Troubling Allegations Against Former Sheriff in Pinal County, AZ (Church mbr)

[smac97]

16 hours ago, bluebell said:

Quote

Quote

 

Quote

If some men were going about declaring that "All women are potential sexual predators," I think women would be entitled to participate in conversations about that declaration.  

If the data supported it

 

What data supports the declaration that "all men are potential rapists"?

How do data measure/assess potentiality in this way?  And can those datasets also measure potentiality about women being "potential" sexual predators?

Might some women object to being characterized as "potential sexual predators" by dint of their sex?  Is that allowed to be part of the conversation?

The date has been put up before, and this thread and in other threads.

Could you provide a link to a specific post with this data?  Candidly, I'm not recalling the presentation of "data" supporting the statement that "all men are potential rapists."

16 hours ago, bluebell said:

At this point, there’s really no reason to put up more data. You won’t engage with it anyway.  

I think I will.  

16 hours ago, bluebell said:

You’ll just put up exceptions to the data and only want to talk about those.  

I'd like to see the data first, and then evaluate whether it 

16 hours ago, bluebell said:

That tends to be your MO.  I don’t want to circle that drain again.

I understand.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

4 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Quote

"All men are potential rapists."

Spencer is a man.

Seems like I am part of the group the above declaration is about.

Is this some type of game for you? 

No.  It's a serious topic.  I am treating it with all seriousness.

4 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Here are a couple scenarios for you. A group of women are in a hot tub together at a posh touristy hotel. Two men enter the hottub. Should the women in the hot tub assume that these men are a potential threat

Theoretically, yes.  I have repeatedly endorsed concepts associated with situational awareness.  I think that is a separate issue from characterizing all men everywhere as "potential rapists."

Have the women reserved the tub, or is it open for any guest to use?  How big is it?  Is the tub in open public view, or in a secluded or closed-off space?  How are these men behaving?  Are they drunk?  Leering?  Behaving improperly in some way?  Or are they just minding their own business?

4 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

- even potential rapists?

I'm less sure about this.  Is the hot tub open to the public?  I live in Provo, which has a Recreation Center, which has a large hot tub open to anyone over 14 years old.  If a group of women are in the tub and two men also get in (it's quite large), then - without more - is that a justification to view those men as "potential rapists"?  It seems . . . not.

Of course, "situational awareness" varies by circumstance.  The hot tub I'm describing is in full view from all sides.  The lifeguard is about 20 feet away.  Plenty of people are walking past all the time.  What is the likelihood of those men attempting to commit rape in those circumstances?

4 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

If you answered no, you're an idiot. One of the men sat down and groped one of the women's crotch with plausible deniability. Just another day being a woman.

See above.  

4 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Scenario two. A woman spends a month with a host family in a foreign country. This family has hosted many young women before. There are children in the family and the family seems nice. While at the beach, the host offers to take the girl out on a battle board into the bay. Should the girl view the guy as a potential rapist?

I don't know what a "battle board" is.  Situational awareness is certainly warranted.  Should the girl put herself in an isolated circumstance?  I think not.

4 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

If you answered no, you're an idiot. The strong man while 100 feet from shore proceeds to grope the girl while she lies there petrified and terrified he might drown her in an "accident". She runs away that day, but nothing happens to the dad because plausible deniability. Just another day being a woman.

See above.

4 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

But poor Spencer. He has to go through life knowing that woman can't tell if he is a threat to them. The horror. These stories are just two of the dozens of stories that I could share from just one woman that I know by the way. 

I think we ought to be able to have serious discussions about difficult topics.  The above comments appear to be an ad hominem.

I know a young woman who was groped while on a college campus by a young man who apparently was somewhat autistic.  She reported the matter, but nothing was done.  This angered her greatly.  Fast forward a few years, and she apparently has adopted a posture towards men that is more or less akin to the "all men are potential rapists" sentiment.  She does not date, turns down offers, and speaks with contempt (after the fact) about young men who approach her.

For me, this illustrates one of the potentialities associated with broad prejudices.  

Another example: While in college I dated a woman who had served her mission in a European country.  On several occasions she expressed her open contempt, even hatred, for all Arab men because she had been accosted by some Arab men while serving as a missionary.  She hated all Arab men - everywhere in the world - because she attributed the behaviors of some of them to all of them.

I do not understand the reasoning used to justify/rationalize prejudice against a category (all adult males are "potential rapists") from people who would, I think, otherwise shrink from and condemn prejudice against some very large subset of that category (all adult Arab males are "potential rapists," or all Black males are "potential rapists," or all Hispanic males are "potential rapists," and so on).

4 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

With utter contempt,

John

I am sorry you feel that way.  I have not spoken to anyone with disrespect or contempt.  I am trying to have a civil discussion, that's all.

It's a difficult topic, to be sure.  I think I am not the only person who is troubled by the "all men are potential rapists" sentiment.  And it's not just because of how it affects me, but also how it affects those who subscribe to it, and how it affects society in general.

See, e.g., here:

Quote

It used to be an axiom of rape prevention programs—and the idea is still prevalent—that “all men are potential rapists,” because most men to some degree endorse attitudes and beliefs that have been associated with sexually aggressive behavior. According to this theory, all men are at some risk for acting on these attitudes. Rape research has never supported this axiom, and calling all men “potential rapists” is a decidedly poor way of trying to reach men—both literally and figuratively. 

