You want to say Hi to the cute girl on the subway. How will she react? Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her. Really. Even to say that you like her hair, shoes, or book. A compliment is not always a reason for women to smile and say thank you. You are a threat, remember? You are Schrödinger’s Rapist. Don’t assume that whatever you have to say will win her over with charm or flattery. Believe what she’s signaling, and back off.

an excerpt from Phaedra Starling’s “Schrödinger’s Rapist: or a guy’s guide to approaching strange women without being maced” (via lostgrrrls)

I have a serious problem with this! And it’s not because I like hitting on cute girls on a subway, or because I disagree with the sentiment that a man who ignores a woman’s wishes in a non-sexual situation is more likely to do so in a sexual one. All that is a given.

My issue is with the part of the post where claims are made as to what a woman might be signalling when she is reading a book and so on. Guess what, she ain’t signalling shit! She is reading a fucking book or looking out the damn window. Communication is not about sending oblique signals to the potentially obtuse.

If I were to send you a note written in ancient Sumerian, a language there is an excellent chance you will not understand, I would be stupid to expect you to understand it.

If I were to attempt to communicate with you telepathically and expect that to work, I’d be even more stupid. And if I were then to go and complain to the world that you did not understand my telepathic signals, that would be idiotic.

So please, while it is so right, that no actually always means no; that men who do not accept a no in a non-sexual context are less likely to accept it in a sexually charged one; that we live in a society that has made much of what you or I would consider rape, tolerated if not outright acceptable; letting people think that they are communicating something by reading a fucking book on the subway is simply careless and dangerous.

We do not need to tell our young men and women that communicating by signals and grunts and expecting that to be understood is ok. We need to tell our young women and men to communicate verbally in a clear and precise manner.

I for one am not telling my daughter: “Honey if you feel threatened and don’t want to be bothered, then sit down and read a book or stare out the window.” instead I am telling her: “If you don’t like something or feel threatened, say so loudly and clearly in a tone that brooks no argument.”

So if you happen to be that woman on the subway reading a book, and I happen to have a hankering to speak to you, then I will certainly open my mouth and do so. And if you then verbally tell me you do not wish to interact at this time, I will certainly respect that.

If you thereby consider calling me a rapist, Schrödinger’s or otherwise, you are insulting both me and your own intelligence, because you know better than that. And remember:

If you combat misogyny by adding misandry, you end up with misanthropy.