Jan 13 2007

Chumps and niceguys

I know. Niceguys are too easy. So, to preemptively counteract the ensuing fluffiness, first allow me to bash a chump by expressing my disbelief over a Boulder homeless shelter’s having put the hush on their decision to admit a convicted “sexually violent predator” into a residence populated by victims of just such predation, which victims are now “freaked out” and find themselves in the untenable position of either staying at the shelter with the psycho or taking their chances on the streets of Boulder in January.

The chump I propose to bash is the shelter’s executive director (whose name, I kid you not, is Harms), who defends the decision to extend his hospitality to the child rapist with this incomprehensible statement: “The very first clause in our mission statement is to provide safe shelter.” Apparently, in accordance with Harms’ way, “safe shelter” now means “convenient access to easy targets.”

And now, a humorous interdudelude: This niceguy just can’t comprehend the mystifying behavior of those perennial crazies, “women.” A Barbados newspaper, either unaware of or indifferent to the fact that niceguys are actually just clingy loser assholes who view women as prizes to which they are entitled by dint of their piously non-violent participation in the patriarchal pissing contest, has published his lengthy whine. A whiff of same:

“A good buddy of mine used to treat a girl real good. He paid her rent, gave her money each week and took her out. Yet, she used to horn him left, right and centre. And when he asked her how she could treat him so despite how good he was to her, she cursed him and told him to go home to his wife.”


Skip to comment form

  1. jnthnu

    And here we have it, why I’m with John Stoltenberg (okay, I’m *trying*) on this whole refusing-to-be-a-man thing.

    Not biologically, just… socially, I guess.

    I wish to refuse to be a man not because I give a damn about gender, but because I really just don’t want to be a in the idiot club, the abuser club, the user club, the sexist remark club, the wink wink nod nod, know what I mean, know what I mean club, or any of the other traditionally male, stupid, lazy, oppressive and violent aspects of history for the last few uh many thousand years, it seems – and modern societies in general.

    I just —-ing quit, ok.

    Now, why don’t I feel any better? Because I’m *not* a woman. It’s not my job to just point out how —-ed up things are and how they could be better, it’s my job to be different, but that’s not enough, it’s my job to try and uhhh… help, I guess, is the word – other male human beings to see what $_expletive $_expletive $_expletive nasty, jerky, $_expletives they are.

    Totally LOL @ last paragraph, though not necessarily all in a good way, you understand.

    Sorry if I sidetracked from the topic even slightly. I’m having an especially cranky morning…

  2. jnthnu

    I meant I was “LOL” at the last paragraph of Twisty’s post, not my response… shall I also blame the patriarchy for my bad and/or confusing grammar? Naah.

  3. George Smiley

    I don’t get how above-referenced dude gets “niceguy” status. Seems to me he’s just an overt idiot-asshole.

  4. RGM

    George, you need to do the research on what a “Nice Guy”TM is. Then you’ll get it. Hint: a “Nice Guy”TM is, in fact, an overt idiot-asshole.

  5. thebewilderness

    Dear George,

    You are correct. Nice Guy=overt idiot-asshole. I prefer the term asshat, but you certainly have the general idea.

  6. J

    I can’t agree with the sentiments in the above blog. To me, they are as much normatively and fear-driven as most of what gets blamed on this blog, which is otherwise quite refreshing.

    The news-article cited gives next to no history on the “convicted sexual predator,” except for a conviction history and brief explanation that he was labeled “violent” and “untreatable” by the law. If that’s the case, then I’m wondering why he was let out at all. That’s not to say that it’s entirely questionable (though not questioned) as to what the law had in mind as particularly violent or untreatable about his actions.

    It remains to be seen whether this guy is (or ever has been) a “psycho,” or just a general low-life who made some bad-decisions in the past. At any rate, translating these ultra-generalization into a reliable prediction of his motives and dispositions is what normative coding is all about. It’s as vile and anti-humanistic as patriarchical coding, and it surprises me that it is so thoughtlessly taken up by Twisty.

  7. FemiMom

    Rapists are not any more “psycho” than other criminals who figure, “WTF! I will do what I please, take what I please; humanity be damned.”
    However, if there is a psycho in the story, it’s the shelter director. Probably so afraid to be called out & criticized by a newspaper or activists of some stripe… And let’s face it, Blaimers, if the violent felon had a vagina, she’d be out on the street.

