justice. I repeat it should have been brought up without delay.

Dark Avenger said...

What’s the big rush? After all, if the Republicans can delay filling a seat for more than a year based on nothing, a few weeks delay to get at the truth can’t be all that bad.

Mike R said...

O-o so since the release of documents was delayed it would no longer serve truth, justice and the American way to find out the truth.

CenterPuke88 said...

0_0, she submitted it in the hope of causing K to be overlooked...but by the time DiFingot it, Knwas the nominee. That changed nothing about the accusation but everything about the ability to quietly influence not picking K. We have no knowledge of what occurred between that selection and the outting by the press.

Mike’s point is valid, so anything that causes a delay is bad and, as the President’s Press Secretary said, every nominee deserves a vote...then the R’s are quite guilty on Garland...karma is a bitch.

dinthebeast said...

She only came forward after her information was leaked to a couple of news services. She knew that coming forward would upend her life and her family's lives, and it has, vindicating her original concerns.
Perhaps you would have liked the leaks to have occurred sooner for political reasons, but that is your concern, not hers.

-Doug in Oakland

3383 said...

I do 14 of those 26 listed items. I'm not sure about my mother, but she still owns firearms.

dinthebeast said...

Comrade: I stole a big chunk of this post and used it elsewhere where it was badly needed, with a link and attribution, of course.

-Doug in Oakland