In contrast to this scolding approach, the research on undetected rapists tells us that actually a very small percentage of men—serial sexual predators—are responsible for a vastly disproportionate amount of the sexual violence in any community. These men cannot be reached or educated. They must be identified and removed from our communities. Our prevention and education efforts must be focused on the vast majority of men who will never themselves cross the line into criminal behavior, but who by their participation in peer groups and activities either actively or passively provide support or camouflage for the sexual predators in their midst. By laughing at their jokes, by listening uncritically to their stories of “conquests” and “scores,” men become facilitators or passive bystanders of criminal behavior.

It is these facilitators and bystanders—men who know who the rapists are in their communities—who must be educated, challenged and coaxed back to a firm stance on the right side of the line, the side where we as a community plant ourselves in opposition to those few who choose the criminal path.

I am grateful that I was raised in the Church, which taught me to honor and respect women and girls.  I am also grateful for my father and older brothers, who demonstrated such honor and respect in their words and behavior.

Here:

Quote

One of the many myths about feminists is that we believe all men are potential rapists – that men are inherently dangerous, their sexuality naturally predatory. It’s an absurd stereotype that runs counter to decades of feminist activism. After all, if you believe men’s natural instinct is to harass or rape, what you are really arguing is that harassment and rape are normal.

Here:

Quote

Rape culture? There’s no such thing
A young feminist tells her sisters to quit the scaremongering.

Rape culture. It is a phrase that has slipped into public discourse with barely a peep of criticism, and it is referred to in feminist missives as if it were an objective, observable phenomenon. For the uninitiated, rape culture is the idea that modern culture – from pop songs to pornography to catcalling – is normalising sexual violence. But contemporary feminists are wrong: there is no such thing as rape culture, and the current obsession with this deeply misanthropic idea is doing more harm then good.

The suggestion that young men in particular can be slowly brainwashed into thinking rape is acceptable diminishes the seriousness of rape. Rape is a specific act of violent assault in which someone is forced into an act against their will or without their knowledge. Aside from murder, it is the ultimate burglary of individual freedom and, most commonly, an expression of the attacker’s desire for power rather than sexual satisfaction.

Let’s get this clear: one does not slide down a slippery slope towards rape. Yes, we live in a society that withholds total freedom and, furthermore, limits freedom for women. But this does not mean that we live in a society of rapists. No individual is entirely a product of their environment. Therefore, the contemporary argument that all men are potential rapists as a result of a society that sexualises women is inherently wrong. Rape is not something that can happen in ignorance; a man cannot rape a woman because he watches too much porn or because he isn’t sure if she’s up for it.
...
It’s easy to see why the dodgy ideas of modern feminism aren’t being challenged. If you even try to unpick the idea of rape culture, you’re instantly called a rape apologist – or, worse still, a mens’ rights activist. Criticising this new orthodoxy is met with almost the same level of vitriol as expressing a dislike of feminism.

Here:

Quote

In common with many MGTOWs, Sherratt is the product of a broken home — his parents divorced when he was three — at which point he was raised by his loving mother, whom he adores. He totally rejects the accusation he is sexist, and instead based his decision to go MGTOW on hard-won life experience.

“When my parents split, although my mum was fair with my dad, she said, ‘I could have taken everything, but I didn’t,’ ” he says. “That resonated. I went to an all-boys school and, when I was 13, I was exposed to aggressive feminism during a debate on sexual consent at a nearby girls’ school. All these girls had been brainwashed to believe that all men are potential rapists, and it scared the hell out of me. I love women and had never even had sex — I’m still a virgin — yet I was being accused of being a potential sex criminal. It was insane.

I think any number of young men are going to be scared about or troubled/demoralized by this sentiment.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 17 by smac97

[Calm]

On 6/16/2026 at 12:39 PM, Danzo said:

Someone with a bee sting allergy is at heighten risk,  This person probably should carry an epi pen, and perhaps avoid flowers in the spring, as well as probably avoiding the local bee keepers.

Once they have taken these precautionary steps, it is probably better for them to stop imaging that every insect they see is a bee.  It would be bad if their fears of bees kept them up at night, or prevented them from going out in the world. Bees are small, they could be anywhere and in theory, one could be justified in thinking that bees are hiding everywhere, after they could be under the desk, but rarely are. 

This explains what you see as a normal level of caution.  I think it also explains the differences in interpretation of “potential rapist” and how you and I have different expectations of response to that premise   

 With bugs identification is relatively easy.  It is wise imo for someone at risk of an allergy to bees to have a moderately heightened awareness of bugs when bees are more likely to be present so that when one becomes aware of a bug close by (whether by sound or seeing it), one takes the time to identify where possible if it is a bee or not.  

No need to panic or to be fearful, that would be counterproductive in fact, interfere with realistic appraisal.  Better to have a level of vigilance similar to  when one checks one’s rear mirror and side and glances around one’s car periodically assuming all will be well, but knowing there is potential for it not to be and so there is a need to check so one has an opportunity to respond in a timely manner.  Vigilance can vary based on location…winter time and indoors or in areas with no vegetation, no real need to check for red flags unless a red flag gets shoved in one’s face…bees sometimes do fly indoors after all.  And my son got stung by a bee in the winter time because he stepped on a dead bee on our balcony.   We should have swept it as there was a lot of debris, might be something else he could have step on to that was painful.