  8. Kenny

    shizzle, i knew this feminism thing wouldn’t work, it’s just too complicated for high school sports:


  9. Twisty

    If, in fact, the dude in question is actually a prince of a guy, no problem, but what I have to go on, j, is the content of the article, which states that the proposed new shelter resident was convicted of attempted rape of a 13-year-old girl and is listed by the state of Colorado as a sexually violent predator. You tell me why it’s “humanistic” to introduce a sexually violent predator into any population, let alone one consisting of marginalized women, many of whom have been abused in the past.

    Even if the article were a complete fabrication, and even if the details of this particular case were to reveal a that the ex-prisoner was in fact the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice, it does not strain the limits of credibility to imagine that such a thing is possible, or indeed probable. Assholes run around raping kids and moving into people’s neighborhoods all the time. Every so often the State of Texas DOC sends me a cheery little postcard alerting me that a registered sex offender has gotten sprung and is happily living a block away. It’s a great comfort.

    The reasons they let violent sexual predators out of prison are many, but they mostly boil down to the fact that patriarchy breeds so many of’em that the system can’t keep up with itself.

  10. Shira

    J –

    You really think his history matters to the rape and abuse victims staying at that home?

    If the plight of desperate, indigent rapists bothers you that much, open up your own shelter for them. Shelters for women who have been victims of such men have an obligation to keep the location of their shelter hidden from men like this, so to actually let him stay there, especially without first asking the women staying there what they thought about the idea, is simply unconscionable.

    It does not “remain to be seen” in any sense – he is a convicted, sexually violent predator. That qualifies as ‘psycho’ in my book, and I’m frankly horrified that it doesn’t in yours. It’s probably easy for you to trivialize his actions as “bad-decisions,” but for that 13 year old girl he was convicted of attacking? Probably not so much. It is not worth the physical and mental health of the women in this shelter to find out whether this guy is a psycho or just some poor schmuck who made the “bad decision” of sexually assaulting a thirteen year old.

    That you could even possibly entertain the idea that Twisty is wrong for making an ‘ultra-generalization’ about someone that has already been labeled ‘untreatable’ and ‘sexually violent’ by the state, especially in the same post where you pretend to give a crap about humanism or fighting patriarchy, is astonishing. I have to say that, based on this post, you either do not know anything about the horrors of PTSD, or that you simply cannot empathize with rape and abuse victims, or both.

    I blame the patriarchy for the fact that he was let out at all. I don’t see why you’re taking the fact that he was let out as somehow evidence that he’s not a sexually violent or untreatable sexual predator. Unfortunately for women like those seeking refuge in that shelter, this culture does not work that way.

    And saying that her sentiments are “fear-driven” – as if it’s unreasonable to be afraid of someone who has been labeled a sexually violent, untreatable predator, especially when you’ve survived rape and abuse – is really just the icing on the patriarchal moron cake.

    (In other news, I think this is my first comment on this blog, but I’ve been lurking for awhile. Brilliant as always, Twisty!)

  11. George Smiley

    The horrible part of all of this is that prisons are essentially rape training centers, and that car thieves are put together with sexual predators and murderers. So these guys get out and are likely to be even more dangerous than when they went in. Unless they find God while they are inside. Then everything I just wrote goes double.

  12. George Smiley

    Please strike the phrase “The horrible part from my last comment and replace with “To make matters worse.” Apologies for the inexcusably sloppy (and unintentionally inflammatory) writing, Twisty.

  13. Pony

    Oh this is so cool:
    “It remains to be seen whether this guy is (or ever has been) a “psycho,” or just a general low-life who made some bad-decisions in the past.”

    Another nice guy, who made some bad-decision in the past:

  14. odanu

    I’m actually mystified as to why the story about the homeless shelter made the news. I work with homeless people, and at least 1 in 10 of the homeless men I work with have sexual offense convictions or are known personally to me to be predatory. The homeless director didn’t discuss it with other clients because it’s more than likely a violation of the client’s confidentiality. I have NEVER discussed another client’s legal, medical, or social background with another client without that client’s permission, and might stand a good chance of losing my right to be licensed as a social worker if I did so. That’s federal law, btw. Now, if that man made a direct threat against another client, there is a duty to report. Until that time, the client’s privacy rights are paramount.

    MOST of the women, and a majority of the men, I work with have been sexually abused, and many continue to be, on the streets, when they leave the drop in center where I work. We work hard on helping all the clients make the street a safer place, and I have personally taken on several of the predators who thought they could intimidate me.

