This post was removed by request of the author.
|
This entry was posted
by Pseudo-Adrienne and is filed under Anti-feminists and their pals, Feminism, sexism, etc, Rape, intimate violence, & related issues.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
June 28th, 2005 at 12:34 pm
Yeeps! Can you fix the typo in my third to last paragraph??
thanks.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 12:39 pm
One of the things that I’ve done at home, but not committed to memory, is the ways in which I believe the majority of men benefit from rape. I consider benefit to happen any time one set of citizens is deprived of certain rights or bodily integrity — that if harm is being done, someone, somewhere, is being benefited. The areas that seem most glaring to me involve access to public space and facilities — access that women are restricted to because of socialized norms of either acceptable behavior or through fear of rape and the “need to protect oneself” that often leads to women not inhabiting the same social space that men inhabit. As I try to mention above, it isn’t that women shouldn’t be desocialized from their passive roles (and we are socialized to be passive), it’s that we have to let women know that it isn’t thier passive roles that lead to rape: the passive roles lead to excuses for rape and therefore you see the seed the preempts socializing girls and women into passivity.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 12:40 pm
Okay no problem, but could you be more specific–sorry, I can’t read today :-)
This comment was written by Pseudo-Adrienne.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 12:40 pm
You mean a thread without trolls? No more discussoins about how mean it is for women to not give up the vagina when men demand it? NO more long-winded avoidance of the topic so we can placate guys who are either nineteen or ‘feminists’?
Yippee!
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 12:45 pm
You know, the double standared isn’t two sets of parallel standards, like the Army physical—complimentary and similar. It’s war. One side can only rise if the other side falls. One side relfects the other side. That’s how men benefit from rape. With women shoved off the streets, men ahve more freedom. With women made the gatekeepers of men’s actions, men are freed from doing so. Men get freedom; women get obligation. Men benefit; women suffer.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 12:45 pm
it should read: if they fail to do this.
:) Thanks.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 12:48 pm
“With women made the gatekeepers of men’s actions, ”
The thing with this is that I don’t believe that many people, male or female, still believe that women are in this role. I’ve been in it myself, personally, recently so I know it is alive and well. But I do think it needs to be addressed, especially when paralled with the ways in which women’s bodies and freedoms are curtailed through force and the threat of force/fear of force.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 12:50 pm
And discussing rape as rape? Not as something else? No metaphors, no deceptions or excuses?
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 12:53 pm
You don’t believe people believe this? It’s there inherent in every blame-the-victim scenario, every incident where a woman got asked what she was wearing. Men get to do what they want. Women apply the brakes. What else is it?
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 12:54 pm
Great points Q girl & P-A. I think your point on restricted access is right on. I’m a runner and one of the things I enjoy is running at night when it is too hot during the day. I’ve encouraged many women to do the same and about 90% refuse outright for fear of thier safety. The other big one is women who never run alone, even during the day on well-traveled routes. This makes me so angry and sad, though of course, not nearly so as the women actually affected.
I disagree about desocializing women to be passive. I agree it is quite hurtful to say something after a woman has been raped, but I think in general we should encourage women, especially girls, to be as active and dynamic as men are encourage to be.
This comment was written by Ron O.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:01 pm
Rivka’s post on this thread is also pretty cool. I’ve been backing and forting in the comments over there
One thing stands out. I know people are trying to be kind, and really honestly think they’re respectful to women, but using a phrase like “dressed to provocitavley” is blaming the victim.
So is jumping all over what the women should have done to prevent the rape.
What gets me is that this derails discussion of what really mgiht work in rape prevention long term, which is some way to eliminate the attitudes that help create rape.
What also gets me is that I’m a strong proponent of programs like IMPACT which teach self desense skills.
I’m trying to align my promoting those programs with my refusal to blame the victim. I think what I try not to do the most is talk about what a woman ought to have done to avoid a specific rape, but promote these programs as empoweing for all dangerous situations. Not just rape. And not just for women.
How’s that sound?
This comment was written by Josh Jasper.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:06 pm
I’m really uncomfortable with the whole notion of even discussing what women could do to avoid rape, frankly. It kind of presumes they’re not doing enough already. It also avoids dealing witht he paralysis that you can sometimes get when someone known someone you trusted suddenly tries this with you.
Never seen a program that dealt effectively with that.
Also never saw a program that took men to task for not nailing other guys for this shit.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:11 pm
One thing that would actually be effective that women could do to prevent rape is to…SHOOT TO KILL, ALL MEN, ON SIGHT. Otherwise, I think we’re stuck working on preventing rape from the criminal’s side.
This comment was written by Kai Jones.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:11 pm
Ginmar: maybe what I meant is that people are unwilling to admit that this is still women’s social role.
I’m all for women protecting themselves and I do it can be done and can be taught without it becoming all about blame the victim. I got in a verbal argument wtih my brother about 10 years ago where he lost his shit and threw something at me. I went to protect myself and wound up breaking a bone in my foot on his inner thigh (missed the testicles). He had the nerve afterwards to act like a big brother/protectionist and advise me to take self-defense lessons. THAT was blaming the victim. What he didn’t know is that I’d played rugby for many years and learned exactly how much pain I can sustain before I completely give up. Had he been a stranger, a broken foot would not have stopped me. THAT is learning how to protect oneself as a woman (according to Q Grrl’s low-income street rules).
I think rape is a little more complicated in that it is not always as straight forward as overt violence and it is *completely* tied up in how we socialize girls and young women into their sexuality. Well, and how we socialize boys and young men into their sexuality.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:18 pm
then again, I completely agree with Ginmar.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:43 pm
Is rape all that big a problem in the world you-all live in?
I’ve been around the block a bit, and one of my many friends was raped once, long ago. Mostly it doesn’t happen. And didn’t happen, when we were all a lot younger. It was quite rare, actually.
Now, I don’t think for one nanosecond that either men or women have changed in the last 40 years. So, what gives here?
This comment was written by Susan.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:44 pm
(Please for the love of God spare me the “you-all were RAPED RAPED and you didn’t even know it!!!” line of argument.)
This comment was written by Susan.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:45 pm
The only completely effective thing that women can do to stop rape is to stop breathing (and even then you’ve got necrophiliacs to contend with).
I don’t think we can saying it often enough — the only way to prevent rape is for men to stop doing it. Of course, we’re never going to get rid of all rape but we could reduce it by forcing people (men and women both) to confront the kinds of attitudes that lead to rape, like –
This comment was written by AndiF.. fucking is what men do to women
. women trade sex to get a man
. boys will be boys
. you can’t blame a guy for trying
. women dont really mean no when they say it
. and stolen from ginmar’s blog: men need to protect women (which really means that men want to control women)
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:49 pm
Girls. (that means, not boys, OK, so don’t jump all over me)
Is this all that common? Rape, I mean? It hardly ever happened 40 years ago.
This comment was written by Susan.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:50 pm
I want to live in Susan’s gated community.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:53 pm
Susan: at least half of the women I know have been sexually assaulted in some way. This is in suburban Dallas. It is, unfortunately, quite common. People didn’t talk about is as much forty years ago.
This comment was written by cclough.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:53 pm
Furthermore, the sidetracking of rape discussions into issues of how men are also socially hurt is complete horseshit.
You wanna know what socially hurts men? Rape. Not in this dismissive “oh, it happens to men too” sense that the apologists use, but in the sense that men’s lives are noticeably worse because of rape and rape culture.
We’re hurt by a rape culture where women are expected to be eternally vigilant in their interactions with us. So why aren’t we (and by “we,” I mean “men”) being more vigilant about it ourselves?
We’re hurt by a rape culture that declares women the gatekeepers of sex while simultaneously discouraging them from being sexual agents. So why aren’t we encouraging the idea of mutuality and an “enthusiastic participation” standard?
We’re hurt by the folks who promote irresponsibility under the adage “boys will be boys.” So why don’t we change what “being a boy” is into something constructive?
We’re hurt by a culture that tells us we should be entitled to any woman we like, and insulted if she doesn’t like us back. So why don’t we start teaching that attraction is not something owed to anyone, and that unrequited attraction isn’t blameworthy?
We need to stop whining about how we’ve done our share by not personally raping anyone, and anything else is women’s fault for what they wear or what they don’t wear, for going home alone or with a stranger or with someone she knows or with a group, for not fighting back or not giving in, for not saying “no” or not saying it loudly enough or not meaning it. Because this culture we’re in? It’s broken.
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:56 pm
Susan: what would you like to talk about instead?
Maybe we can talk about the Congo? I’m particularly fond of the number 40,000. Especially when 40,000 happens over a 4 year spread. 10,000/year. Yet our troops are in Iraq.
Wait, I’m getting ahead of myself.
Susan: Do you believe that girls and young women are socialized to fear rape? If not, please explain.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 1:59 pm
Susan, I don’t know what the fuck your problem is, but this time around I won’t put up with obnoxious trolls who derail the entire thread (like Aegis and Nephandus) to avoid discussing the topic, its points, or dismiss it all together. Do you have anything intelligent to say, a coherent argument maybe, or are you just going to be rude, and get banned? If you get banned, it’s because of your behavior–not your disagreeing opinion(s). Disagreement and differing view-points are perfectly okay, but all I see from you is immature trollish behavior. And age and experiencing things do not always grant someone vast wisdom, knowledge, and maturity. Someone can be sixty and experience many things, and yet still be ignorant and immature.
This comment was written by Pseudo-Adrienne.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:01 pm
ha ha, Q Grrl.
Anything but.
As a young woman I hitchhiked all over this country and Europe, alone, or with one male companion. Dated all sorts, went to frat parties, you name it I did it. (And a bunch of stuff you probably couldn’t think of even.) Then I married early and became a hippie in the Haight. Low dresses, long dresses, lack of stated restraints. Danced naked in the park, yadda yadda.
I’ve been all over, mostly alone. Guys have hit on me plenty, but no one ever threatened, let alone achieved, rape. I can say the same of my girl friends, all of whom lived as I lived, and one of whom only was raped. (A guy jumped out of the bushes in Central Park.) I was known as a pretty hot babe in my day, and shy I wasn’t. But no one ever threatened me. It wasn’t done, if you know what I mean.
The guy in Central Park, OK. Random criminal act. But men you knew? ya gotta be kidding. No one, male or female, would ever have spoken to the creep again. Quick route to being a total outcast. And on the girl’s word alone.
No one did it. Or almost no one. Unthinkable.
This comment was written by Susan.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:05 pm
“It wasn’t done, if you know what I mean. ”
Yeah, right. Tell that to the girls who knew the Kennedy’s.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:07 pm
“It hardly ever happened 40 years ago.”
Where’s your proof? Any stats with links? Or is this just another one of your opinions since you have presented no factual evidence to substantiate it? And maybe rape “hardly ever happened 40 years ago” because people dismissed women’s accusations of rape and sexual assault as “she was a whore,” “she’s being hysterical,” “she was askin’ for it,” “prostitutes can’t be raped,” “she was married to him–she consented to all sex with him when she married him,” etc., so the rapes were never proven or even reported. Yet amazingly, we still deal with this shit today.
This comment was written by Pseudo-Adrienne.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:11 pm
Susan: at least half of the women I know have been sexually assaulted in some way. This is in suburban Dallas. It is, unfortunately, quite common. People didn’t talk about is as much forty years ago.
Wow. No kidding. This surprises me.
Forty years ago we talked our head off to each other at least, don’t kid yourselves. But this wasn’t true then.
I suppose, to answer your other question, that women are socialized to fear rape, but this wasn’t a big issue in my generation since it happened so rarely. We’re all socialized to fear theft too, which was a lot more common. I think this misunderstanding (the frequency of the threat) may be behind a lot of our collective misunderstandings here.
Susan, I don’t know what the fuck your problem is, but this time around I won’t put up with obnoxious trolls who derail the entire thread (like Aegis and Nephandus) to avoid discussing the topic, its points, or dismiss it all together. Do you have anything intelligent to say, a coherent argument maybe, or are you just going to be rude, and get banned? If you get banned, it’s because of your behavior”“not your disagreeing opinion(s). Disagreement and differing view-points are perfectly okay, but all I see from you is immature trollish behavior. And age and experiencing things do not always grant someone vast wisdom, knowledge, and maturity. Someone can be sixty and experience many things, and yet still be ignorant and immature.
Appreciate your courtesy. Hey, I’m just gathering information. So shoot me. I don’t think I’ve said anything rude. If I have, I apologize, and I’d like a citation to the rude remark so I can avoid rudeness in the future.
I’m wondering what’s going on in the heads of you-all, and what kind of world you’re living in. You (if you weren’t so automatically hostile) might be interested in how women in a previous generation handled this problem, and if it wasn’t a problem then, you might be interested in why it wasn’t.
My answer to the last question is wandering towards a feeling that there were a lot of social constraints which operated to restrain such behavior (rape) which seem not to be operating now. Is this interesting to you, Pseudo-Adrienne? Or do you just want someone to scream at?
This comment was written by Susan.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:12 pm
Susan–just because you’ve never been raped or sexually assaulted, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen back then, or doesn’t happen. And keep trying my patience.
This comment was written by Pseudo-Adrienne.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:12 pm
Susan,
No one did it. Or almost no one. Unthinkable.
Oh they did it but you may not have known about it because what was unthinkable was talking about it. And things that we would clearly call sexual assault today would’ve have been called a “bad date” or “being taken advantage of”.
This comment was written by AndiF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:15 pm
Susan, I am most confused by your turnaround in this issue. On the previous thread you stated very clearly that girls: don’t get very drunk, that’s just stupid (of course, it is a commonsensical advice for everyone, but “you didn’t want to go there”, except I don’t like the “stupid” bit, how is this not blaming the victim?)), and the previous thread was about things to do to avoid rape. Now you are saying it is a nonexistent problem, or almost so. A non-issue, one might say. Care to explain?
