>

Agreed. A lot people say the victim is "lucky" to have that happen to them simply because they're men.
I agree that sexual assault, female on male, should be treated just as seriously as the reverse, and I agree that there are double standards. However, I do not accept the premise that male sexual violence against women is treated as harshly as you imply. Everybody hates a hypothetical rapist, but people often turn a blind eye or make excuses when it turns out to be their friends or family, and actual conviction rates are pitiful. >

Even if that’s true society as a whole would demolish that person. Women can be found to actually have assaulted someone and no one really talks about it >

Hey, so this isn’t as true as we’d like it to be.  The guy who was convicted of violently raping me served six months house arrest during which he was able to leave the house for work and limited recreation.  He hasn’t been shunned or ostracized.  I actually did lose friends because I reported him, and lost my job because I was missing work for the trial.
I won’t go into lots of detail about what he did, but it took me six months to physically recover.
His life is just fine. >

I don’t think this one example can trump numerous other ones. And by what measure do you say his life is fine? >

You've got this a bit reversed.  
The cases of a man sexually harrassing/assaulting a women are more likely to have very few consequences for the aggressor than otherwise.  
Most women have experienced/will experience such a thing in their life, and their aggressor won't be convicted of anything because it will not be reported, dismissed, or have barely any punishment for it. >

But we aren’t compare victims justice to abusers consequences. We’re comparing male victims to female victims and the outcomes. >

Not in the last 4 comments. >

Huh? >

Your argument is all over the place.
Premises: 

if a woman s*xually assaults a man, it is treated as something less serious. This is unacceptable

True. And valid.

Regardless of gender, a 16-year-old is vulnerable to being manipulated or exploited.

True. And valid. But I'm getting closer to asking you the important question.

So as a result, I think that the age of consent laws should be changed.

That's a non sequitur. Age of consent laws don't have any bearing on the social views of gendered victims. E.g., age of consent laws create a victim/perpetrator by definition. You're talking about two different things - law and culture.
The bulk of what you're trying to discuss here is covered by 'traditional values.' Women were generally viewed as delicate - and in need of care. This cultural thought has shifted. But it's slow. So we still have a lot of the 'care' stuff when it's not necessary. Family courts are a good example.
So, yes, there is a double standard. But no, I don't think it's wrong. I just think the standard is warped. Men and women are different - biologically, mentally, etc. We are the same species but serve entirely different roles within our species. Having standards is not a bad thing - having irrational standards is.
This is slowly changing. Women are no longer experiencing the 'care' (I use that term loosely, because it was mainly just misogyny)  that they did in the past. And that standard takes time to change. I honestly think that the bigger issue is in 'pretending people can do whatever they want without consequence' as that seems to be the more common thread. 
E.g., sex-workers claiming that sex work is an admirable venture. >

I agree to an extent. Age of consent laws do create a victim by definition, and age of consent laws aren't gender specific. I do think however in some countries they can be improved, as for the age of consent laws in the US, they are good but that does not apply for the rest of the world. The view is changing, I agree.
I do not however understand what you mean buy

So, yes, there is a double standard. But no, I don't think it's wrong.

Could you elaborate on that section? >


I do think however in some countries they can be improved

Based on what? There's no universal right and wrong. You're speaking of a cultural issue - not an issue of all humanity.

Could you elaborate on that section?

Double standards are only double standards when you ignore the actual differences in principles. You can agree or disagree all you want - but true double standards are incredibly rare. >

I agree that there is no universal right or wrong, what I am saying is that there are some principals that everyone agrees on namely; the age of consent should not be lower than 13,  a 40 year old should not be allowed to have sex with a 14 year old, even if she has consented and rape should be treated very seriously. This unfortunately, is not the case for some countries in the world. 
True double standards are rare, true. I do think that double standards are at play to an extent here though. >


some principals that everyone agrees on namely; the age of consent should not be lower than 13

While I agree, I'm going to be the devil's advocate.
Why? What the difference between 13 and 14? 14 and 16? 16 and 18? >

Generally, 13 is the age where puberty starts to really hit, and hormones that make you horny, start to increase drastically at that age. There is little difference between 13 and 14 but generally 13 is widely accepted as the start of major puberty, and as of the start of teenager life. As for difference between 14 and 16 and 18, a 16 year old is generally going to be more mature and intelligent then a 14 year old and so one... There is not concrete answer but there has to be A answer, as there has to be A age, it's the same thing with the age that you become an adult, it is somewhat arbitrary, yes! But does there have to be an age, also yes. >

Puberty starts on average at 11 for girls and 12 for boys.
That throws a wrench in your 'at least 14' argument based on puberty. >

