Maybe you, y'know, shouldn't engage in so-called "locker room talk" (because let's be really real here, the "locker room talk" going around right now is bragging about committing sexual assault).
That such things can be so normalized should be proof enough that you don't need a safe space. Your safe space (and, as a white male, mine too) is the entire Western world by default.
> Maybe you, y'know, shouldn't engage in so-called "locker room talk" (because let's be really real here, the "locker room talk" going around right now is bragging about committing sexual assault).
No, that's reframing it in the context of the current presidential election.
The sort of thing that I'm talking about is "Hey, what are you doing this weekend? Oh, I'm going out with this Cuban girl I just met. I hear they're supposed to be tigers in the sack".
Notice no sexual assault there, just a conversation females might kick up a big fuss over. "Stop objectifying and stereotyping us."
Or even "What happened to your car? Oh, the transmission guy bent me over and fucked me good for 800 bucks to replace some shitty gears he probably yanked out of a junkyard".
These things should be allowed and have a safe place where you can say them.
The former is a conversation I--as a white male--would think you are, at best, skeevy, objectifying, and a little bit racist for having. Thinking that is not restricted to women at all. And you can be that kind of asshole anywhere you want to be. But you'll be considered in the context of the world you live in when you do. Why do you need a "safe space" where you can be shitty? Why not just don't be shitty?
The latter--I've used very similar phrasing in conversations with feminist advocates and not gotten a bit of static because the context they were used in was perfectly clear and not avowedly harmful, as per your first example. I think you're misunderstanding the objections that would be raised about your speech.
It's very interesting the quick journey from "skeevy, objectifying and a little bit racist" to shitty and asshole and avowedly harmful. I fail to see how that statement is harmful at all.
> feminist advocates and not gotten a bit of static because the context they were used in was perfectly clear and not avowedly harmful
Do they even have the right to complain? You use whatever language you want, and they can choose whether or not to hang out with you. "He's boring to talk to, all he wants to talk about is Yankees baseball". Any allegation of misogyny these days or even worse, sexual misconduct will ruin the life of a man. Even if he managed to clear himself of criminal wrongdoing, his career is over.
That's not so much true as a thing that "mens rights" advocates seem to enjoy saying. In fact: the available evidence points sharply in the other direction.
Case in point, duke lacrosse players and Derrick Rose.
Heck, Derrick Rose's accuser didn't even have her name made public whereas Derrick Rose had his name dragged through the mud and had to spend plenty of time and money on lawyers. Whatever happened to the legal system being public record?
That's the best case scenario. The woman was trying to settle, but ended up trying to sue for 21 million. Again, that is the best case scenario, that you have enough time and resources to lawyer up.
If somebody accuses you of something like that when you're at work, there is no due process when it comes to HR. You can sue for wrongful termination, but that's hard to prove and requires expensive lawyers.
> Maybe you, y'know, shouldn't engage in so-called "locker room talk" (because let's be really real here, the "locker room talk" going around right now is bragging about committing sexual assault).
You're shitting me. The leap you just made from "locker-room talk" equating to "bragging about sexual assault" is holy-fuck-what-the-hell-wrong-with-you absurd.
Did you miss "going around right now", somehow? "Locker room talk" has emerged as a defense in the last two weeks for Donald Trump bragging to Billy Bush, with a hot mic, that he sexually assaults women.
That phrase wouldn't be being used if it were not at the forefront of the public consciousness, and that it is being used to moderate bragging about sexual assault is telling.
Those of us who aren't obsessing over this reality TV-show, joke of an election don't think like that.
You're taking a phrase which has existed for, oh, I don't know, probably as long as locker rooms have existed, and re-branding it as "locker room talk now equals bragging about sexual assault" henceforth until the end of time.
Do you realize how dangerous that is?
In the same vein as this article (tangentially): the term "mancave" has been branded forever as offensive to feminists. We're apparently heading down the same road with "locker room talk". Unreal.
No, how do you equate Trump bragging about his success with women to sexual assault?
He basically said that if you're famous, women let you do things to them. As an example, he just said "I'm automatically attracted to beautiful [women]—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything ... Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything."
He didn't sexually assault anybody, they consented. Where are you getting sexual assault from? And his statement is true once you hit a certain level of fame/wealth.
Just because they let you do it doesn't mean they want you to do it. Consent is not about whether or not you can get away with it. It's about ensuring that the other person also wants it.
You're saying people should censor and filter themselves at all times, to everyone, about everything? That's fucked up. Everyone needs a place to be themselves regardless of how often they say things that would micro-aggress people. That's why men find places to have locker room banter. Just because they are misguided by your own standards doesn't mean they deserve social solitary confinement. You should be glad they have the sense to only speak their mind in private settings rather than at the workplace or in public.
You don't have to censor or filter yourself. But objectification and sexism and racism aren't "being yourself" and the idea if it is ludicrous; it's just being hidebound and shitty. Why should you have a sinecure from which to be hidebound and shitty? Why not just not be hidebound and shitty?
I would rather they not have the sense to "speak their mind in private settings"; I would like to know who I should not trust because of who they have decided to be.
This is a really narrow minded and judgmental perspective. I hope some day you encounter more diversity in your life and have more empathy towards others.
That such things can be so normalized should be proof enough that you don't need a safe space. Your safe space (and, as a white male, mine too) is the entire Western world by default.