175
Survey: Almost Half of Women in Tech Have Experienced Gender Discrimination in the Workplace (www.isaca.org)
submitted 4 weeks ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
49 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

IMO you and your partner should always communicate prior about whether it would be okay to wake each other up with sex, and not doing so is irresponsible.

I don't think being woken up with a sexual act you couldn't consent to is a good way to define rape. A good definition is whether the act was wanted or unwanted. There's a subtle difference here.

If being woken with a BJ was wanted, then it's not rape. But it could have been rape if it was unwanted. It's extremely irresponsible to pray and hope that the contact was wanted without establishing anything prior. Basically: it's possible to consent to something during/after the fact. But it's dangerous, and why risk being a rapist by doing it that way when you can simply have a conversation about whether it would be okay?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    Yes, you should communicate before, etc.

    The point is more that if men were viewing themselves as "most likely victims" because they've been told repeatedly that men get raped a bunch, and that acts such as wakeup BJs count as rape in the eyes of the narrative, then they'd be mass reporting themselves as being raped for an act that, at present, most guys shrug at. It's the societal 'norm' that says "all men should always want sex" that underpins it in a way, in that men almost never consider themselves victims in this regard -- that, paired with the norm that men's bodies are completely disposable. And it's partially the societal norm that women's bodies are inherently desired/wanted/to be protected, that makes them view a lot more scenarios as 'rape' -- and allows them to decide if its rape years after the event even, if they later realise they felt some sort of pressure to go through with it. Much different measurement methods for the same concept, so it seems really disingenuous to compare them directly.

    Similarly, women have been told repeatedly that they're discriminated against at work. If they see a group of guys going out after work to a pub, and they don't get invited, they'd likely report that as gender discrimination -- it's networking opportunities that they're being denied. I've even heard COO women on Freakonomics before commenting about how the choice of activities/conversation topics, being not the ones that women typically do/talk about, isolates/discriminates against them. Meanwhile guys, seeing a group of girls going to the girl only gym, are not meant to see that as gender discrimination / not 'trained' to view it as gender discrimination. When a group of women is discussing women-centric topics, men aren't trained to see that as isolating. So when you later ask both groups if they've been discriminated against, "Surrpise!" the women will claim it more regularly, while the guys will be oblivious / nonchalant about it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 child)

    ...tbh though, I think you're not framing the situation correctly:

    Women for a long time were excluded from male dominated spaces. So they ended up having to form their own groups and spaces. Now you imply that women having those spaces is the exact same thing as men excluding women from their spaces.

    Yes, the loaded word patriarchy is a thing that hurts both men and women. But trying to frame men and women's situations as analogous is ignoring a loooot of history. You're looking at the end result and measuring it without seeing the past circumstances that created it.

    This is like looking at the Black Lives Matter and being upset that they didn't name themselves All Lives Matter. When their creation was a direct result of black people losing their lives at the hands of police, and the name was meant to bring attention to that.

    Women's groups and spaces, similarly, are a direct result of wanting to escape the discrimination and exclusion that comes from being in male-dominated environments. This is not 1:1 with men excluding women from things. Not when historically, women have been excluded from: voting, having paid jobs, having their own bank accounts, owning property, the choice whether to have kids, the choice of who to marry. Not to mention, literally being considered property to be bought and sold through dowries. For hundreds of years up until very recently this was the case. And the scars of that still exist in society. You cannot look at those scars and be blind to the history.

    Men are definitely less likely to report rape if they've experienced it. In part rape is still seen as something to be ashamed of being a survivor of. I'm not arguing against that. But idk man, I think you're making a lot of black and white assumptions here about why things are the way that they are.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •