Schrödinger’s rapist: or a guy’s guide to approaching women

Post Reply New Topic

SCHRÖDINGER’S RAPIST: OR A GUY’S GUIDE TO APPROACHING STRANGE WOMEN WITHOUT BEING MACED

http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest ... ing-maced/


Some of you guys might find the tips useful for interacting with chicks.

Good article, ArrantPariah. Thanks for sharing it with us.

Excellent article. I hope that it will clarify for many why women *have* to be selective, skeptical, guarded, nonresponsive, etc., in their interactions with men they don't know......including those they may encounter on online dating sites.

And, for the record, I want to add that not just extremely attractive women who get raped. For a rapist, it is not a sexual act, so the woman's attractiveness is not a factor. It is an act of power and dominance, so any woman at all makes a suitable subject for the rapist.

I think it is sad you feel the need to feel that way.

It is sad, but it is also the real world. There are a lot of bad people out in the world.

That article seems like it could have been written specifically for Aspie men.

I disagree. That kind of behavior is a common issue among all men in regards to approaching and talking to women.

The problem is that while there are plenty of nice people out there like me, there are also some very nasty people. The problem is that the nasty ones look no different to the nice ones.

I do not even like the mention of the R word, I share the view which was communicated to me and the rest of my class at school when I was about 11. A visiting policeman stated that "real men do not commit rape, and that rapists are things pretending to be men".

From what I have read a lot of rapists do it out of sadism or as a means of making them feel powerful and important, they are likely to choose any woman and not just ones which are attractive to a man with normal sexual urges / behaviour. To me a woman who is frightened or distressed is not an attractive woman (I do not want to have sex with a woman who is in that state), neither is one who is rejecting my advances. Sadly a lot of rapists think that these three types of woman are attractive becuase they are disgusting perverts.

As I behave myself around women and would not dream of forcing myself on a woman I have a hatred for rapists. They fail to live up to a moral standard which frankly is that not hard to reach so I dislike them. Rapists should be glad I am not a judge or lawmaker able to impose what I think is a fair and reasonable reward for their dire deeds on them. Some of the ideas I have for sentances are things which some people might think are rather harsh.

Well, yes. There is also the issue of the clues when a woman wants you, and which some of us might miss. I mean, the basic operating assumption is that a random woman doesn't want to have anything to do with us. If a conversation is started, how do we know if she is "just being friendly", or "wants to get into our pants?"

In other countries, like Thailand or Brazil, I think that things proceed from the assumption that the man wants sex, and move on from there.

Here, we start from the assumption that "the woman doesn't want anything to do with us", and things move on awkwardly from there.

I think that most rapes are perpetrated by a man that the woman knows.

This is such a useful article. I hope a lot of people read it.

This article was mildly offensive. As if all women are paranoid and all men are evil. I get the point, and its a valuable one, but if I wanted advice on how to behave around women, I'd ask someone who has respect for men. However, the advice is probably quite useful for the uninitiated. I prefer something with more depth than a page full of straw man anecdotes to teach me about courtship behavior.

You're right about that. It's really sad. It's very very sad, especially when you consider that when women "feel that way," it's a reaction to their experiences. Constant (or even infrequent) uninvited, unwanted, unpleasant intrusions from men tend to add up to a cumulative effect. In a sense, a woman's "creep-meter" becomes calibrated by experience and time, becoming more sensitive to signs of potential danger.

Which is to say: in the usual course of things, women learn to "feel that way" as a direct result of men's behavior toward them. This happens over time, with all but the most oblivious women. All women (at least in my culture, the US) are constantly chipped away at by men throughout life, by their boundaries being disrespected in one way or another again and again and again and again....

Whether any individual woman has experienced outright violence in the form of rape or physical abuse or not, the sheer number of boundary "stretching" attempts by men to assert their power occur with such sickening regularity that I believe "feeling that way" is common to virtually all women in my culture (and heaven knows, other cultures as well: considering that we North Americans are supposedly not like that; it's part of what gives us our status as "first worlders").


In my opinion the blog post (linked above) is thoughtful, insightful, and excellent. And I believe we could all learn from reading it,, and that there's much of value in the comment section of the post as well.