Phrasing “every bug is a potential bee” doesn’t necessarily mean imagining every bug is a bee, it can mean one withholds any conclusions until one makes the appropriate effort to identify whether a bug is a bee or not and therefore requires action.  One does not need to act until one knows for sure except in areas of high risks where bee encounters are highly probable.  It definitely doesn’t mean one is assuming bees will be frequently be inside homes or around at night.  That is for one thing against the stats dealing with bees.  It would be irrational to spend time thinking on and planning anything beyond the bare minimum for these because such encounters would have a very low occurrence and in most cases once encountered, there’s easy solutions to control the situation (bees stuck indoors somehow hang around windows or doors, one can therefore remove oneself and get another to deal with the wayward bee).  An epi pen covers the very rare occurrence of getting stung by a bee at night in the winter, such as occurred with my son.

You can tell me if you have any problem with the above, it sounds to me much the same as what you wrote that I quoted.

It would be helpful too if you explained why you went to extreme irrationality as if someone using ‘every man a potential rapist’ is imagining situations comparable in being fearful of bees at night, etc.  I don’t understand when most of us are talking about taking realistic, rational measures for safety, you have jumped to being focusing on irrational, anxiety disorders attached to predators.

Back to bees….sort of.   Using your response to bees, I would like you to explain how one can prepare for assault in the same rational, realistic way you and I describe above for bees because I see those as good standards for preparation and caution for most (all?) things in life. These are serious questions as your answers will help me see how you and I view the risk differently (if we actually do) and what is appropriate to do about the risk (separating this from how to discuss it for now).

1) Someone would be unwise to imagine a bug is a bee when they identify that it lacks the distinctive identifiers, correct?

What are the distinctive identifiers of a predator so that we can immediately know in the same way that someone is not a predator (not limiting this to only men or adults as predators can be women and juveniles?

2) Someone would be unwise to worry about bees in places they don’t typically appear, such as in our homes and anywhere indoors or times such as at night.  

Where are the places and times predators don’t appear?

Quote

They should also recognize that their condition is unique to them, they should not be asking their friends and family to avoid bees, bee keeping and other activities, as well as recognize that bees are an important part of agriculture and are a great benefit, as well as recognize bees are mostly harmless to most people. (my grandfather kept bees).

They shouldn't project their condition to other that don't have their condition. 

I agree those with allergies to bees should assume others who do not have that allergies are not at risk.  At the very least it would be wasteful for those not allergic or likely around those who are to carry an EpiPen.  That is better to go to those who know they need it.  

3) How can you tell if someone is not at risk of being targeted by a predator?

What is unique about those who have been victims of assault and harassment that we can use to identify those who they should not project the possibility of assault or harassment on?

For those of us who have been victims and are now survivors, how do we know when it would be unreasonable to project the possibility of what happened to us onto other women or children or anyone for that matter?  What shows who is safe and who might not be?

If you could answer those 3 questions along with the previous ones, it would help me and hopefully others quite a bit in understanding your view of what is a realistic approach to safety in this area. 

Edited June 17 by Calm

[The Nehor]

On 6/16/2026 at 1:38 PM, bluebell said:

You could ask men who don’t struggle with this issue (like Nehor or SeekingUnderstanding, among others) how they are able to deal with the quandary. Most of us know men who are very capable of doing it so there are probably plenty you could go to for advice. 

In romantic situations: Ask for consent.

In casual group settings: No need to change anything.

In one on one: Don’t do anything that could be construed as threatening (physically or verbally) even as a joke.

Also, defend women. A few weeks ago I went to an event with a bunch of people I knew well and some I don’t. When I parked saw a woman I know in her car with her window rolled down and a guy talking to her. That had a really bad vibe. Walked over to her and was going to ask her if she needed anything but another mutual guy friend showed up just before I did and gave the guy a death glare and asked if she needed anything. I just stood next to him and watched. The guy blustered a bit and then walked away loudly announcing that he “wasn’t that kind of guy” and that “this is ridiculous”. I was about to text the biggest guy I knew at the event if he could come join us right before the guy retreated. He was a recent ex who knew she was going to the event and planned this ambush to try to force a conversation that would hopefully get them back together again. No doubt he saw this as some kind of romantic gesture but she felt trapped because she in many ways was. Another guy and I stayed outside after she came in to make sure he left while the first guy walked her inside and took her to some of her closest friends and then rejoined us. She gave us both hugs later and said that this group was the first group she has felt safe around in a long time.

On 6/16/2026 at 12:47 PM, smac97 said:

I agree with these sentiments.  And as you note, the "real harm" of this sentiment not only affects the individual, but those within his/her sphere of influence.  For my part, I have, in recent years, often withdrawn from having casual conversations with women in social environments.  Unless my wife is there, I don't say really anything at all.  And when she's there, I keep my conversation with women brief and distant.  In hindsight, I think my reservations (reluctance?  fear?) about having such conversations largely traces back to this February 2024 thread in which @Calm and @bluebell, among others, not only endorsed and justified this "all men are potential rapists" mindset, they criticized me for objecting to it, and some even ridiculed me for questioning it.  And this all happened while at the same time many also acknowledge that this mindset is prejudicial and unhealthy.

So treating women as some kind of incomprehensible ‘other’ that you can’t connect with was your strategy? Why? Were you worried they were going to make false claims against you or something? And how would your wife being around help? You need a witness? This seems like it is more about your hurt feelings than any sense of reasonable caution.

