Skip to content

Real Men Do Rape!

February 6, 2009
Third wave feminists miss an opportunity to expose the reality of patriarchy, again. Apparently, it is easy to do when you refuse to move outside of patriarchal conditioning.

Real men do rape! There is nothing about that assertion that is not feminist. Unless, you are saying a woman, or the collective woman speaking her reality is not feminist. The patriarchy defines who real men are, and those real men are usually rapists. Real men in the patriarchal world are men who are not girly men, sissy men, candied ass men. Real men are not men who treat women equally. Real men are not men who treat women with respect. Real men close ranks to protect other men. Real men stay quiet and not report rape. Real men think women have it coming to them. Real men are hypermasculine, homophobic macho men who do in fact RAPE, mostly women.

The very assumption that it was a man who “defaced” the sign is an example of how men remain society’s default. Is it too much of a stretch to believe a woman, even possibly a rape victim, defaced that sign? It proves how women (third wave feminists) continue to think and see men as the default model. It is very possible that a woman “defaced” that sign. We are not going to just wake up one morning and be greeted by change. We must change thinking. And using men as the default model is not changing minds. It reinforces what is already established.

When I saw the “defaced” sign, I immediately thought, yeah I know that’s right. It’s about time we stop cuddling real men (rapists), and make the writing on the wall as plain as possible. It is time to expose them for the rapists they are.

Real Men Do Rape!

The first sign, the one before “defacing” is not feminist. How is needing one man to save a woman (women being the default rape victim, since it is called an anti-feminist sign) from another man, feminist? Sounds a little supermanish or Prince Charming to the rescue, to me. Besides, what do you think he will want as a reward when he saves you from the “real man?” Because he will tell everyone, everyone how he saved a woman. How else are legends, myths, and fables, known?

It is time to really start thinking outside of the box. Time to bring some shame on those real men for raping, for continuing the patriarchy, —an institution so blatantly anti-feminist. For being so weak that they have to play the role of real men, even though no one is making them do anything. They are the ones who have been in charge for over 2000 years after all.

Moreover, what if it was a man, a real man who “defaced” the sign. What it if was in fact a man, expressing that real men do rape. By complaining about his stark assertion, are we saying we rather him not admit that real men do rape? Are we saying that we prefer that he and his rapist brothers not admit their crime?

To quibble over real men or men allowing men, diverts from the reality that collectively MEN DO IN FACT RAPE.

  1. MargaretJamison permalink
    February 6, 2009 8:29 pm

    Yeah, I think the “defaced” poster was a bit more reflective of reality too. Maybe if male people weren’t so concerned with being “real men” in the first place there wouldn’t be so much rape (that’s not my belief, but for feminists who believe culture and culture alone is what makes men rapists, that would be the assumption). This whole idea that there are “real men” and not-real men is what lets men get away with seeing themselves as individuals instead of as a class. We need to stop discussing this stuff in gendered language anyway. It’s MALES who rape and who need to stop raping, whether they’re calling themselves “real men,” “gentlemen,” “homos,” “queers,” “trans,” or leprechauns. MALES, dammit, of all ages, sizes, shapes, and colors.

  2. The Fabulous Kitty Glendower permalink
    February 6, 2009 8:31 pm

    Yes indeed, the collective male does in fact RAPE!

  3. speaking up, an atheist woman permalink
    February 11, 2009 8:22 pm

    Aah, the old floating penis approach (sparks) from the usual quarters I see? It wasn’t me, it was the penis! Huh? No in the sky! A floating penis! It’s a bird, it’s a plane…

    Funny that these are the same folk who think they can also define “manness” on issues as well…
    If a male chops of his dick (and makes creep-ass plans to harvest the uteri of dead women*) he is no longer male, but female! So not only are rapists not real men, but also eunuchs…Interesting I suppose.

    *The same women have problems when it is the Italian PM saying this, but wrt beloved tranz.

  4. The Fabulous Kitty Glendower permalink
    February 12, 2009 4:47 am

    I’m still waiting to hear how harvesting uteruses is feminist.

  5. MargaretJamison permalink
    February 12, 2009 12:28 pm

    ***Funny that these are the same folk who think they can also define “manness” on issues as well…
    If a male chops of his dick (and makes creep-ass plans to harvest the uteri of dead women*) he is no longer male, but female!***

    Ha! Did you read that thread over at Anji’s (Shut Up Sit Down)? If not, you absolutely must. There’s a thread over there about “trans-friendly” books for kids, a spin-off of a comment I’d left on another post. I went over there to participate, since it was my comment that set the whole post up. And some man-to-woman trans person actually said something along the lines of, “What are ya gonna do when we can harvest your uteruses*, bitch!” And I was like whoa! Is that really the plan? And then a female woman says something like, “Yeah, I bet the radical feminists are against THAT too” all triumphant-like because radical feminists can’t stop the misogynist roll of technology.

    ***I’m still waiting to hear how harvesting uteruses is feminist.***

    It’s feminist the same way it’s pro-animal rights to propose that all eagles erroneously born into human bodies be given wing transplants off of recently deceased (due to natural causes, I promise!) eagles, in order to make real their internal identities. As a trans-eagle, I think that sort of program would be beneficial to trans-eagles and born-eagles alike, because what could possibly be better for born-eagles than to stop hogging all that endangered species money for themselves? Plus, since born-eagles are going extinct, shouldn’t they be glad that they’ll have their trans-eagle sisters to carry on the pan-eagle struggle?


  6. MargaretJamison permalink
    February 12, 2009 12:31 pm

    Oh, and I meant to say up there about the uterus transplants that in order to be of any use the ovaries and all would have to come with it. Otherwise, what ovum would a man-to-woman trans person have to fertilize (with his own sperm, too, presumably)?

  7. speaking up, an atheist woman permalink
    February 12, 2009 2:04 pm

    Margie, yes that thread was where I got it from. And that eagle/tran-eagle analogy is spot on!

  8. MargaretJamison permalink
    February 12, 2009 5:04 pm

    Man, I’m so glad you’ve read it. Wasn’t that thread a hoot! I’d love it if everyone who’s on the fence about whether the trans stuff is feminist would read it, so that they can see abject proof that it is not. I mean, really. Harvesting uteruses off of dead and/or mentally unstable female people is in no way feminist. I really don’t understand this push to have everything labeled feminist anyway.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: