A few years ago, on Xmas Eve, I tweeted a simple thought experiment. I never imagined the volume or intensity of response it would generate, but it was clear that it had illuminated a discussion worth having. Revisiting it each Dec 24th has become something of a tradition. [1]
Having done this a few times now, I'd like to include some useful context:
1. A thought experiment is a hypothetical scenario that enables theoretical examination of the consequences or result of a particular variable - it's not a call to action. So please, settle down sirs. [2]
2. The exercise is intended to examine the ways disparate gendered experiences affect the lives of women. It is absolutely not intended to suggest that women are not simultaneously affected by other types of harm, or that women don't harm one another. We do. Not immaterially. [3]
3. The hypothetical occurs over 24 hours. It's unnecessary to explain that it would be problematic if half the population were Thanos'd, because that's not what we're doing here. Men, nor all traces of their existence, are not going to vanish. They literally don't know how. [4]
4. Lastly, (though not exhaustively), Trans women are women, and are thus part of the "women" category here. Because they are women. So that makes sense.
If you would like to contribute regarding disparate gender experiences as a trans man, you are welcome.
Ok here we go. [5]
Women, imagine that for 24 hours, there were no men in the world.
No men are being harmed in the creation of this hypothetical. They will all return. They are safe and happy wherever they are during this hypothetical time period.
What would change? What would you do that day?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
99.46% of US rapists get away with it. (0.54% are incarcerated).
Data varies, but various studies have showed as few as 2% and as many as 10% of reported assaults are false accusations. The most commonly cited rate is 3-5%
There's a couple of important points in play here /1
First, statistically, false accusations only occur if an accusation is made and documented, generally in the form of a police report.
But we also know that only 23% of rapes are reported, so the FA rate is a percentage of that number, not the total. (check study methodology) /2
So in a sample representing circumstances existing per every 1000 occurrences of rape, we know that appx 230 rapes are reported, and 2-10% of those reports contain a false accusation -- BUT, it's not 2-10% of 1000, its 2-10% of 230.
The right is going to gaslight you about Trump’s Proud Boys comment.
1) He misspoke 2) He was entrapped 3) You misunderstood 4) You are lying 5) You are delusional 6) You are delusional and defamatory
But this is important. Don’t let it go. Don’t normalize it. Say instead:
1) His reply was clear and in context 2) The question contained the correct response 3) No I did not 4) No I am not 5) I know what I heard, saw, and can easily re-hear and re-watch 6) A defamatory statement is a lie intended to damage character. Bad facts are not defamation.
Ye Olde, “It was just a joke”
1) Any reasonable person can see that he was not being sarcastic
2) Trump is literally never actually sarcastic, ever
3) Not at all an appropriate topic for sarcasm, and if he were, it would be condescending and dismissive
I mean, isn't he a reporter? he could have reported on the tapes instead of keeping them for his book - i.e. the medium most profitable to him - seven months and 190,000 lives later. He sat on information that the president was lying about a deadly public health risk.
Imagine you're a substitute teacher and the principal at one of your schools tells you he's just learned there is flesh eating bacteria growing in all the walls and ceilings, but he's going to tell everyone it's totally fine. Do you write a book? Or get the kids tf out of there?
Worth noting that this is the same Bob Woodward who, during the confirmation hearings, sat on a story that Kavanaugh had lied in a 1999 public letter, widely published, denying that he was an inside source during the Starr investigation. He was in fact, Woodward's inside source.
@unca_fa It may surprise you to learn, though I hope not, that I am, with rare exception, not opposed whatsoever to disagreement so long as it opens dialogue in good faith. My support for Harris is solidarity based, given the road ahead of her. I also read her record differently.
@unca_fa I think Harris is a good example of a woman who wants to create meaningful change and took the roles that put her on the path to access. She performed them in accordance with expectations, with notable exceptions, because that is necessary to travel that path successfully.
@unca_fa I have read perspectives of her performance as a DA and AG that are in line with yours, and I have also read about numerous examples that contradict that construction. I have found those more persuasive, though I dont expect to agree with every choice she has made or will make.