- Joined
- Aug 14, 1999
- Messages
- 131,122
- Location
- Hollywood CA
- Caf Award
- Caf Lifetime Achievement Award 2017
I concur, Bill.
Fantastic work from Maher. Captured the rising sentiment that these aren't one size fits all situations nicely.
I concur, Bill.
Most women are conscious that they are always at a physical disadvantage to an able-bodied man, if he chooses to use that advantage. We choose to ignore that, for the sake of our sanity, for the sake of living our daily lives, getting on with our careers, building friendships, and ultimately for the sake of our love lives. Equally, we know the fact that generally women worry about how we're seen and that we want to be seen as kind, or gentle, or at least as polite, can be used against us.
Nonetheless, on a date, 99% of the time we're the physically weaker sex and we're trusting our judgment - judgment that might be impaired by things like youth, drink, physical desire, excitement, or even wishful thinking - to keep us safe, physically and emotionally.
That's the point about strangers who date, you don't know each other. You're finding out about one another. One of the things you're finding out is whether you are looking for the same thing, whether you're tuned into one another intellectually, emotionally, physically. Reading each others body language, non-verbal cues, tone of voice, and mood is part of that.
I still read that article (with my reading influenced by the fact I see it as a single perspective rendering of a multiple perspective event) as two incompatible people date and it goes wrong because he thinks the evening is about sex and she thinks it's about connecting, and maybe even a relationship.
But that's a statistical thing - even if the number of women who were into "sex on the first date" was the same as the number of men who saw it the same way (which it isn't) you don't really know who you're meeting (in either direction). You're guessing. Which from my point of view means that the one who is at a physical disadvantage (especially if they are the doubter) needs other defences. To me, that meant regaining control of the situation - verbally if that seemed like it was enough, or by not placing myself in a situation where I felt at risk (like being alone with the person) if the danger/unknown seemed higher.
What's difficult to know as you read Grace's story is why she couldn't react in a different way - to make her reactions more explicit. Had she taken a gamble against her own instincts - the red/white wine thing, the rushed meal and trip back to the apartment? Did she continue out of paralysis, misguided politeness, optimism that he might respond, or even because she still had some vague hope that by mimicking a sexual response she might end up feeling one? I don't know. But whatever it was it did her a disservice, and that for me is the bigger picture here.
Dave Chapelle makes a good and eye-opening point in his own way on one of his recent Netflix shows, he's talking about how as a teenager he did a show and was given $20k in cash which he had to take home through the city in his backpack, he says how petrified he was that on his person was something that many men around him would have killed him for no question if they had known it was there. He makes the comparison of instead of having $20k, what if it was known that he had a vagina instead and maybe that's how it can feel to be a woman sometimes as no doubt there are men out there in those realms of desperation. Of course I'm paraphrasing and he delivers it a lot better but it does make you think.
I doubt is comparable. I travelled around the world 3 years nd I had always 3k-4k dollars/euros on me hidden. Passing through among the most violent countries even sometimes in the worst neighbourhoods in some places. And yes, sometimes I was afraid but I knew that I would only lose money (If you give it away right away would not be a problem). Also, no one knew that I had that quantity but men know that a woman has a vagina. And when you get raped, is not comparable in losing any quantity of money.
I understand a bit the analogy, but at most he could grasp a bit and it was just one night, for women is the whole life what it piles up
Most women are conscious that they are always at a physical disadvantage to an able-bodied man, if he chooses to use that advantage. We choose to ignore that, for the sake of our sanity, for the sake of living our daily lives, getting on with our careers, building friendships, and ultimately for the sake of our love lives. Equally, we know the fact that generally women worry about how we're seen and that we want to be seen as kind, or gentle, or at least as polite, can be used against us.
Nonetheless, on a date, 99% of the time we're the physically weaker sex and we're trusting our judgment - judgment that might be impaired by things like youth, drink, physical desire, excitement, or even wishful thinking - to keep us safe, physically and emotionally.
That's the point about strangers who date, you don't know each other. You're finding out about one another. One of the things you're finding out is whether you are looking for the same thing, whether you're tuned into one another intellectually, emotionally, physically. Reading each others body language, non-verbal cues, tone of voice, and mood is part of that.
I still read that article (with my reading influenced by the fact I see it as a single perspective rendering of a multiple perspective event) as two incompatible people date and it goes wrong because he thinks the evening is about sex and she thinks it's about connecting, and maybe even a relationship.
But that's a statistical thing - even if the number of women who were into "sex on the first date" was the same as the number of men who saw it the same way (which it isn't) you don't really know who you're meeting (in either direction). You're guessing. Which from my point of view means that the one who is at a physical disadvantage (especially if they are the doubter) needs other defences. To me, that meant regaining control of the situation - verbally if that seemed like it was enough, or by not placing myself in a situation where I felt at risk (like being alone with the person) if the danger/unknown seemed higher.