I did not state that puberty started, I stated that hormones that make you horny start to increase drastically at that age.
The vast majority of 11/12 year olds have not gotten horny ever. >

So your argument just went from subjective to really subjective. You're attempt to quantify the unquantifiable.
There is no 'this person is fully capable' brand. It's shades of grey all the way up. Which is why we look down on employer/employee relationships - because of the power imbalance. Fully capable adults - yet we still allow for a victim status.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say other than 'I think it's unfair' but you haven't explained the why behind it. Just observations that have explanations. >

I agree, that there is not this person is fully capable brand, I also agree  that if there is a power imbalance in the relationship it should be looked down upon. But that has nothing to do with what I'm trying to say. 
What I'm trying to say (in one sentence) is that sexual assault, rape and similar acts should be treated very seriously, regardless of gender. >

I’m sorry to hear you feel this way. I can tell you that in the US women & men don’t typically get justice over their abusers. Most people who are sexually assaulted don’t report their assault. Due to various reasons we know that at least 1 in 3 women are sexually assaulted by age 18. The statistics are that 1 in 7 men are sexually assaulted by age 18. There’s no doubt that statistics based on self-report are not accurate.
What you have asked about is not a male vs female issue. Sexual assault & sexual harassment are a human issue. >

I agree, that was my main point, that sexual assault should be treated seriously, disregarding gender. >

Of course. Sexual assault allegations should never be treated differently & there is not evidence that the reports that are made by men & women are treated differently. Unfortunately most victims, men & women, never report their assault to authorities. It’s a humiliating experience to even bring a report of assault to authorities & the legal system has a terrible track record when it comes to charges brought & convictions of the perpetrators of sexual violence.
There is no evidence that males & females are treated differently in regards to the seriousness with which their allegations are taken. I don’t doubt that you are expressing a feeling from your own experience, but to stop sexual predators it is most valuable to have males & females work together to change the dynamics of how all victims are treated. >

Your post starts with sexual harassment. First question: What is your evidence that women’s reports of sexual harassment are treated more seriously than men’s?
You then move on to sexual assault & state that when women accuse men of sexual assault the men are “thrown in jail.” Second question: What is your evidence that men who sexually assault women are jailed at higher rates than women who sexually assault men? 
Third question: Why did you not ask about men who sexually assault men? >

I disagree, but only in the perspective of how society is gradually changing. The laws and the police on the other hand? No, that is unfortunate, but social progress is and will put pressure to improve the issue of legal processes.
The stories of sexual assault of men, here and that I have heard elsewhere are taken with care by those who read them, I myself try to say fight, yes.... Surely nothing will come of it, but with women either, the first few years of fighting for it to be taken seriously will always be like that. And it's hard, it's horrible that you have to expose yourself, but it's the step you have to take. The law is like that, until they kill someone it was not forbidden to kill someone.
Women continue to be recriminated, that it may be false or that they are guilty.
Men are recriminated in different ways, for their strength, sexuality, which is false.
Victims, please look for people who LISTEN AND SUPPORT YOU, FIGHT to be recognized and get justice. From the bottom of my heart, I wish you all the best. Slowly societies are seeing sex crime for what it is, a crime. >

The reason sexual assault (SA) isn't taken as seriously when women commit it against men is because we, as a society, don't view women as threatening or potentially dangerous. This isn't true and plenty of women have proven that the so-called "fairer sex" can be just as violent and screwed up as any man.
But facts are often obscured by societal norms and values. Humans are, at their core, a species that values storytelling and communicating information with a personal element to it. Most people, unless they have a legal or scientific background (or they're unusually interested in the topic at hand), tend to zone out when people bring up facts, data, charts, etc.
Unfortunately, some of the blame is due to men themselves. We balk at the idea of ever appearing "weak" or not in control of the situation. We see ourselves as powerful leaders (or worse yet, "alpha males") even when we know that's not true for the majority of us, and even when it is true, it isn't true ALL the time.
If a woman can overpower a man and SA him, men take that as a personal attack not against men as a whole, but themselves. It makes us stop and for a moment, the delusion we've created for ourselves as the "the hero" is broken and we realize we might actually be vulnerable.
So how do we respond to this? Do we unite in solidarity and help one another? Hell no! We make jokes about the guy who was a "wuss" and "allowed" himself to become a victim. Like sharks, we smell blood in the water and eat our own.
Interestingly enough, it's because men so rarely work together (unless the task is traditionally manly, such as building something, shooting guns, or driving cars really fast) that certain body-related issues — like height or genitalia size — also remain targets for jokes and abrasive commentary.
The reason I brought that up is because look at what women have done with weight-related issues. They banded together (not all of them, certainly, but enough) and started a movement against body shaming, despite the ridicule that followed and still happens from time to time. It's just one more example of men turning on one another instead of propping each other up.
(Just so you know, I'm not taking the high road here and claiming that I, a man, haven't been guilty of this behavior in the past myself. I try not to act that way now, partially because I've mellowed with age, but also because there's really no reason to be a jerk. It doesn't help me or anyone else.)
And for the record, I'm not saying ALL of this is the fault of men. It's not. However, it's also true that we're not doing ourselves any favors and instead are hurting each other in the long run. >