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:16 pm
Well, if we’re talking about outright forcible stranger rape, I suppose there are stats somewhere, and I doubt they’ve changed much. There are a certain number of nuts in every generation.
But date rape? Men you knew? It was very rare. Not because guys have changed, but I suspect because mores have changed. A man who did that would have been immediately ostracized by all his friends, male and female both.
Does this interest you at all? Or are you just going to scream at me for the fun of it?
This comment was written by Susan.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:19 pm
Tuomas,
It’s apparently not a non-existent problem now, if 50% of women have been victims. The thing about drink was just a suggestion aimed at what I perceive to be the current culture.
Hey, man, we got drunk a lot. As much as you-all. But it didn’t put you into that kind of danger then.
This comment was written by Susan.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:21 pm
Susan–all of your comments on this thread have been rude, disrespectful, dismissive, and trollish. You’ve derailed this entire thread with your comments. Your other comments on “Amanda’s rape prevention” thread have been rude. Your behavior has proven that you can be middle-aged and still an obnoxious, ignorant, immature ass. And your *banned*, you’ve derailed this thread enough, you troll. Take your ignorant bullshit someplace else.
This comment was written by Pseudo-Adrienne.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:23 pm
But date rape? Men you knew? It was very rare. Not because guys have changed, but I suspect because mores have changed. A man who did that would have been immediately ostracized by all his friends, male and female both.
I don’t what universe you lived in the 60’s but it certainly wasn’t near the one I lived in. Copping a feel was worth bragging rights; “getting into a girl’s pants” made a guy a fucking hero to his friends.
This comment was written by AndiF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:31 pm
The absolute refusal of most people to hold men accountable for their actions has become a real issue in my life of late. Yesterday I was reading about anti-prostitution posters in Sweden that featured men in business suits with prominent wedding rings in a move to get them to stop traveling overseas to prey on vulnerable women in the Baltic. I had never seen similar materials that didn’t have abused-looking women on them before that.
There were posters in the NYC subway a few years ago with “yearbook photos” of women who have been victims of domestic violence, and I wonder what kind of impact shifting the lens of the camera/eye from woman-as-victim to men-as-victim-makers would have. In the current climate it would probably just enrage men whose favorite line is, “But *I* don’t hit women so suggesting all men are abusers makes you a man-hater.”
Howard Stern makes a lovely young woman in a bikini eat from a dog bowl on the floor and attempts to discuss why this is wrong get barraged with, “It’s her choice and this is a free country.” It’s not the woman’s childhood, history, actions or motivations I question but Howard Stern’s. Asking, “Why does Howard Stern want to treat women this way?” makes men either wax philosphical about the immutably cruel nature of human beings or make hollow platitudes about the curious whim of market forces which shall never, ever be questioned. The source of the sexism is never pinned on Howard Stern or his mostly male listeners who enjoy humiliating women and demand such scenes.
This comment was written by Samantha.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:32 pm
Susan,
Where did you get the 50 %? Oh, and I’m not satisfied at your explanation. The thing is, as you said, if stranger rape has been the same, why would you need to take more precautions aginst stranger rape now as opposed to then? (Like not being drunk around strangers etc.)
But you already said that none of your girlfriends had been date raped, and obviously you don’t know (many) cases from that time, then how would you know? (Btw, guys these days have seemingly very anti-rape sentiments like rapists are sick fucks etc. but if some “lying slut” accuses a frien of rape, then well, “it wasn’t a real rape”…) Would have been ostracized, you say. But were they?
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:33 pm
I agree with Jeff. Rape does not benefit men. Women not having access to public places does not make men more free, it makes us less happy.
This comment was written by Piter.I have never taken rape lightly, and have sometimes thought that it should be punished as severely as murder. Does anyone have any concrete suggestions for a man about how to prevent rape (beyond just not doing it himself?)
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:36 pm
Oh. Susan got banned already. Well, my questions were kind of rhetorical anyway. Hey, a non-derailed rape thread? That would be great…
And I agree with all commentors who said that men need to stop cuddling their rapist, sexist buddies.
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:37 pm
Well, if we’re talking about outright forcible stranger rape, I suppose there are stats somewhere, and I doubt they’ve changed much. There are a certain number of nuts in every generation.
But date rape? Men you knew? It was very rare. Not because guys have changed, but I suspect because mores have changed. A man who did that would have been immediately ostracized by all his friends, male and female both.
Wow, rape-myth-tastic!
1) “Forcible stranger rape” is real rape. Anything else is just being victim-y.
