No means… well it means no, really.

I knew that sooner or later something about the Kobe Bryant case would send me into an apoplectic rage… and here it is. On Thursday, Gregg Easterbrook of the New Republic wrote a little column about how all men know that no doesn’t really mean that:
Because men know this–because in the real world “no” does not always mean no–speaking the word “no” is not the ideal way to communicate to a man that what is happening has changed from persuasion, or pressure, to compulsion. Men not only want sex, the male mindset holds that overcoming the woman’s “no” is part of manliness.
He goes on to suggest that instead of using the word “no” to mean “no,” that perhaps we should have some other mutually agreed upon signal, such as “this is rape” which would help the man understand that the woman was serious about not wanting his advances.
I have a different suggestion… how about this as a signal: when the woman says “no” and the guy doesn’t seem to understand that it means no, instead of the woman saying “this is rape” how about if she pulls out a gun, and blows the guy’s head off. That would send a pretty clear signal, I think. Or maybe he could just stop when she says “no” in the first place.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.