    All homeless clients are “easy targets”, especially the women, but a well run homeless shelter at the very least protects women from gendered violence within its confines, without needing to prevent potentially violent men from getting life saving shelter. And frankly, most men are potentially violent. In my experience, the only difference between the average homeless guy and the average guy with a job and a mortgage is that the homeless guy is more open and upfront with his violence. To eliminate the danger to homeless women, a lot more than this one guy would have to freeze in the streets.

  15. justtesting

    hey, the login thing has disappeared ?

  16. scratchy888

    The nice guy seems to have an awfully difficult time communicating with women. I believe his whole article is an admission of communication failure. He can’t figure out that answers to his questions because he has failed to ask the questions directly of the subjects concerned.

  17. kristi

    To comment on “the nice guy”… the end of his story was a hoot. His friend was so nice to that woman he was cheating on his wife with , and then she was unfaithful to him! What a double standard she had … oh, wait…

  18. thebewilderness

    I had a beau like that once. No matter how carefully you framed the problem, he simply could not hear what you were saying. He always heard something entirely different. When I moved to the couch he began to suspect there might be a problem. A year after I moved out he confided to a friend that he still hadn’t figured it out.
    It took me a while to realize that the reason he couldn’t hear was that he was wearing his ass for a hat. I do credit him with demonstrating for me how to recognize an asshat when confronted with one.

  19. kate

    I have to side with Odanu on this one. As much as it may suck, the homeless shelter only reflects the greater social problems outside its bounds.

    The shelter here in where I live takes in all persons, including just released violent predators, scam artists, batterers, child abusers and murderers.

    They also segregate the population by gender, with each on a different floor and each having a full-time staff member on duty at all times the shelter is occupied.

    What this does point up more than anything is how poor folks, who may find themselves on real difficult times can easily fall into more disaster and trauma just by virtue of their circumstances.

    Violent predators and other socially non-desirables just released move onto rooming houses, tenement slums and any other cheap housing besides the shelter. Some even go back to family in the burbs.

    Here in my town, there is a women-only shelter that women do have the option to stay in if they wish and where women with children are shuttled. Its a much safer option although sometimes there isn’t room and the staffers have to make tough choices about who gets in and who has to go back to the general shelter.

    But back to my point which is that women cannot hope to escape or be safe anywhere, that’s just the facts. Also, poor women and children, more than those with more financial resources, have to live with the fact that they, more than any others, must often either succumb to the inevitability of their confronting an abuser, or live in total fear for their safety everyday, even in their own homes.

  20. Pony

    It’s common for women who are homeless to eventually pick one man to protect them. It’s a protection racket and of course, the women are expected to pay.

  21. Buttercup

    At least half the people in any given homeless shelter will have violent records. Shelters are only slightly less dangerous than the street. I work with these people quite frequently; as a welfare caseworker, we get our share of the victims and the victimizers. Sadly, much of the time, they’re one and the same. For this, you can guess who I blame.

  22. ashes

    “niceguys are actually just clingy loser assholes who view women as prizes to which they are entitled by dint of their piously non-violent participation in the patriarchal pissing contest.”

    twisty this made me expel my beverage through my nose.

    i love you.

  23. mali

    I think the most telling thing in the article about the Colorado women’s shelter isn’t necessarily that they’re placing this guy in the shelter.

    It’s at the very end when the reporter mentions that while the women in the shelter were not told about the dude’s presence in their immediate environment, the neighbors of the shelter were called to a public meeting by the police, at which 200 people attended, to let them know about the situation.

  24. mali

    In the above post, when I said “women’s shelter” I meant “homeless shelter.” Oops.

  25. kate

    Of course Mali, because citizenship and membership to the human race in the US is purchased, didn’t you know silly?

    I used to love to stab legislators when they would bloviate about “My taxpaying constituents.” and recommend they bone up on their civics lessons. I mean, who represents the rest of the population, the local dog catcher?

  26. odanu

    Mali: The neighborhood has no duty to confidentiality. The case managers and counselors at the shelter do. I can almost guarantee you that there are easily a dozen convicted sex offenders who have stayed at that shelter in the last year. There are probably also many people who have been convicted of other violent crimes. The people at the shelter were not notified of the man’s sexual conviction. Nor were they notified of all of the other criminal records of the people in the shelter, nor should they be. The man served his time. If in a mental health professional’s opinion he is still dangerous, then he should be committed to a mental institution. He should not be prevented from seeking shelter at a homeless shelter.