What's difficult to know as you read Grace's story is why she couldn't react in a different way - to make her reactions more explicit. Had she taken a gamble against her own instincts - the red/white wine thing, the rushed meal and trip back to the apartment? Did she continue out of paralysis, misguided politeness, optimism that he might respond, or even because she still had some vague hope that by mimicking a sexual response she might end up feeling one? I don't know. But whatever it was it did her a disservice, and that for me is the bigger picture here.
Of course it is comparable, you have something on your person that potentially dangerous men will or have the potential to use great violence to 'acquire'. The analogy doesn't need your anecdotes about carrying money around or your assumption about what happens if you give the money away. The idea of the story is to be thought provoking and relate the vulnerability that women face to something a man can more readily understand as it really is something we don't really comprehend in general. Not sure why you would argue against it like it's a mathematical theory.
You might have missed the point, Chappelle was not comparing the crimes but the fear one experiences when they could be a target if you have something that they want (be it money or your body). Chappelle had 20K on him that thankfully no one knew about so he was safe but you cannot be safe as a woman because a rapist always knows you have what he is looking for.I doubt is comparable. I travelled around the world 3 years nd I had always 3k-4k dollars/euros on me hidden. Passing through among the most violent countries even sometimes in the worst neighbourhoods in some places. And yes, sometimes I was afraid but I knew that I would only lose money (If you give it away right away would not be a problem). Also, no one knew that I had that quantity but men know that a woman has a vagina. And when you get raped, is not comparable in losing any quantity of money.
I understand a bit the analogy, but at most he could grasp a bit and it was just one night, for women is the whole life what it piles up
But he wasn't trying to compare mindsets or even suggest that the two scenarios are in any way equal. Just that as a man this was the first time he felt unsafe and that women must carry around their own version of this fear at all times.I think the analogy Chappelle made is good, in theory - but falls short on the mind state ....
Now if I am carrying cash on me, I know it - but nobody else does, and sure, I may be more vulnerable or alert than I normally would be - but outwardly, i'm not in any more immediate danger than I usually would be.
But he wasn't trying to compare mindsets or even suggest that the two scenarios are in any way equal. Just that as a man this was the first time he felt unsafe and that women must carry around their own version of this fear at all times.
It might be a heavy handed analogy that misses out on many at risk people (as you rightly pointed out) but as @Vidic_In_Moscow says it should be eye opening to the heterosexual male who doesn't need to think twice about walking home alone from the pub after a night on the beer. I would never underestimate how oblivious the general male population (who would never dream of committing a rape) would be to such a mindset.
what if it was known that he had a vagina instead and maybe that's how it can feel to be a woman sometimes as no doubt there are men out there in those realms of desperation
I think the analogy Chappelle made is good, in theory - but falls short on the mind state and ultimately only tells half the story, which I think is what @4bars was alluding to.
Ultimately what makes walking out at night solo dolo for a woman so scary, is not so much that you have a vagina - that's a very surface level analysis.
It's more about the power dynamics, objectification, and difference in size and strength - they can do whatever they want to you, and ultimately you are likely to be unable to stop them.
It's also key to remember that gay men, trans women and lesbians are at high risk (and in some cases, higher risk than heterosexual women) of being targets for rape and sexual assault too.
Having a vagina/being feminine etc isn't necessarily the differentiating factor here.
Everyone knows that on average heterosexual men are more likely to be the dominant figure in any form of sexual contact due to various factors, that power position is what makes it scary - because he knows that I am unlikely to hold him off and I know it too.
Now if I am carrying cash on me, I know it - but nobody else does, and sure, I may be more vulnerable or alert than I normally would be - but outwardly, i'm not in any more immediate danger than I usually would be.
Does that play on your mind regularly or is it a fleeting thought you have every so often?
Yeah like I said at a surface level it certainly does the job, and if you're not used to that experience it should definitely give you perspective.
is what @Vidic_In_Moscow wrote, and "how it can feel to be a woman" is probably what I took issue with, as I don't think it's comparable.
I think a better line of reasoning would be "how it can feel to be vulnerable" or even perhaps "how it can feel to lose that element of power" - I think that would've been better.
Feels like you're nit picking a bit, I thought everyone would understand the gist of the story.
I'm sure they do, I provided an alternative analysis from my perspective.
I think a better line of reasoning would be "how it can feel to be vulnerable" or even perhaps "how it can feel to lose that element of power" - I think that would've been better.
It doesn't necessarily play on my mind, but i'm certainly more hyper-sensitive to my vulnerability if I am alone.
But tbh, I couldn't even tell you the last time I was alone at night purely because I avoid being in that situation as often as I can.
Feels like you're nit picking a bit, I thought everyone would understand the gist of the story.
It doesn't necessarily play on my mind, but i'm certainly more hyper-sensitive to my vulnerability if I am alone.