On 6/16/2026 at 12:47 PM, smac97 said:

Some in that thread, and in this one, have tried to parse out what people mean when they declare to the world that "all men are potential rapists."  Such efforts are, for me, unavailing.  If this message board were to ever have an in-person get-together, I would not attend.  As much as I otherwise hold folks like Calm and Bluebell in high regard, I don't understand the societal expectations associated with "all men are potential rapists."  I can only withdraw and abstain from interaction. 

And then complain about the male loneliness epidemic?

[Danzo]

"all men are potential Rapists" seems to be a philosophy that is prevalent here on the board, but represents a minority view of the women I know, Even the ones I know that have been sexually assaulted in the past. 

They don't view "all" men as potential rapists, although they definitely view some men as potential rapists. 

On 6/17/2026 at 3:01 PM, Calm said:

1) Someone would be unwise to imagine a bug is a bee when they identify that it lacks the distinctive identifiers, correct?

What are the distinctive identifiers of a predator so that we can immediately know in the same way that someone is not a predator (not limiting this to only men or adults as predators can be women and juveniles?

The important thing is to education people on predatory behavior, and how to recognize it.  The things me and my wife discussed with my daughter include

Recognizing red flags in a relationship.   Be extremely wary of a friend (male or female) that won't take no for an answer.  I always asked my daughters this when they were starting a relationship, they needed to say no to them a least once initially to test them out.  If they keep trying to talk you into doing something you don't want to do, even if they do it in a charming way, watch out.

Avoid being alone with someone.  Aways keep the door open, have friends around and spend time in a public places.  If one feels threatened, retreat to a public place where people are around.

If you think you are being followed, make a U-turn or cross the street and walk the other way.  It makes it more obvious that they are following you.  Retreat to a public place.

Assault is much, much, much more likely to come from someone you are friends with, or related to, than the rando on the street.

Avoid hanging out with intoxicated people in places where predators are actively look for prey (bars, and clubs, and concerts for example).

Follow the Spirit. 

 

"All men are potential rapists" focuses attention on the wrong people, in my opinion.  I can cause people to wary those that are of little threat and ignore people who pose an actual risk. 

 

On 6/17/2026 at 3:01 PM, Calm said:

3) How can you tell if someone is not at risk of being targeted by a predator?

What is unique about those who have been victims of assault and harassment that we can use to identify those who they should not project the possibility of assault or harassment on?

For those of us who have been victims and are now survivors, how do we know when it would be unreasonable to project the possibility of what happened to us onto other women or children or anyone for that matter?  What shows who is safe and who might not be?

Everyone is at risk of being targeted by a predator, there is no binary at risk/not at risk for anyone.   Risk is a matter of degree.  One cannot eliminate all risk but there things that can increase risk and things that can reduce risk. This is a delicate topic on this message board.  Saying that one can increase or decrease risk is not, in any way blaming the victim.   When I was in the fire department many years ago, we talked about safe driving all the time to people, before a traffic incident, we never talked about safe driving at the scene of the accident.  There is a time to talk about safety and there is a time to give treatment to those injured.  Talking about safety can save pain and suffering, but usually makes people worse if discussed after an incident has happened and injuries are fresh. There are times when nothing the victim could have done would have avoided the accident.  Even though that is often the case, talking about safety is still important.  

If you want my further ideas on the subject, let me know, but if you think this board isn't the place to talk about safety without seeming to blame the victim, I will leave the topic alone. 

[smac97]

On 6/17/2026 at 4:14 PM, The Nehor said:

Quote

I agree with these sentiments.  And as you note, the "real harm" of this sentiment not only affects the individual, but those within his/her sphere of influence.  For my part, I have, in recent years, often withdrawn from having casual conversations with women in social environments.  Unless my wife is there, I don't say really anything at all.  And when she's there, I keep my conversation with women brief and distant.  In hindsight, I think my reservations (reluctance?  fear?) about having such conversations largely traces back to this February 2024 thread in which @Calm and @bluebell, among others, not only endorsed and justified this "all men are potential rapists" mindset, they criticized me for objecting to it, and some even ridiculed me for questioning it.  And this all happened while at the same time many also acknowledge that this mindset is prejudicial and unhealthy.

So treating women as some kind of incomprehensible ‘other’ that you can’t connect with was your strategy?

No.

Substantially revising/limiting interactions with women in casual conversations with women in social environments.  Ironically, for sort of the same reasons as have been asserted against men.  Some women, feeling they cannot readily differentiate between the "bad" men from the "good" ones, presumptively view "all men as potential rapists."  One potential response to this unfortunate prejudice is to sort of reciprocate.  If a man - one of the good ones - cannot readily differentiate between women who view him as a "potential rapist" and those who do not, he presumptively views all women not known to him to harbor this prejudice, and so on that basis limits his interaction with them so as to mitigate the risk of misunderstandings, false accusations, and so on.  Meanwhile, all the women with whom this man does not interact likewise benefit because, well, there's far less risk of the man raping them if he preemptively declines to interact with them in any meaningful way.

It's not that the "all men are potential rapists" subscribers are "incomprehensible," but rather that they are both prejudices and dangerous, and hence best if avoided altogether.  Nor is it that I "can't connect with" them, but rather that I simply choose not to as a safety and mitigation strategy, both for my sake and theirs.

On 6/17/2026 at 4:14 PM, The Nehor said:

Why? Were you worried they were going to make false claims against you or something?

That's certainly a possibility.  Prejudice is, after all, an inherently irrational sentiment.