    Please note. The shelter is a homeless shelter, not a women’s shelter. The article specifically states that, as is common with many shelters, men and women are housed in different areas and only meet in supervised commons areas.

    This whole argument is NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) at work. We KNOW that when someone is released from prison, he or she may still be dangerous, if they went in that way. We have taken away market rate housing from these people (too expensive for the jobs someone with a convicted sex offense will ever get), we’ve taken away public housing, and now there’s a hue and cry to take away homeless shelters? What, realisticly, do you want to do with them? Lock them up for the rest of their lives, in contradiction of our consitution’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment? Kill them? Most violent sex offenders already wear a “red letter” and many are chemically castrated already.

    The streets are not safe for anyone, and less so for women, and the same holds true for homeless shelters and substandard housing. Until people are willing to put their money and their neighborhoods where their mouths are, none of this is going to change.

    Yeah, the patriarchy is to blame. But it’s NOT to blame for protecting the confidentiality of homeless patrons of shelters. It IS to blame for turning young men into sexual predators to begin with, and then partly to blame for leaving no systems in place that can adequately deal with the fallout.

  27. Rainbow Girl

    In honour of de-lurking week I have this to say:

    1) I’ve been lurking on this site since October and usually don’t comment because I mostly agree with everything. Everything! Seriously, pass the Kool-Aid.

    2) I blame the patriarchy for this one. But,(and I say this not knowing the details on the legal system in the US) it is perhaps unfair to place so much weight on the one man running the shelter. We should have legal systems in place that are able to deal with sex offenders in an effective enough manner that people don’t need to be scared of their neighbors. For example, I wouldn’t mind getting a postcard informing me that a chemically-treated ex-offender was living next door, but I have seen cases in Canada where offenders have been assessed as “100% likely to re-offend”, yet released back into society. Of course, the legal system fails victims/survivors of sexual violence at every step. But that is primarily where change needs to happen, rather than in the decisions of individuals managing shelters.

  28. Kim

    This releasing prisoners into society with no money, no job prospects, no mental health care and no shelter is an ongoing problem, folks. Personally, I do this sex offender should be allowed in any shelter with women and children nor do I feel any deep sympathy for him. I do think, however, there should be SOMEWHERE for him to go.

    The “nice guy” in question is between a rock and a hard place: if someone needs shelter, their criminal hx should not, as a rule, keep them out. At the same time, I’m sure he goes to at least some length to insure resident safety. The fact that this place is a shelter for the homeless — not just women, not just families as is the case with other shelters — is likely why he may allow this sex offender residence.

    As a social worker myself, I find it hard to believe that there isn’t some other place for the sex offender to go. My guess is there very well may be other options — even if he has to seek shelter in neighboring towns, but someone has chosen to make a big stink about “the issue” att his shelter. I also wonder if he is involved with any sort of mental health team, esp if he suffers from any sort of mental illness/needs meds.

    If I were NiceGuy, I would provide the SO with a list of other area shelters and phone numbers, tell him to start dialing and show him the door. Still, with confidentiality issues (like it or not, SOs have rights — I got some beefies with that, trust me, but they do), laws, etc. this SO could still choose to make a “But I want to stay here!” stink and I may not be able to legally refuse him.

    The whole thing is just a nightmare.

  29. Kim

    Clarification due to typo: “Personally, I do NOT FEEL this sex offender should be allowed in any shelter with women…”

  30. Kim

    Odanu: “In my experience, the only difference between the average homeless guy and the average guy with a job and a mortgage is that the homeless guy is more open and upfront with his violence.”

    Isn’t that the truth?
    I take this a step further bring to the equation The 100KPlus earner who talks the talk and butter wouldn’t melt in his mouth in public and at social functions. He is Provider Supreme and respected. In his home life, he is the biggest, creepiest dick you’ve ever seen, esp to his wife.

    At least with the homeless guy, what you see is what you get.
    Not the case with Provider Supreme.

  31. Repenting

    I’m glad we can all agree that homeless people are people too. Seriously, though; it’s hypocritical to get up in arms about this one case when most people at homeless shelters are a mix of sex-offenders and rape-victims. Just like most normal homes are a mix of sex-offenders and rape-victims.

    The patriarchy is the only thing to blame.