Society paints women as victims. We’re weaker, more vulnerable and need to be protected. As such, we can’t hold power of any kind - we can’t be heros, nor can we be villains, since heros and villains are equally powerful. Just look at all the rage that rises up any time there’s a strong female lead since it’s so “unrealistic” for a woman to be strong.
Men are strong. Male heroes and villains and overrepresented in media. There’s barely such a thing as a weak man in media, and if he exists, he’s the butt of the joke. 
Since we as a society see men as holding all the power, it’s hard to take male victims and female villains/heroes seriously. >

Admittedly, the idea of what constitutes a "strong" female hero is all over the place. 
I think most of the issues revolving around a physically strong female hero isn't that a woman can't be strong, just that it can be immersion-breaking to see a woman who's 5'3" and maybe 100 lbs tossing guys who're over six feet tall and 200 lbs around as if they're ragdolls. 
In my mind, a strong female hero doesn't mean she can bench-press a truck, it means she's smart, resourceful, and understands when she needs assistance and when she can do it on her own. Some people might see the latter as weakness, but it's not. Knowing you need help and accepting it is called maturity, and a lot of male heroes in Hollywood are basically emotionally-stunted psychopaths who'll make some ridiculous quip after killing a ton of no-name henchmen. 
Good examples of "strong" female heroes would be Ellen Ripley (Alien series), Sarah Connor (Terminator series), Lorraine Broughton (Atomic Blonde), Flynne Fisher (The Peripheral, TV series), Lady Cornelia Locke (The English, limited TV series), and there are undoubtedly many others I can't think of at the moment. All of these women can kick butt, but they also understand their own limitations, ask for help when they need it, and aren't a "one-woman army" who also hates men. 
But this is somewhat off-topic... :) >

Yet, nobody thinks it’s breaking immersion when male heroes do unbelievable shit :) And nobody thinks that male heroes need to know when they need help in order to be believable. Male heroes are not expected to ever need help :) Male heroes are the default, female heroes need to jump through hoops to be taken seriously :) >

You're making a lot of assumptions because I do find a lot of what male heroes do is immersion breaking.
Like the example I originally illustrated regarding male heroes, I think it's insane that we're supposed to cheer for a guy who guns down tons of rank-and-file enemies and then makes a joke about it. Why are we glorifying someone who's a psychopath?
And I do think male heroes should ask for help. Some do and more have been within the last decade or so, but others... yeah, not so much. The ones that don't often aren't well-written characters, so there's a whole bunch of problems with them that make me (and many other people I know) roll our eyes.
Plus, men in movies who have realistic responses to things (like screaming if a giant robot dinosaur stomps down in front of them) are often cast as the comic relief or cowards. Yeah, fear isn't something the audience considers "okay" to show in male heroes, and while that can be a positive trait in very specific situations, it's also a huge negative because it stops the characters themselves from being believable protagonists and turns them into two-dimensional caricatures.
In short, poor writing and relying on tropes makes for bad characters, male or female. >

That’s the thing.
The only time when male heroes are criticized is in this scenario, when I bring up the double standard of female heroes being criticized while male are not. No one ever starts the conversation by criticizing male heroes because they are so normal. The default man in media is a strong hero. Male heroes are way overrepresented. As are weak women. >

women nudity is taken more seriously because men have made it that way by objectifying and sexualizing women. this isnt a positive for women or something they want. womens bodies should be seen as relatively normal, men just dont view them that way like women view mens bodies >

This is a little off topic, but what about women who sexualize themselves and other women? Or the women that sexualize men? 
Wanting more attention on men's issues does not invalidate women's issues, and it irritates me that people actually think that. >

its honestly like you didnt even read my comment. for starters the whataboutism is off the charts

what about women who sexualize themselves and other women?

i said

this isnt a positive for women or something they want

so if women dont want to be sexualized in society, why would you assume the reason why womens bodies are sexualized and mens arent is due to women sexualizing themselves?
and also are you arguing that women doing what they want with their own body and sexualizing it gives everyone else equal right to do so as well?
this isnt even including the fact that all current and historial evidence and trends shows the sexualizion of women is a result of oppression by men. thats why whatsboutism is a fallacy. 