Then there's also potential misunderstandings.  And also the objective of making women feel safe by removing myself as any sort of (potential) danger to them.  See, e.g., here:

Quote

Some years ago I was teaching at a local university.  I usually started my day very early, at 6:00 a.m.  I had to park my car and walk a fair distance through several inter-connected buildings to get to my office.

One such morning I found myself walking toward my office about 50 feet behind a young woman.  At that time of day there was nobody else around.  I shortly realized that I was making her nervous.  I had not said or done anything, and I had not closed the gap between us, but she looked back at me a few times in quick succession, and she looked nervous.  

So I called to her and said "Hey, my name is Spencer Macdonald.  I teach here and am headed to my office in ___________ building.  It looks like we are headed in the same direction.  I can see that I am making you nervous.  I am sorry about that.  I will stop for a few minutes and let you get to wherever you are going.  Sound good?"  She smiled, nodded and said "Yes, thanks," and continued on her way.  She gave off a "sigh of relief" vibe in doing so.  I waited about five minutes and then continued toward my office.

In retrospect, I suppose I did the right thing.  I gave her my name (and that I teach, and that I was headed to my office) because the lawyer in me thought that this would give her some measure of security.  I stopped and gave her several minutes to get to her destination.  I could see that this happenstance, of her being all alone early in the morning with a stranger walking (50 feet) behind her, was putting her on edge.  I had not planned any of this, and I certainly was no threat to her, but she did not know that.  So I felt it best to, as you put it, "give her a choice."  I don't blame the young woman for feeling a bit nervous, even though she was in no actual danger from me.  The confluence of events (early morning, nobody around, a stranger walking behind her) was what it was.  I mitigated the situation by communicating with her and then giving her a few minutes to get to her destination.  Problem solved.

I was never a risk to this young woman, but it was understandable that she could not confirm that in the moment, so to avoid any misunderstanding, I altered my behavior and my interaction with her.  Not because she was "incomprehensible," but because I wanted her to feel safe (and, to some extent, for my own protection).

On 6/17/2026 at 4:14 PM, The Nehor said:

And how would your wife being around help? You need a witness?

Yes, that.  Also, having my wife around increases the possibility of interacting with women in a social environment, as in her absence I have effectively no such interactions.

On 6/17/2026 at 4:14 PM, The Nehor said:

This seems like it is more about your hurt feelings than any sense of reasonable caution.

Well, no.  See the above anecdote.

On 6/17/2026 at 4:14 PM, The Nehor said:

And then complain about the male loneliness epidemic?

I have no such problem.  I do worry for young men, though.  From a previously-linked article:

Quote

In common with many MGTOWs, Sherratt is the product of a broken home — his parents divorced when he was three — at which point he was raised by his loving mother, whom he adores. He totally rejects the accusation he is sexist, and instead based his decision to go MGTOW on hard-won life experience.

“When my parents split, although my mum was fair with my dad, she said, ‘I could have taken everything, but I didn’t,’ ” he says. “That resonated. I went to an all-boys school and, when I was 13, I was exposed to aggressive feminism during a debate on sexual consent at a nearby girls’ school. All these girls had been brainwashed to believe that all men are potential rapists, and it scared the hell out of me. I love women and had never even had sex — I’m still a virgin — yet I was being accused of being a potential sex criminal. It was insane.

"All men are potential rapists" is not only facially prejudicial, it's also alienating and demoralizing.  I have plenty of friends and family.  Other men, particularly young man, may not be so lucky.  And I think it is reasonable for them to be nervous or scared about the "All Men Are Potential Rapists" thing.  Indeed, it seems odd to see people both advocate for this unfortunate sentiment and then turn around and ridicule people who take it seriously.

Thanks,

-Smac

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

"all men are potential Rapists" seems to be a philosophy that is prevalent here on the board, but represents a minority view of the women I know, Even the ones I know that have been sexually assaulted in the past. 

They don't view "all" men as potential rapists, although they definitely view some men as potential rapists. 

 

Can I ask, how do they tell the difference?

[Danzo]

14 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Can I ask, how do they tell the difference?

It's usually by their behavior.

 

[MustardSeed]

I just dont love it when men suppose how women think, or how we should think.  
 

What I do love is when men say, “Im upset that men have done enough harm in the world that you 1.perceive lack of safety 2. Experience actual threat.  Your concerns  make sense. “ 
 

Just yesterday i was pumping gas. A dude walked up to me, got 2 feet from me, and asked what perfume i wear and told me i probably look great driving my sporty black car. He would not go away.  I did not invite this nor did I feel comfortable.  I did not assume anybody was going to rape me at the gas station. But if anyone here cant understand how gross that feels, how it adds to the pile of info, how that was in public in daylight,  and how thats JUST YESTERDAY i dont know what else there is to say. 
 

I guess there isnt anything anyway.  

Edited June 19 by MustardSeed

[smac97]

12 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I just dont love it when men suppose how women think, or how we should think.  

I don't think we ought to dictate such things to each other.

I think that door swings both ways.  There has been plenty of commentary in this thread denigrating men for objecting to being characterized as "potential rapists."  Perhaps women who subscribe to this unfortunate sentiment ought not criticize and condemn and ridicule men for their thoughts responsive to that sentiment.  It is men, after all, who are the targets of it.

12 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

What I do love is when men say, “Im upset that men have done enough harm in the world that you 1.perceive lack of safety 2. Experience actual threat.  Your concerns  make sense.“

This sort of sounds like you supposing "how {men} think" and/or how "we should think."