  32. Hattie

    I do not think we can isolate sex offenders. There are too many of them. I do not approve of locking them away forever. No matter what we think, they are human. That’s the thing. They look and behave like everyone else, for the most part.
    So how do we protect potential victims?
    Know who they are and where they are. Inform people of their presence and that they need to be watched. At the same time, do not participate in vendettas to drive predators out. That encourages the secrecy that allows predators to act with impunity.
    The predator operates through secrecy and preying on the weak. He is an opportunist, which is why so many of his victims are family members.
    Where predators are concerned, knowledge is power. If a predator feels he can’t get away with it, he won’t try anything. So I would say, let him into the shelter, because he is human, but keep tabs on him. Are these women so helpless that if a man tries something they fall apart and let him have his way? Talk about victimology!
    I’m currently worried about a potential sexual predator, but he’s very secretive, and I’m having a hell of a time getting the message out about my suspicions. He’s typical in that he comes across as kind, considerate, a feminist even. He has insinuated his way into the life of some people I know. Pinning these people down is hard. They are clever. These are not the stupid drunken rapist types or serial rapists, and I don’t know what to say about them.

  33. invisible_hand

    in defense of nice guys:
    i accuse you, twisty, of nice guy mislabeling. namely, why does a “nice guy”{tm} need to be a “clingy loser?” not only that, but who is the nice guy here? we must have radically different defninitions of “nice,” when your “nice guy” is an adulterer. a “nice guy” must be nice by nature (or if you follow a post-structuralist view of the self, universally nice in behavior), not simply nice to someone from whom he wants to get something. or maybe, i am thinking of a “kind guy.” {tm}. semantics aside, the guy seems like an asshole adulterer more interested in getting it wet than people’s feelings, rather than a “nice guy.”

  34. Andy

    “…and told him to go home to his wife.”

    How preposterous! AND quite “dudely!”

  35. Ron Sullivan

    Hattie, just two things: “sexually violent” and what you need to do in a shelter, even more basic than washing up in the morning and right up there with not freezing to death, is sleep. I don’t know the specifics of this shelter but even if I knew that a scream would bring 20 people a-running to help, I’d have trouble sleeping if I were in those women’s position.

  36. odanu

    Ron. The reality of shelter life is that almost no one gets any sleep…and not because of cross gender violence, which is generally non-existent within the walls, between clients, because of tight security between dorms (though employees are another matter). No one gets any sleep because it is loud, because the violence and theft are constant, and because it is crowded and smelly and doesn’t feel safe.

    As for this particular violent sex offender? The fact that he’s a known quantity to staff (as are many of the sex offenders, usually) means that they keep an even closer eye on him. Frankly, though, I’d be much more worried for the young men in the men’s dorm with him than for the women on another floor.

  37. Rei


    For a full and complete understanding of the term “nice guy,” google the words “nice guys forum.” (I’m not going to direct link such an unpleasant place.) The nice guys are a self-labeled internet tribe, and their battle cry runs “women don’t like nice guys.” A few minutes on one of their sites will reveal that, in fact, it’s passive-aggressive virulent misogynists we don’t like, especially when they won’t stop trolling our feminist blogs. Hence, “nice guy” now means “passive-aggressive virulent misogynist,” which requires a bit of black-white thinking, and is not Twisty’s fault. I doubt the phrase can ever be reclaimed.

    And really, Invisible, a Philo should know the terms before entering the debate.

  38. kate

    Odanu reiterates what I have seen of shelters. There is a reason why many people will always choose to sleep outside except in the worst times of year.

  39. kate

    Where you at Twisty girl? We done beat this old horse to death and need something new.

  40. Joolya

    What a nice guy indeed!!!

  41. mali

    odanu, please note. I corrected my use of “women’s shelter” in my original post. I read the article and realize it’s a homeless shelter for men and women.

    My point was not that I agree with sex offender notification laws. It was that there is a clear contrast in how the shelter residents and neighbors of the shelter are being treated by the community. One group “deserves” to be notified of a sex offender while the other doesn’t. Whether anyone should be notified of a sex offender’s presence is another discussion entirely and I didn’t mean to imply by my original post that I felt one way or the other about it. I feel like this article is noteworthy because it so clearly shows this contrast in how a community feels about its ‘legitimate’ residents and its shelter-seeking homeless, not because it’s about a sex offender in a homeless shelter, which is not uncommon (as others have pointed out).