2) Most women report rape.
3) Rape is perpetrated by mentally ill men.
4) Once upon a time there were some halcyon days when men respected women. Then feminism came along and invented ‘date rape’, and now we all find ourselves in this huge mess.
Perhaps the UK was simultaneously more liberal and more uptight 40 years ago, because I’ve taken calls from women to my local Rape Crisis line who were raped back then and haven’t told anybody since then. Sadly, I bet someone will be posting the exact same thing on a 2045 blog equivalent.
This comment was written by Emma.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 2:47 pm
Piter,
Does anyone have any concrete suggestions for a man about how to prevent rape (beyond just not doing it himself?)
Yes, call guys on the kind of behavior that can lead to date rape when you see it happening. Men who hassle and grope women and get away with it don’t have that far to go before they assume that they are entitled to take whatever they can get.
This comment was written by AndiF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 3:03 pm
I wasn’t around 40 years ago, but when I was growing up (in the 80s) and the movie Extremities came out (anyone remember that? Farrah Fawcett is raped by a stranger then turns the tables on him), I remember being part of some public discussion of the movie moderated by a rape counselor. She asked the audience to identify a series of situations as rape or not rape. All of us agreed that the rapist in Extremities was clearly out of bounds, but when the question became “is it rape if a husband/boyfriend forces his wife/already-sexually-involved girlfriend?” almost no hands went up. I remember thinking the woman was really pushing the definition of rape too far and destroying her credibility, which I found frustrating. And I considered myself a feminist at the time (yeeg…). I myself was, in fact, in a relationship where I felt I had very little say about when sex was going to happen and what it was going to consist of, and pretty consistently allowed myself to be misused, on the socialized belief that once I’d consented to anything with a man, I had no right to refuse anything at any time. What a chump.
So anyway, I agree with AndiF - I think 20 and 40 years ago, a lot of what most of us would now consider rape was just seen as business as usual, and the climate of ’sexual freedom’ in the 60s (and now, come to think of it) had to have kept a lot of women (especially in the counterculture) from feeling comfortable complaining.
MG
This comment was written by Mary Garden.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 3:24 pm
To follow on what Samantha said, I would love a TV ad with a bunch of actors, selected for their diverse appearances, dressed in street clothes, and doing everyday things such as working in an office, on a construction site, grocery shopping, etc. As the camera panned in on each one, it would center on a big sign hanging around the man’s neck saying “Rapist” or “I date raped and told my friends, but they thought it was cool” or something like that.
After the collage of rapists, perhaps some summation like “Unfortunately, rapists aren’t usually that easy to identify. If you know someone who has bragged about getting a girl drunk and having his way, or slipping a drug into her drink to make her give it up, or threaten her or hurt her to have sex, even if he knows the girl or is in a relationship with her, he has committed rape. Be a man. Report rapists.
This comment was written by odanu.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 3:28 pm
WHAT WE SHOULDN’T BE SOCIALIZING THEM FOR IS THAT IF THEY FAIL TO DO THIS, THEY DESERVE THE OUTCOME OF AN ACTION FREELY CHOSEN BY A MALE PERPETRATOR.
I agree with this. I’m sorry if anything I said was interpreted as saying that it is the girl’s responsibility to prevent rape. I know it is not the victim’s responsibility. My only concern (perhaps unfounded) is that someone will interpret this as a reason not to avoid particularly dangerous situations, or not to advise, e.g., their daughter to avoid particularly dangerous situations.
As a society, though, I agree that we need to blame the people committing the crimes, not the victims.
This comment was written by Glaivester.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 3:36 pm
Well, I noticed on the other rape thread that someone asked about how to identify guys who might be dangerous. Not that the burden should be on us, but still, there’s a very interesting and gut-instinct affirming book called “The Gift Of Fear” by a guy named Gavin De Becker that I read years ago. It didn’t so much teach me what to look out for as it did show why certain guys set off my “get away from this person NOW” alarm. Like, oh, that’s why I always feel unsafe when a guy won’t listen to me saying I don’t need his help - he’s not respecting my “no”. And it really told me that yes, if I had a feeling, an instinct, about a man possibly being dangerous, then I should listen to that and honor that and not get caught in that “oh but I don’t want to hurt his feelings, I’m sure he’s REALLY a nice guy” guilt bullshit that bad guys use to sucker you in. It happens in supposedly safe social situations all the time. The books details really clearly the tricks and games bad guys play on women to get them to isolated places so that they can harm them, and it also talks about handling stalking behavior. I found it both practically useful and very affirming: yes, what you feel is true, yes, you should listen to your feelings, and the most important thing is to take care of yourself, not worrying about hurting some guys ego. I’ve always paid attention to my instincts and I feel sure that that’s saved me from some seriously bad shit over the years. I think one of the worst things about all the denial of the fact of rape is that it makes even those of us who haven’t been raped question our impressions about whether someone is dangerous or not. It keep us constantly see-sawing between a (possibly well-justified) apprehension, and guilt about not trusting men.