12 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

Just yesterday i was pumping gas. A dude walked up to me, got 2 feet from me, and asked what perfume i wear and told me i probably look great driving my sporty black car. He would not go away.  I did not invite this nor did I feel comfortable.  I did not assume anybody was going to rape me at the gas station. But if anyone here cant understand how gross that feels, and how thats JUST YESTERDAY i dont know what else there is to say. 

That is quite unfortunate behavior.  I fully acknowledge how unpleasant and gross that made you fee.

I think I can acknowledge that and, at the same time, note that I did not do this thing, nor have I ever behaved in this way, nor would I condone or wink at it, and that I find characterizing all men everywhere as "potential rapists" because of stuff like this is reasonable and fair.

Disrespectful behavior toward women is an ugly thing.  We need to avoid and condemn it and take whatever mitigating steps we can as individuals and as a society.

Prejudice is also an ugly thing.  I think we need to avoid it also.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

It's usually by their behavior.

 

So there are sufficient warnings signs to be aware of in your opinion?

How do you know someone is the wrong person to be worried about?  Can we ignore the risk of being alone with a genial and respectful uncle or teacher or bishop because we can trust they are safe in your view?

Not asking to challenge you, but to understand differences in our views, assuming there will be some differences.  Obviously we both see caution as very important.
 

Since I am the one who has brought up preparing to lower the risk the most in the conversation iirc and in fact that is the only value I see in using the “every man a potential rapist” (to really wake up girls and women so they stop being as dismissive of warning signs and precautions, as I have seen myself and so many other women making excuses in our past for very inappropriate behaviour by men of all ages), I do not see discussing ways of being cautious as blaming the victim any more than defensive driving (I used this analogy at the beginning of this subtopic) means an accident is the fault of the driver who is hit….especially since while in the case of driving that at times might be true, it never is in the case of harassment or assault as no one can be forced to do these immoral acts unlike accidental plowing into a car that stopped too quickly or crossed a line.

Edited June 19 by Calm

[Danzo]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

So there are sufficient warnings signs to be aware of in your opinion?

Since I am the one who has brought up preparing to lower the risk the most in the conversation and in fact that is the only value I see in using the “every man a potential rapist” (to really wake up girls and women so they stop being as dismissive of warning signs and precautions, as I have seen myself and so many other women making excuses in our past for very inappropriate behaviour by men of all ages), I do not see discussing ways of being cautious as blaming the victim any more than defensive driving (I used this analogy at the beginning of this subtopic) means an accident is the fault of the driver who is hit….especially since while in the case of driving that at times might be true, it never is in the case of harassment or assault as no one can be forced to do these immoral acts unlike accidental plowing into a car that stopped too quickly or crossed a line.

As I mentioned, Risk is not a binary Risk/No Risk situation.  Risk will never go to zero but it can be reduced.

Sexual assault (like all crime) comes down to the confluence of three things

1. Opportunity

2. Ability

3. Desire 

If you take one of those three things away, there will be no assault.

1. Opportunity: this is probably the easiest factor to control. Most men will never have the opportunity to sexually assault someone because they will never encounter them.   Almost all sexual assault occurs in a private location so staying in a public location can greatly reduce risk.   Also being in groups can decrease opportunity.  Avoiding bars, nightclubs, intoxicated people as well as extremely large crowds (sometime too many people around can get someone the protection of anonymity.    Avoiding Strangers isn't enough, most assault happens between people who are  acquainted, so avoiding being alone with someone else is always advisable.  Also, it is important not only to be aware of your surroundings, but to look like one is aware of their surroundings, Head down, ear buds, looking at phone can cause someone to look vulnerable, which can invite trouble.  

2. Ability: there isn't much one can do to affect the ability of someone to cause harm, but if someone looks like they can cause trouble for an assailant, often the assailant will look for someone else.  There is some overlap with no 1.  Having friends around that can cause trouble can often deter attack.  Since much sexual violence occurs between people who are acquainted, knowing your rights, knowing police, lawyers and the "System" as well as making it known that you know this can deter.   I have known many people who get trapped in bad situations, get taken advantage of because the perp knows the victim doesn't know how to get out of their situation.  Just a year ago, I was able to help someone get out of an abusive  financial situation when I helped this person understand how the banking system works, fraud protection, property rights, legal rights, etc.  The perp has since moved on.

3. Desire.  This one is the very hard.  It is difficult know what makes someone desire to assault someone else. Often the victim has no control over this factor.   Being aware of how one communicates is important.  Although, one might think that drawing attention to oneself creates desire, often the opposite is true.  Perps are often looking for the person who is withdrawn, not paying attention and easily separated from friends.   One thing I mention often is avoiding people who can't take no for an answer(on any subject, not just sex).  These, I believe are the most dangerous.  These are people who don't respect the autonomy of others and are the quickest to violate boundaries. 

 

Just some thoughts, risk will never go to zero and one can do everything right and still get in trouble. 

 

 

 

[MustardSeed]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I did not do this thing,

 

Nvmd

Edited June 19 by MustardSeed

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Danzo said:

Avoiding Strangers isn't enough, most assault happens between people who are  acquainted, so avoiding being alone with someone else is always advisable.

How is this not essentially saying anyone is a potential rapist? (Serious question)

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

How is this not essentially saying anyone is a potential rapist? (Serious question)

In a strict logical sense, every man, woman and child is a potential rapist, just like every man woman and child is a potential president of the United States, Every man woman and child is a potential Nobel laureate, Olympic gold medalist or mass murderer.