    Where did I say that this guy shouldn’t be allowed in a shelter? I’m also not advocating denying the guy a place in a homeless shelter because of his record. I’m not sure how pointing out that the community is treating neighbors and shelter residents differently is NIMBY.

  42. rae

    I usually just lurk but I have a question(s). Why should this guy be allowed in any shelter? What has he done to show any evidence of being worth anybody’s consideration? Why does predatory & violent behavior not erase a person’s right to claim kinship to me via humanity? I would really like to know once & for all.
    Twisty, thank you for all you do to educate those of us new to the blame game.

  43. bean

    I agree with the the person who said that the guys friend didn’t sound very nice at all,honestly he’s an adulterer! When I think of “nice guys who can’t get girls” their problem is usually not their personality but being to shy to get girls attention and talk to them.

    just my 2c

  44. Hattie

    Why does predatory & violent behavior not erase a person’s right to claim kinship to me via humanity? I would really like to know once & for all.

    Um…he’s human? Are we not responsible for the least among us? I say this, and I am not even a Christian!

  45. Random Lurker

    Whether or not predatory people should be considered humans who can be appealed to through reason and reformed or treated as dangerous irrational carnivores like lions and bears has been debated for thousands of years. There’s no chance of solving this once and for all anytime soon.

  46. rae

    I will answer Hattie & try not to post again because i know I cannot hold my own here. I am not a christian either & I will not be responsible for the least among us unless the least among us are those unable to protect themselves. In my opinion, you can either protect the predator or the preyed upon. I know that is a simplistic statement but where it’s possible it’s what i believe.

  47. Hattie

    We are not a bunch of rabbits who have to run scared from the fox. We learn to protect ourselves, our children, and others who might be preyed upon. We work to reduce aggressive in society and to do what we can about the perpetrators. The important thing is knowledge. No secrets.

  48. scratchy888

    We are not a bunch of rabbits who have to run scared from the fox.

    I think that the scared rabbit syndrome comes from an those who are used to being either granted or denied their rights from an outside source. So the seeming denial of their feminist rights from an offical source seems like an affront. Hattie is right in the sense that the locus of control needs to move back inwards, so that women take control of their own situations and recognise and act upon a danger to somebody else. I used to live in a culture where this kind of responsible behaviour was actually quite common. I have always missed a sense of that, living in the First World.

  49. rae

    It is not about rabbits & foxes. More about foxes & foxes. Yes, you must protect yourself & those you care for–but not from your own society. Threat should come from an outside source, not one of your own, which is why I claim no kinship to violent predators. I should not be expected to co-exist with anybody who poses a threat to me & neither should my children. In order for a community to be safe unsafe elements must be kept at bay.
    My opinion.
    Everybody has one.

  50. rae

    Hope the above made sense. It’s 4 in the morning.

  51. Kali

    I agree with Rae. Women and children should not have to place curfews on ourselves and each other so that predatory men can roam around in freedom. It is not about whether they are human or not, but whether the rights and freedoms of predators (human or not) should trump the rights and freedoms of their potential/real victims (human or not).

  52. Q Grrl

    Well from my point of view, the shelter system is passively allowing him to continue his predation, only this time it comes in the form of ensuring a warm and dry place to sleep and eat. Those homeless women, certainly those with girl children, will most likely make the choice to stay on the streets than venture into a confined and amplified space of male predatory behavior. And this, in my opinion, is how all men benefit from living in a rape culture – they simply don’t have to make the same compromised decisions that women do.

    I don’t blame the patriarchy here, only becase you cannot separate the shelter out as if it has standards and operatings procedures that are so beneficent that they transcend patriarchy. The shelter is actively upholding paradigms of “fairness” that benefit violent and predatory men. And then the rest of us scramble to justify the “humanity” of human predators. Some even go so far as to flail the spectre of that most inhumane (to women) practice known as Christianity.

    Why go that route? Why not just admit that because some men are willing to make high art of their predation, they continue to reap benefits, even if said benefit looks dismal to the rest of us? This man might be homeless, but he was shelterd safely within a complicit bubble of silence – and now that it is public record, homeless women in Colorado will make increasingly less beneficial and humane choices for themselves. But hey, at least this child fucker was warm and dry, right?

  53. Hattie

    How about getting rid of the Predator in Chief in the White House?