This comment was written by Amy.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 3:37 pm
Susan - Well, yeah. Many of the people in that audience with me at the Extremities discussion were your age and older. Those people were just as uncomfortable with non-stranger definitions of rape as I was.
Also, a lot of us do (shocker) have friends and family members your age whose experience was quite different from yours. My brother, your age, for example, raped at least two girl “friends” in high school. Both of them were determined by authority figures (the high school principal in one case) to have been “asking for it.” He got off scot-free. The one case was well-publicized; he was considered quite a scamp - the girl, what else? a slut. To this day, he is totally unashamed of what he did and does not consider the way he “lost his virginity” (the gang bang behind the school) to have been rape.
MG
This comment was written by Mary Garden.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 3:37 pm
Maybe I should rephrase that:
I agree that we (as societies, as individuals, and in all other ways) should blame the people committing the crimes, not the victims.
My mention of “as society” was meant to point out that while individually, it makes sense to try to reduce one’s risks by avoiding the most risky situations, obviously the larger problem will not be solved this way, and must be solved by reducing the number of people willing to rape.
This comment was written by Glaivester.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
I suspect that Susan is suffering from a case of rose-tinted hindsight. I’ve made a reasonable study of the issue and I have no reason to believe that the incidence of rape has changed materially; it’s just that now women talk about it. Thank goodness; that’s a first step towards raising awareness and finding solutions - which, as others have noted, are going to have be oriented around changing male behavior, not self-imposed limits on women’s actions.
However, it is absurd to cite “rudeness” as a reason for banning her. P-A, you were ten times as rude as she was. She didn’t say your position was “ignorant bullshit”, or call you an “obnoxious ass” - you said those things to her. Her comments may have been derailing the discussion that you wanted to have, but they weren’t rude. Your statement that she was going to be banned for her rudeness, not for her opinions, seems counterfactual. It was her opinions that were causing the problem.
Not that my support is going to win her any friends. ;)
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
Oh, for fuck’s sake, Robert, why does PA have to wait till somebody says shit like that? If you get any more disingenuous we’re all going to go into insulin shock, especially after the smiley.
I’m sorry, but trolls who go, “OH BUT RAPE JUST DIDN’T HAPPEN!” are not worth wasting their time on. If you can’t see that, you probably aren’t either.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 4:48 pm
Thank you, AndiF. That really is helpful, as obvious as it SHOULD have been to me. I don’t think we guys think about this subject enough.
This comment was written by Piter.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 4:54 pm
I rather agree with Robert about the banning of Susan. She may have been wearing rose-colored glasses, maybe willfully, maybe not. But as surprising to me that a woman didn’t really believe rape happened that often may be, I don’t think she was rude. I think the response to her was out of line.
She definitely appeared to have the potential to become trollish, but she hadn’t become one yet.
This comment was written by cclough.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 4:57 pm
Wow talk about on the wrong track!
1) Not only women get raped. Males have been raped, and by women. Society is just such that almost any male coming forward about it would be laughed off the planet.
2) Rape is not about sex. It is about power… it is about hurting the victim. It is about feeling better about themselves (the rapist) by showing they are ’superior (in their minds) to their victims. If it was all about sex only pretty young girls would be raped… most rape victims seem to be plain at best.
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:00 pm
and
3) (sorry not enough room last time) rape can be prevented without living in a cave. Self defense training, preparedness and most importantly *** being aware of one’s surroundings and always analyzing possible threats *** is essential. I dont mean being paranoid, just alert and attentive… noticing threats when they exist. Being prepared.. cellphone to call 911 always charged and on your person for example (no service needed all will call 911 by law) and so on.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:04 pm
Neal, what about male responsibility for rape? You know, the actual rapists in the vast majority of cases?
How can men make other men less likely to rape?
This comment was written by cclough.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:07 pm
^ This time without trolls? (Check the comment on “About Ampersand” thread)
Why would a rapist need such things? (I know what you meant, but let’s try this reversal for a while).
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:08 pm
Here we go again…
heaven forbid that we should be allowed to discuss the gendered nature of rape on y’know - a thread entitled Rape Culture and Gender…. what were we thinking?!
This comment was written by Spicy.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:08 pm
directed at Neal Feldman, the ^ thing. Sorry cclough.