Or the women that sexualize men?

the original point i was countering was that womens nudity is taken more seriously than mens. i was explaining why this happens. if women sexualized men at the same rate men sexualize women or even at any significant rate then womens nudity wouldn't be taken more seriously than mens

Wanting more attention on men's issues does not invalidate women's issues,

this is very manipulative wording. im not claiming we shouldnt focus on mens issues because it invalidates womens. im countering the fact this is a mens issue at all. which is not, because womens bodies being sexualized is oppression against women, not men >

The whole post is about men's issues.

for starters the whataboutism is off the charts
My "whataboutism" had purpose in my reply. This post is about men's issues, and you made it about women's. My point was that you saying it's all about men oppressing women is a fallacy. It's not just men. 
if women sexualized men at the same rate men sexualize women or even at any significant rate then womens nudity wouldn't be taken more seriously than mens

Well, the thing is, they do. But nobody makes a big deal out of it because it's not a woman. Men get sexualized around as much as women do. 

im countering the fact this is a mens issue at all. which is not, because womens bodies being sexualized is oppression against women, not men

What exactly do you mean by this? Because men who have been sexually assaulted, harassed, or abused being ignored is a very big men's issue. >


Well, the thing is, they do. But nobody makes a big deal out of it because it's not a woman. Men get sexualized around as much as women do. 

if they were, womens nudity wouldnt be seen as less normal as mens as OP argued in his original point

Because men who have been sexually assaulted, harassed, or abused being ignored is a very big men's issue.

some men have been murdered or robbed. that does not make them mens issues. a man experiencing something negative doesnt make it a mens issue. 
the reason why things like sexual assault are seen as womens issues because it happens to them with men as the perpetrators on a systematic level at a significant rate. assault done to men isnt talked about as much not because of oppression against men, but because it just doesnt happen as often as it happens to women
i also love the argument that only men are ignored about assault and abuse as it people believe and listen to women. the whole reasons movements like metoo were started is because women weren't believed or listened to
edit: i love how you downvoted it the second i posted this comment without even enough time to read it. >

Again, you're making it all about women. And you really think that women being raped is a systemic issue? Do you think that the government encourages it/ pardons it completely? 

some men have been murdered or robbed. that does not make them mens issues.

Except that men being murdered and robbed at a significantly higher rate than women would make it a men's issue. Just like suicide rates, homelessness, etc. Those are men's issues. 
And I don't know how many times you need me to say this, this post is about MENS issues. Nobody here is invalidating women, but it almost seems like you're trying to invalidate men. 

i also love the argument that only men are ignored about assault and abuse as it people believe and listen to women. the whole reasons movements like metoo were started is because women weren't believed or listened to

I never said only men are ignored about assault. They are much more likely to be ignored, made fun of, and blamed for it. That doesn't invalidate women being victim blamed, too. It's an issue on both sides, but one side is being much more ignored. 
Just like when men are abused, it's almost always blamed on the man by the majority. Even if all the proof points to the woman abusing the man, the majority wither rolls their eyes or villainizes the man, accusing him of being the violent one. >

How do you think that changing age of consent laws will change the problems that you mentioned (such as male assault and men's mental health not being taken seriously)? >

Yes is not taken as seriously because our society has toxic masculinity standards created by men themselves, it hurts them and they are not realizing. I had a guy friend of mine brag about sleeping with an adult women when he was 12. I told him that was abuse and he just went to brag to other boys and told me I didn't understand cause I was "not a boy". Another friend of mine, his dad got him a hooker so he could lose his virginity with her when he was 12 as a birthday gift, he was also bragging. What I am trying to say is many straight men promote this type of behavior to one another normalizing men almost as sexual addicts or people who are always down for sex no matter what so when things like that happen nobody takes seriously. 
About nudity, is not taken seriously because men are usually not shamed for being nude, they literally walk around shirtless and pee in the streets... They are the ones who shame women if they show too much skin, they even shame women who wears burka. If a guys nude leaks ofc is a bad thing not saying is not but there are reasons why it doesn't has the same repercussion as when it's a woman . >

OK what about when woman laugh at, ignore or minimise the man getting the sexually assaulted? That due to toxic masculinity as well? I get what your saying to a point especially about how statutory grape is glorified with males where it definitely isn't with females but why do we always say well its because men are toxic is why men have the issues they have and then when we talk about issues that effect women it because men are toxic? >


That due to toxic masculinity as well? 

Yes, it is. >

You're right.
And too often it's also true when women are victims.
It sucks to be a victim of these things, and we should all act to support these victims regardless of their identity.