 

However, we shouldn't treat every man woman or child as a potential rapist unless they initiate some action indicating they are such.  Accusing someone of being a rapist is a terrible accusation, and should not be treated lightly.

the vast majority of the men in this world will have neither the opportunity, the ability or the desire to rape someone.    Only an extremely small percent of all men have the desire to rape someone,  an even smaller percent of those men have the opportunity and ability to rape you.

 

 

 

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Danzo said:

However, we shouldn't treat every man woman or child as a potential rapist unless they initiate some action indicating they are such.  Accusing someone of being a rapist is a terrible accusation, and should not be treated lightly

Don’t disagree with you in the sense of treating someone with the consequences of being a rapist if they are not.    You shouldn’t   Makes no sense.

It is about precaution.  Never being alone where possible to limit this with someone who can overpower you unless there is very good reason to trust them, avoiding places where possible where one is vulnerable….unfortunately truly safe places are few and far between outside our homes (and even there for some the risk is high). Places that should be safe, that we must encounter…stores, banks, doctors’ offices, gyms, parks, schools, public transportation, private transportation, etc are too often sites of harassment and assault.

Edited June 20 by Calm

[The Nehor]

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

No.

Substantially revising/limiting interactions with women in casual conversations with women in social environments.  Ironically, for sort of the same reasons as have been asserted against men.  Some women, feeling they cannot readily differentiate between the "bad" men from the "good" ones, presumptively view "all men as potential rapists."  One potential response to this unfortunate prejudice is to sort of reciprocate.  If a man - one of the good ones - cannot readily differentiate between women who view him as a "potential rapist" and those who do not, he presumptively views all women not known to him to harbor this prejudice, and so on that basis limits his interaction with them so as to mitigate the risk of misunderstandings, false accusations, and so on.  Meanwhile, all the women with whom this man does not interact likewise benefit because, well, there's far less risk of the man raping them if he preemptively declines to interact with them in any meaningful way.

It's not that the "all men are potential rapists" subscribers are "incomprehensible," but rather that they are both prejudices and dangerous, and hence best if avoided altogether.  Nor is it that I "can't connect with" them, but rather that I simply choose not to as a safety and mitigation strategy, both for my sake and theirs.

So your plan is to assume that all women who believe this are inherently dangerous and avoid them.

So you will treat all women as potential threats to your safety because some might be a threat to you?

And yet when the threat to women is potentially sexual assault this mitigation strategy is somehow deranged and unhealthy?

Are you trying to be ironic and self-deprecating here?

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

That's certainly a possibility.  Prejudice is, after all, an inherently irrational sentiment.

I’m going to yoink this and quote it back to you regularly. Thanks in advance.

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

I was never a risk to this young woman, but it was understandable that she could not confirm that in the moment, so to avoid any misunderstanding, I altered my behavior and my interaction with her.  Not because she was "incomprehensible," but because I wanted her to feel safe (and, to some extent, for my own protection).

I suspect that last bit was the main reason.

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

Yes, that.  Also, having my wife around increases the possibility of interacting with women in a social environment, as in her absence I have effectively no such interactions.

So you are already isolating yourself from women. So what changes if you have to treat them all as potential threats as per above?

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

Well, no.  See the above anecdote.

Where a large part of it is about you and protecting yourself.

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

I have no such problem.  I do worry for young men, though.  From a previously-linked article:

"All men are potential rapists" is not only facially prejudicial, it's also alienating and demoralizing.  I have plenty of friends and family.  Other men, particularly young man, may not be so lucky.  And I think it is reasonable for them to be nervous or scared about the "All Men Are Potential Rapists" thing.  Indeed, it seems odd to see people both advocate for this unfortunate sentiment and then turn around and ridicule people who take it seriously.

Honestly if the men who are going to take offense at this “Go their own way” and don’t interact with women that might be for the best.

Also I don’t take seriously the incel/MGTOW/Red-pill/Nick Fuentes followers and others of that ilk. It is just misogyny and homophobia mixed with a very unhealthy amount of homoeroticism and homosociality. It is probably more self-damaging than women proactively treating men as a potential threat and is much more toxic and unnecessary but somehow the whole thing is the fault of women. If women would just behave and not make any man ever feel bad there would be no misogyny. It is all their fault.

You are showing more empathy for these creeps than you are for women who face threats of sexual assault and that should be a cause for serious self-reflection as to why you value the well-being of men over the well-being of women.

[bluebell]

20 hours ago, Danzo said:

It's usually by their behavior.

 

How so?  For example, the women who are raped by men that they had known for years, what behavior by the men should have been a tip to the women?

The man who gropes a woman who's standing in front of him in the grocery store, what behavior should have tipped her off that he was a potential sexual predator but the other guy standing behind her next week won't be?

[bluebell]

19 hours ago, Calm said:

So there are sufficient warnings signs to be aware of in your opinion?

How do you know someone is the wrong person to be worried about?  Can we ignore the risk of being alone with a genial and respectful uncle or teacher or bishop because we can trust they are safe in your view?

Not asking to challenge you, but to understand differences in our views, assuming there will be some differences.  Obviously we both see caution as very important.
 