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:11 pm
I assumed it was for Neal, but thanks for clarifying. :)
This comment was written by cclough.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:14 pm
And on the subject of prostitution and the related issue of the porn industry regarding the claim all the women are ‘victims’ (why arent the men victims I dunno lol)…
Fact is prohibition on any subject on any level has been a miserable failure.
Most in the porn business at least WANT to be… signed releases and all. For a very prominent couple of examples Jenna Jameson and the past CA Gubernatorial candidate Mary Carey.
Are there those who do it who might rather not? Probably, but the same can be said of almost any job. No one is forcing them in the legal business.
As for prostitution I feel it is semantics. If I go on a date with SureThing Sue and pay $50 for the date but not to her it is legal… if I pay a prostitute $50 it is a crime. Why?
Almost 100% of what is bad about prostitution (pimps addicting girls and guys to drugs, rapes, murders assaults, disease spread and the like are attributable to it BEING ILLEGAL. Nevada seems to do pretty well as does Denmark for two examples.
A very large number of prostitutes do it because they want to, like to or cannot make as much money any other way.
When I moved to San Francisco in 1981 my first room was in a hotel where many hookers lived (not worked, lived)… and I got to be social friends with many. And their position was they were anything but victims. One said “Honey, last night I made $2500. If that makes me a victim then victimize me to hell and back again!”
Victim..yeah right. She made $2500 a night, I was making $25 a night pumping gas.
Who was the ‘victim’?
Some look down on lawyers too, remember.
Just some things to think about.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:15 pm
Yeah, you’re officially a troll with no interest in the discussion at hand, Neal. Cordially fuck off.
This comment was written by cclough.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:17 pm
last one for a while I promise!
On Susan’s claim no date rape 40 yrs ago:
Not sure it should be bannable but…
I think what the hand-wringers TODAY define as date rape was VERY common 40 yrs ago… go out, get your date a bit drunk and when she is inebriated go for it.
What was normal date procedures even less than the above is today considered date rape.
How many movies from the 60s and before have the woman saying no repeatedly while the man plows on until she finally says yes?
By today’s loony standards that was date rape.
Nowadays you almost have to get forms signed in triplicate, notarized, publicized, circumcised, 312 other -izeds, lost, found, filed, refiled, misfiled, put up for a community vote in Botswana and submitted for joint approval by the Pope and Charles Manson before you can even freaking HOLD HANDS, much less get even a peck on the cheek.
SHEESH!
Heck, glancing at her chest or his crotch or either’s buns without the above written permission today is considered date rape.
So it depends on the standards you use… today’s standards (everything is date rape) or the standards of 40 yrs ago (only criminal rape on a date was date rape and maybe not even then)… otherwise you are talking past eachother.
True?
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:18 pm
Not even close.
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:20 pm
No. Now will you go away?
This comment was written by Spicy.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:21 pm
wow fast responses…
male ressponsibility for rape.
OK… what do you mean by that? That all males, myself included who never raped anyone, should take responsibility for rape?
I would disagree with that.
If you mean do I think that rapists should be made to take responsibility for their criminal action, then yes, I agree they should, just like any other person, male or female, should if they are guilty of a legitimate crime.
Or did you mean something else?
I just dislike when rape is defined solely as woman=victim male=wrongdoer.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:24 pm
Cut off one head and two more pop up! What’n heck is so threatening about this topic, that some folks will deploy any old argument to derail it, no matter how absurd or irrelevent?
This comment was written by Medium Dave.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:29 pm
How can PEOPLE (males OR females) be made less inclined to rape … thats a good one.
Not easily solved.
First I would say that society would need to change, radically. BOTH male and female social dynamics would need to be grossly altered. Sexual mores would need wholesale revamping.
Why do rapists rape? Usually, whether factually true or not, it is assumed to be the way to hurt a woman (or man) the most. Usually because this is such a sexually repressed culture (for all our vaunted claims of enlightenment).
Take sex out of the realm of taboo, society wide, and rape loses much of its harmful effect and as such will no longer be as sought as a weapon to use against the mind of the victim.
Last I checked, for example, Denmark has a much lower rape incidence than the US. Not eliminated, true, because they share many of the same harmful societal factors.
Is that something of a start to answering your question?
Punishment usually alone wont do it… rape is high recidivism. Just makes them madder. Just makes them want to ‘get even’ even more.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:31 pm
Tuomas I do not understand your question… I was not suggesting self defense classes to the rapists.. was suggesting to those who do not wish to be as likely victims.
Was I unclear?
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:33 pm
I couldn’t agree more, Q.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:34 pm
cclough:
Well!
Quite interesting… Susan got booted for being rude, dismissive, etc… and what does your non-responsive response to my post make YOU? And profanity too!