  54. speedbudget

    Has that guy that wrote the whiny article ever considered the fact that maybe the “assholes” he references “get the women” because they are being who they are, rather than faking being somebody they aren’t just to get the prized pussy? And whoever said women are something to be gotten? I guess the patriarchy blinded him to the fact that women are concious beings with their own wants and desires who act on their own impulses, rather than the automatons the porn industry would have men think they are.

  55. Metal Prophet

    I don’t think that anyone forfeits their right to be human, no matter how terrible they are, and that includes people like Hitler and Stalin. But that also doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be held responsible for your crimes. This guy deserves humane treatment, but not in any way that will further harm anyone else.

  56. Adam

    Excerpt: “Niceguys are actually just clingy loser assholes who view women as prizes to which they are entitled by dint of their piously non-violent participation in the patriarchal pissing contest.”

    I love this line, but I think it’s awful and I believe you fell in love with your own compelling, angsty turns of phrase and wrote them for their own sake. If not, then you’re an accomplice in the preservation and perpetuation of patriarchy.

    Radical feminists hate men, because in a patriarchal economy men dominate women in order to get what they want from them, and the terms of the deal pit humans against one another based on biological differences and their associated societal roles.

    This is a hierarchical system that exaggerates the divisions between men and women in order to essentialize the differences between them and justify the system. It loves binaries: masculinity is strength, femininity is weakness; masculinity is protection, femininity is vulnerability.

    You see duplicity in the niceguy because you can’t believe that any guy can be nice, really. What man can fully understand the unfavorable position of women in patriarchy without having experienced it firsthand?

    What you don’t allow is the possibility that some men, like some women, including radical feminists, do not buy into a system that would enhance their position through a violent appropriation of the rights and safety of others.

    These men understand that patriarchy creates a problem in order to sell a solution: that patriarchy threatens women and labels them weak in order to make a man’s offer of protection desirable. These men refuse to participate in this double bind, which attempts to keep women down. They refuse to speak the language that patriarchy has taught them to speak. These same men, though, divest themselves of the dubious currency that makes them attractive to women, and so you see them mourn the loss in such phrases as “nice guys finish last,” and “women don’t like nice guys.”

    Any woman who accuses a truly nice man of piously non-violent participation in patriarchy perpetuates a division of the sexes on nothing but biological grounds: because that person has a penis, distrust and dismiss any niceness that comes from him. This is a reiteration of the principles of patriarchy.

    What you don’t get about the devoted niceguy (because certainly you’re right about a certain iteration of niceguy, who has or learns to have the same patriarchal, or violent, mindset as the chumps but lacks the physical currency to effect dominant behavior) is that his expressions are a response to patriarchy, a refusal to participate in it. They are a protest of patriarchy, not a quiet, insipid, timid, hypocritical iteration of it.

    Nice men can be genuinely nice, kind, thoughtful, respectful, caring, nonviolent, solicitous, nurturing and quiet, and insofar as these characteristics are feminine in a patriarchal economy, there are women—the ones fluent in the language patriarchy has taught them—who recognize that such men cannot provide them with protection against the threats and effects of patriarchy.

    If in denouncing expressions of femininity from either women (“how’s about you personally eradicate your own crippling dependence on femininity from your own individual selves?”) or men, you intend to disturb the dynamic that fuels patriarchy, then I can absolve you of what otherwise amounts to a valorization of the power (i.e., masculinity) and the method (i.e., binarism) that men have used to dominate women and propel patriarchy.

    If not, you are a victim and a proponent, even as you try to wriggle free, of this patriarchal mentality, and in belittling niceguys, or guys who are nice, you only alienate an ally in the fight against gender inequity.

  57. Twisty

    Adam does not grasp that the line he quotes is the definintion of ‘niceguy,’ a word used frequently in the world of cutting-edge patriarchy-blaming to describe assholes. He then does what so many enjoy doing, which is to aver that “radical feminists hate men,” which howler he follows up by calling me a “victim” in that way people have that makes victimhood sound like some kind of heinous crime. And then, following the Guidelines for Dudes Who Comment on Feminist Blogs, he drags out the tired old admonishment “don’t say anything to upset men, because your salty behavior will cause nice guys to abandon your cause!” Because as everybody knows, nice guys can always be relied upon to do the standup thing, unless some smarty bitch insults them. Freedom from oppression can be yours, as long as you act the way your oppressor wants you to.

    Pfui, novice blamer.

  58. Q Grrl

    Yeah, one would think the inequity itself would motivate the male conscience.

    Adam, here’s a hint: Paternalism sucks eggs.

Comments have been disabled.