Since I am the one who has brought up preparing to lower the risk the most in the conversation iirc and in fact that is the only value I see in using the “every man a potential rapist” (to really wake up girls and women so they stop being as dismissive of warning signs and precautions, as I have seen myself and so many other women making excuses in our past for very inappropriate behaviour by men of all ages), I do not see discussing ways of being cautious as blaming the victim any more than defensive driving (I used this analogy at the beginning of this subtopic) means an accident is the fault of the driver who is hit….especially since while in the case of driving that at times might be true, it never is in the case of harassment or assault as no one can be forced to do these immoral acts unlike accidental plowing into a car that stopped too quickly or crossed a line.

A woman in a discussion shared how she had been friends with a man, that he had always been extremely polite and gentlemanly around her.  And then one day he murdered a woman he met online and took out on a date. 

[bluebell]

18 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

 

Nvmd

I am in awe of your self control.

[Danzo]

On 6/20/2026 at 9:11 AM, bluebell said:

How so?  For example, the women who are raped by men that they had known for years, what behavior by the men should have been a tip to the women?

The man who gropes a woman who's standing in front of him in the grocery store, what behavior should have tipped her off that he was a potential sexual predator but the other guy standing behind her next week won't be?

I think you just listed some of the behaviors

[manol]

Bluebell wrote: 

On 6/20/2026 at 11:11 AM, bluebell said:

How so?  For example, the women who are raped by men that they had known for years, what behavior by the men should have been a tip to the women?

The man who gropes a woman who's standing in front of him in the grocery store, what behavior should have tipped her off that he was a potential sexual predator but the other guy standing behind her next week won't be?

To which Danzo replied: 

28 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I think you just listed some of the behaviors

So... @Danzo... it sounds to me like you are saying that the way for a woman to recognize behavior indicating a man may sexually assault her is if he does sexually assault her? 

What am I missing?

Imo the level of apprehension and caution Bluebell and the other women in this thread have expressed is absolutely justified and prudent.  Don't take it personally. 

Edited June 22 by manol

[Danzo]

On 6/20/2026 at 12:14 AM, Calm said:

Don’t disagree with you in the sense of treating someone with the consequences of being a rapist if they are not.    You shouldn’t   Makes no sense.

It is about precaution.  Never being alone where possible to limit this with someone who can overpower you unless there is very good reason to trust them, avoiding places where possible where one is vulnerable….unfortunately truly safe places are few and far between outside our homes (and even there for some the risk is high). Places that should be safe, that we must encounter…stores, banks, doctors’ offices, gyms, parks, schools, public transportation, private transportation, etc are too often sites of harassment and assault.

"all men are potential rapists" is a blanket statement. 

Personal safety is highly situational, humans just don't have the capacity to be hyper vigilant at all times.  They must pick and choose, by their circumstances when to be cautious.  Even the examples you give are highly distorted, you view public places as dangerous, when the vast, overwhelming majority of rapes occur in the home.   You say that for some, the home is a high risk area, and there's the rub,  its always situational.

If one views all men as predators and potential rapist's, then one has the danger of interpreting all actions of men through that lens.  Was I being clumsy in that crowded room or was It assault?, was that smile friendly? or was it something else? 

Sexual assault is always about intent and  often depends on the context.  When I was a Firefighter EMT, I did a lot of touching that in other circumstances would be called sexual assault.  When I was a young father, changing a diaper involved a whole lot more touching than sexual assault.  Due to the "all men are potential rapists" trope, as a man I hesitate to help mothers with their children.  My boys can't gain childcare experience by being babysitters (like I did when I was a youth). I have often been on crowed busses where there is now choice but to be in everybody else's personal space, and the only real way to avoid touching people is to put your hand in your pockets (which is a good way to make sure you fall into someone's lap when the bus takes a sharp corner).

A few months ago our neighbor, who was a young mother, that I didn't know, came to my house and was panicking when her toddler had a fever when her husband was away (my wife was out of town).  I was able to help calm her toddler down by picking him up and singing to him while the medicine was taking effect.  Everything worked out and the mother was grateful, but because the "every man is a rapist" mentality, I was a bit apprehensive to help.  This mothers need seemed to be more important than my apprehension at the time and the help I gave was appreciated.  If the mother had the "every man is a rapist" mentality, she might not have had the courage to seek assistance when she needed it.   

 

 

 

[Danzo]

38 minutes ago, manol said:

Bluebell wrote: 

To which Danzo replied: 

So... @Danzo... it sounds to me like you are saying that the way for a woman to recognize behavior indicating a man may sexually assault her is if he does sexually assault her? 

What am I missing?

Imo the level of apprehension and caution Bluebell and the other women in this thread have expressed is absolutely justified and prudent.  Don't take it personally. 

Men should be judged by their behaviors, not by the fact they are men.  If they are acting like a sexual predator, then they deserve to called sexual predators, however they shouldn't be called a predator when they are minding their own business. Judge people by what they do, not what they are.

How about we just agree that I won't call you a predator and you wont call me a predator unless you or I do something to deserve the label.

Edited June 22 by Danzo

[manol]

18 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Men should be judged by their behaviors, not by the fact they are men.  If they are acting like a sexual predator, then they deserve to called sexual predators, however they shouldn't be called a predator when they are minding their own business. Judge people by what they do, not what they are.

Don't take it personally.  Sexual assault is real and it happens often enough, and without warning enough, that women and girls have every right to err on the side of caution.  You would too if you were in their shoes. 

 

18 minutes ago, Danzo said:

How about we just agree that I won't call you a predator and you wont call me a predator unless you or I do something to deserve the label.

You are more than welcome to call me a potential sexual predator.   I won't take it personally because I know I'm not a sexual predator and have never been one. 

Edited June 22 by manol