As a matter of fact, I just sent the link to my (very neurotypical, ultra-cis-female, degree in psychology) daughter. And (me being me) I wrote a little essay to go with it, re: the perspectives I had gained from reading the post.

....and I even recommended she read some of the dreaded "comments section" (although I usually advocate NOT reading the comments, as a rule.) Many of the commenters on this blog raise good points that I wish were understood by all men. Then perhaps there'd be no need to discuss the sadness aspect of women who "feel that way": Because of course it's sad. Yet, it's a natural & necessary defense mechanism developed by women to increase their chances of personal survival.

It's unfortunate if any neuro-diverse gentlemen's feelings are being hurt as a side effect of a woman's process of protecting herself from danger. However, one also has the responsibility to notice when one is being rebuffed, and (whether or not one "takes it personally") one must act as if one does not, because it's inappropriate, and so as not to further annoy the person who doesn't want to be bothered. Chances are, the rejection may not be completely about you. More likely it's that "your" behavior (I'm using the word "your" in the sense of "men whose actions, though perhaps unjustly, are sometimes perceived by women as creepiness, danger, or other negative interpretations") whew! (heaven forbid I be misunderstood by any failure to clarify every f-ing word, lol)

So anyway, to recap, often times "your" behavior toward a woman unknown to you, in "X" public situation, causes her to feel alarmed and defensive because she sees something in "your" actions or demeanor which reminds her of previously-encountered men, who DID turn out to be dangerous.

They were dangerous against all logic, &/or despite the man having good references from mutual friends, despite the man being a close family friend or relative (all too common) ~ maybe despite his being a so-called pillar of society. Factors which may reasonably make a particular man seem "safe" do get "taken into consideration" by women. In fact, women sometimes use these "logical" or "reasonable" considerations to override their natural, self-protective feelings of unease regarding a "man" who is ostensibly "just" (fill in some innocuous, reasonable action) ~

But next time, usually, she won't be so quick to override her instincts.

Moral of the story for women (or of course individuals of any gender, who feel endangered or uneasy around a person) : Do NOT override your gut feelings. If you do rationalize away the internal alarms that are trying to warn you, sooner or later you will probably discover WHY you had felt uneasy or negative about that person.

Moral of the story for the socially-awkward and/or autistic man, who is wanting attention from a woman he does not know: Go ahead and try to talk to her if you must, but be on the Red Alert for any sign that she may not welcome, nor wish to return, your attention.

And if you see any signs of her rejecting your approach (if you're in any doubt, research to find out the non-verbals that indicate someone is not wanting to interact, but they're actually kind of reasonable and logical to interpret) : Then you Must. Back. Off. & Stop. Bothering. Her.

That's just the (mostly unwritten) rule. If you feel that you must ignore/disobey this rule, or you believe it doesn't apply to you, well, then, women will see you as a creeper, and take steps to avoid proximity to you, on the basis of that judgment. And it would be a valid judgment on her part: if you are ignorant of the mores of your culture, or choose to ignore/override your knowledge due to the depth and quality of your desire to interact with some woman you see in public - well then yes, you're acting like a buffoon.

Which is not a way to act, if you wish to attract non-negative attention from anyone.

-----------

No offense intended to anyone.

You're right about that. It's really sad. It's very very sad, especially when you consider that when women "feel that way," it's a reaction to their experiences. Constant (or even infrequent) uninvited, unwanted, unpleasant intrusions from men tend to add up to a cumulative effect. In a sense, a woman's "creep-meter" becomes calibrated by experience and time, becoming more sensitive to signs of potential danger.

Which is to say: in the usual course of things, women learn to "feel that way" as a direct result of men's behavior toward them. This happens over time, with all but the most oblivious women. All women (at least in my culture, the US) are constantly chipped away at by men throughout life, by their boundaries being disrespected in one way or another again and again and again and again....

Whether any individual woman has experienced outright violence in the form of rape or physical abuse or not, the sheer number of boundary "stretching" attempts by men to assert their power occur with such sickening regularity that I believe "feeling that way" is common to virtually all women in my culture (and heaven knows, other cultures as well: considering that we North Americans are supposedly not like that; it's part of what gives us our status as "first worlders").


In my opinion the blog post (linked above) is thoughtful, insightful, and excellent. And I believe we could all learn from reading it,, and that there's much of value in the comment section of the post as well.

