By: Matt Wallaert

In reply to Ang Moh.

I feel like this is where we get into having two actually different discussions here.

1) Is what the guys did helpful or hurtful to rape prevention?

2) Is the way in which the author and commenters have expressed their reaction to that going to create more or fewer male allies?

My problem with critiquing them for not being perfect falls into the (2) bucket; those critiques, if not expressed constructively, result in fewer male allies, which we desperately need.

The problem is that hinges on (1) and what we are comparing these dudes to. If we are comparing them to the other teams who chose not to address rape as an issue in this competition, then I’d rather have more of them these guys than less of them. If we compare them to the hypothetical versions of themselves where they built a cheap-to-analyze rape kit (which I think has much higher practical value) after talking to folks who were super familiar with the problem, then yes, I’d much rather have more of the hypothetical versions.

So I suppose that is why I am so passionate in my defense. I recognize that (2) rests on (1), and so I’m arguing that is important to acknowledge both that these guys did something less than perfect but that what they did is actually a good deal better than doing nothing at all. Which, without putting words in her mouth, I think Audrey disagrees with me on – she thinks it would be better for them to have done nothing. Or maybe not – the prose and comment make me think so but I could be entirely off base.

I’m sorry you feel I’m not giving women equal credence. I am showing up, and responding to these comments with a minimum snark and I’d like to think no shortage of intelligence. Which, at least in my world, is one of the highest compliments you can pay: having the intelligent discussion, even when you disagree. Listening and responding, in some depth, and caring enough to keep doing it.

What’s funny is that even that appears to be undervalued by some here. Why spend time writing? Don’t you have better things to do? I wrote it originally after some debate, and have continued to write, because I think it matters how we choose to bring allies and advocates into a cause. And because I think the women here are important voices in doing that. And as a guy who spends a bunch of time trying to bring other guys into the fold, I’d rather you didn’t make it harder for me.

So there we have it. I think some people here agree with me that what they did is suboptimal and others think what they did is actually hurtful; I’ve offered evidence for my side on both funding and attention and I doubt that anyone will say “well you should have been using that special nail polish” as a form of victim blame anytime soon. And I think there are people who think demonizing these guys are wrong (although given how quickly she was shouted down, I wouldn’t expect her to chime in again) and those who think we should demonize them because they actively hurt the cause.

But to the person who called me a pretend ally – I will bet you a significant portion of my income that I have taken more direct action to improve the status of women in America than you have. Am I imperfect in that advocacy? Absolutely. Am I an imperfect dude more generally? Yep. But of all the many things I’ve done in my life, that has been the least socially rewarding: men say idiotic things like “the only reason there are male allies is because they want to get dates” and women point to all the ways we could be doing more.

Side note: I actually had a woman tell me the other day that helping women understand how to use data to negotiate for a raise was teaching them to “act like men”. Since when did men have the monopoly on logic? Fuck me running.

But you’re absolutely right about one thing: I do have other things on my plate right now. Sadly, they are confidential but I will try to remember to tell Audrey about it when it launches and then we can see how she feels. And I promise not to say a damn thing if she thinks it is terrible, so you don’t have to deal with a discussion that isn’t perfectly in line with the community conclusion.

And for what it is worth, the net effect is that I am temporarily less excited to try to work on this problem. And I honestly think that if you step back and look at this discussion, you can see why. Now you can argue that means I shouldn’t be trying to help in the first place, but I think to most folks, this conversation would be discouraging. Because I pointed out at the beginning, if you tell people how bad they are instead of how good they could be, they stop trying.

Maybe that’s a worthwhile metric: I walked away less likely to help with rape prevention (at least temporarily; fortunately, I’ll rebound given my massive ego and belief that this is changeable). Did you? Because if you didn’t, then it is because you are in the position of power. This is your turf, a community of people likely to agree with you. And you used it to make someone else want to help less.

Awesome.

Tara: good call. I should have started by congratulating Audrey for thinking about rape culture, even if I don’t agree with her opinions. I sometimes forget that not everyone understands that when I take the time to make an intelligent argument, I’m trying to say just that. So if I didn’t start with it, at least I can end with it – Audrey, thanks for taking the time to think critically about this issue. I think next time around, there is a way to present it that both talks about the issues with what they did and still encourages male advocacy and I’ve tried to outline how. Look forward to future articles.