But tbh, I couldn't even tell you the last time I was alone at night purely because I avoid being in that situation as often as I can.
It was hardly alternative though, it was pretty much the exact point Chapelle made. He's a comedian so he isn't going to provide a full on explanation, a lot of what you said is implied I think. Of course I hope you have seen his version too as I'm sure I absolutely butchered it and my version wouldn't be ideal for any kind of analysis.
Edit: I'm pretty sure he poses the idea that what if everyone knew he had the money too, like everyone would recognize a woman
It certainly affects men who become disabled as adults. Often they feel vulnerable or fearful in situations (like empty multi-storey carparks) in a way they never felt before.
I think that's the crunch, it's there and it's in the back of the mind. The majority of the time it gets ignored, as a statistical improbability (which of course it is) and as too restrictive a way to live, but it becomes part of the psyche.
Cant really imagine living like that.
I'm a real night owl, regularly bring dog for walk around a pitch black park at 10 / 11 +,
occasionally occurs to me that its somewhat dodgy (and is dismissed more or less immediately)
Used to go for a walks around Dublin City in the middle of the night after parties just to unwind.
I'd look behind me and realise the street i just walked down has a junkie shooting up in the doorway back there which i was completely oblivious to.
Oh see I love walking out at night, especially when it’s still and quiet - but I definitely wouldn’t do it alone, I would just hate to be in the position of *if* something happens you know?
It’s unlikely, but it’s still possible so if I can avoid it I definitely will.
didn’t say he should provide a full explanation though, I said on a surface level it does the job that he was going for but I would stop short at saying it’s comparable to ‘feeling like a woman’ which is why I said it’s more comparable to feeling vulnerable.
I’m not sure why you take such an issue with that.
I concur, Bill.
Yeah, i get it.
I'm quite blase about it, i should probably be more careful really.
I think i'd be a bit reluctant to admit it and let it get to me if i did feel threatened, maybe a bit of that mixed in to my experience.
Christ you are hard work
I think the analogy Chappelle made is good, in theory - but falls short on the mind state and ultimately only tells half the story, which I think is what @4bars was alluding to.
Ultimately what makes walking out at night solo dolo for a woman so scary, is not so much that you have a vagina - that's a very surface level analysis.
It's more about the power dynamics, objectification, and difference in size and strength - they can do whatever they want to you, and ultimately you are likely to be unable to stop them.
It's also key to remember that gay men, trans women and lesbians are at high risk (and in some cases, higher risk than heterosexual women) of being targets for rape and sexual assault too.
Having a vagina/being feminine etc isn't necessarily the differentiating factor here.
Everyone knows that on average heterosexual men are more likely to be the dominant figure in any form of sexual contact due to various factors, that power position is what makes it scary - because he knows that I am unlikely to hold him off and I know it too.
Now if I am carrying cash on me, I know it - but nobody else does, and sure, I may be more vulnerable or alert than I normally would be - but outwardly, i'm not in any more immediate danger than I usually would be.
I understand a bit the analogy, but at most he could grasp a bit ...
Great read. It does make you wonder how many people are wearing Times Up badges or rounding on Weinstein et al. because its the popular thing to do rather than being the right thing to do. I am sure morals in Hollywood are quite fluid.
Yeah, seems so. The lines have been blurred however, and now scumbags like Weinstein and Spacey (and all the other despicable characters that have allegedly committed sexual assault) are being grouped with Tarantino. Now I’m not defending Tarantino, he’s clearly a reprehensible character, however it’s in a different stratosphere to the deplorable actions committed by others. For example, this thread is about sexual abuse: has Tarantino been accused of that? Apologies if I have genuinely missed part of the story.The shit that’s come out between Uma Thurman and Tarantino in the New York Times confirms all your worst prejudices about his character.
Yeah, seems so. The lines have been blurred however, and now scumbags like Weinstein and Spacey (and all the other despicable characters that have allegedly committed sexual assault) are being grouped with Tarantino. Now I’m not defending Tarantino, he’s clearly a reprehensible character, however it’s in a different stratosphere to the deplorable actions committed by others. For example, this thread is about sexual abuse: has Tarantino been accused of that? Apologies if I have genuinely missed part of the story.
Yeah, seems so. The lines have been blurred however, and now scumbags like Weinstein and Spacey (and all the other despicable characters that have allegedly committed sexual assault) are being grouped with Tarantino. Now I’m not defending Tarantino, he’s clearly a reprehensible character, however it’s in a different stratosphere to the deplorable actions committed by others. For example, this thread is about sexual abuse: has Tarantino been accused of that? Apologies if I have genuinely missed part of the story.
Great read. It does make you wonder how many people are wearing Times Up badges or rounding on Weinstein et al. because its the popular thing to do rather than being the right thing to do. I am sure morals in Hollywood are quite fluid.