As a matter of fact, I just sent the link to my (very neurotypical, ultra-cis-female, degree in psychology) daughter. And (me being me) I wrote a little essay to go with it, re: the perspectives I had gained from reading the post.

....and I even recommended she read some of the dreaded "comments section" (although I usually advocate NOT reading the comments, as a rule.) Many of the commenters on this blog raise good points that I wish were understood by all men. Then perhaps there'd be no need to discuss the sadness aspect of women who "feel that way": Because of course it's sad. Yet, it's a natural & necessary defense mechanism developed by women to increase their chances of personal survival.

It's unfortunate if any neuro-diverse gentlemen's feelings are being hurt as a side effect of a woman's process of protecting herself from danger. However, one also has the responsibility to notice when one is being rebuffed, and (whether or not one "takes it personally") one must act as if one does not, because it's inappropriate, and so as not to further annoy the person who doesn't want to be bothered. Chances are, the rejection may not be completely about you. More likely it's that "your" behavior (I'm using the word "your" in the sense of "men whose actions, though perhaps unjustly, are sometimes perceived by women as creepiness, danger, or other negative interpretations") whew! (heaven forbid I be misunderstood by any failure to clarify every f-ing word, lol)

So anyway, to recap, often times "your" behavior toward a woman unknown to you, in "X" public situation, causes her to feel alarmed and defensive because she sees something in "your" actions or demeanor which reminds her of previously-encountered men, who DID turn out to be dangerous.

They were dangerous against all logic, &/or despite the man having good references from mutual friends, despite the man being a close family friend or relative (all too common) ~ maybe despite his being a so-called pillar of society. Factors which may reasonably make a particular man seem "safe" do get "taken into consideration" by women. In fact, women sometimes use these "logical" or "reasonable" considerations to override their natural, self-protective feelings of unease regarding a "man" who is ostensibly "just" (fill in some innocuous, reasonable action) ~

But next time, usually, she won't be so quick to override her instincts.

Moral of the story for women (or of course individuals of any gender, who feel endangered or uneasy around a person) : Do NOT override your gut feelings. If you do rationalize away the internal alarms that are trying to warn you, sooner or later you will probably discover WHY you had felt uneasy or negative about that person.

Moral of the story for the socially-awkward and/or autistic man, who is wanting attention from a woman he does not know: Go ahead and try to talk to her if you must, but be on the Red Alert for any sign that she may not welcome, nor wish to return, your attention.

And if you see any signs of her rejecting your approach (if you're in any doubt, research to find out the non-verbals that indicate someone is not wanting to interact, but they're actually kind of reasonable and logical to interpret) : Then you Must. Back. Off. & Stop. Bothering. Her.

That's just the (mostly unwritten) rule. If you feel that you must ignore/disobey this rule, or you believe it doesn't apply to you, well, then, women will see you as a creeper, and take steps to avoid proximity to you, on the basis of that judgment. And it would be a valid judgment on her part: if you are ignorant of the mores of your culture, or choose to ignore/override your knowledge due to the depth and quality of your desire to interact with some woman you see in public - well then yes, you're acting like a buffoon.

Which is not a way to act, if you wish to attract non-negative attention from anyone.

-----------

No offense intended to anyone.

I agree. Calling all men "Shrodinger's Rapist" is pretty insulting and "objectifying" us somewhat.

And she is overly paranoid too - thinking 1 in 60 men is a 10-notch rapist. Maybe in maximum security jail you'd find that ratio, but not in the population at large. 1 in 60,000 would be closer to the mark.Of course there are some dodgy men about, but chances are they're not going to be reading the article.

As Hermier says, the best advice is just for women to trust their instincts, and men/aspies to keep a particular eye out for the signs of rejection. The other tip I'd add for women is to weigh up his friends. If any of them dubious or seems like an as*hole, be on extra alert. Nice people don't hang out with as*holes.

I hope this can clarify why.."Even though you (man) know you are not dangerous, to a stranger ( likely a women) you very well could be considered to be", argument that is sometimes posted here & other places.

If the stats she took are only from convicted rapists (one in sixty) & since rape is a crime often not reported, frequently no one is convicted, & because it is crime of opportunity the perp. is never found , one in sixty might be a very low estimate.

So, do you get it now, guys?