Guess it is true, the first one to resort to profanity is the last one with anything legitimate to say.
Seems to me you just want to hear that which you agree with. How sady closedminded.
And you instantly and viciously attack anyone who disagrees with you. How sadly pathetic.
And you call me a troll? It is to laugh.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:41 pm
So not true?
In what way?
My I have rarely run into such a group of closedminded martinets! Got your own little clique where you just incestuously (intellectual incest) just all agree with one another and drive off anyone who points out issues you would rather ignore or not deal with because it demonstrates flaws in your positions.
And you then wonder why when you come out of your little bubble of a ‘think tank’ into the real worl you get laughed at.
I am willing to defend my statements and positions on the matter against reasonable, reasoned and logical challenge.
All I have seen so far is “we disagree with you, go away!’ without a shred of anything even approaching thoughtful response.
Why should I be surprised?
Keep being victims and desperately trying to recruit more to your manner of ‘victim think’. Keep banning folks apparently falsely for what you do in actuality. Be well and while you’re at it have a crumpet, you surely need one.
I thought you were actually interested in real discussion, not patting yourselves on the back for chasing off anyone who might actually challenge your claims.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:45 pm
In the context of the overall discussion, Susan’s bid to suggest rape isn’t really a problem, in and of itself, qualifies as rude and disruptive.
Back to some issues brought up by the trolls in the last thread, I actually had a real world test this past weekend on translating the subtle intents of womenfolk. A roommate had a friend visit who I made out with the last time she was here. This time, I think we both assumed much the same would occur. I tried to make a move, but felt like I wasn’t getting anything in response. That, and that fact that she was a little drunk convinced me to pull back. I learn later that she was disappointed that I wasn’t more “take charge” with her and that she did want something to happen. Fair enough, but I’m not going to bemoan my call. I don’t want to even remotely push myself on a woman, so if I err on the side of caution, that’s clearly the side to err on. While I believe it would be a good thing to encourage more communication in physical romantic situations (and I’ll accept responsibility for not just asking her what she wanted on that count), men really need to be okay with nothing happening. Some men would get so worked up to think they missed a chance to hook up because they misread a woman. You know what? Its no big deal. It happens. Get over it. Don’t go crying about how mysterious and unreadable women are. This stuff happens. Learn to live with it. Having been in that situation, my biggest complaint is that the woman knew that I’m very cautious about making a first move because I did tell her that. Am I torn up because I had the opportunity to “get some” and didn’t? Of course not. And having seen that hypothetical situation that always gets dragged up by rape apologists, I’m all the more of the opinion that its a silly complaint on their part.
This comment was written by BStu.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:46 pm
Susan,
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.I’m trying to be nice and respect my elders, but right now you’re being so selfish and so ignorant that I want to smack you. Let me give you a little personal history. I grew up with priviledge up the wazoo. I went to a very exclusive British boarding school, commonly attended by the British aristocracy and the children of third world dictators and mega-businessmen. Hell, we even had memebers of the British royal family. No-one I went to school with ever lived in a poor neighborhood in their life. No-one lived in a high-crime area. And it was a girls only school. If there’s any group of young women who shold have been safe, who were protected and warned what risks not to take, who were trained to be assertive (hockey and lacrosse and fencing, oh my) and sure of their own rights and their ability to control their destiny, it was us.
At least 25% of the girls I know from that school have been raped or sexually assaulted. There are probably more that I don’t know about. This number pretty much matches up with the average.
I’m not sure what planet you live on, but on this one rape is not now and never has been rare. To say that it never happened 40 years ago is bullshit. My mother (born in 1944) spent her entire adult life with a wierd rip in her ear to remind her of the time she was sitting in a car with her boyfriend and he tried to rape her, nearly pulling her earring right out of her lobe in the process. And she was a “good” girl, one who did all the things she was supposed to do.
I can see how your own experiences might give you a false sense of security. I am and always have been a risk-taking kind of woman too, and I too have managed somehow to stay safe. But, the fact that you’ve never been raped, and neither have I, isn’t because we’re special or smarter than everyone else. We’re just damned lucky. And that luck could end tomorrow if we were unlucky enough to cross paths with some asshole who has no respect for women and doesn’t care what we feel or what we want.
Just because reality hasn’t smacked you in the face doesn’t mean it’s not there. I’ve never been a victim of the vicious racism that permeates every aspect of American society either, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to pretend it doesn’t exist. Have some compassion.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:47 pm
That all males, myself included who never raped anyone, should take responsibility for rape?
I would disagree with that.
Why? Responsibility isn’t blame. Responsibility is deciding to help fix the problem rather than deciding “I’m not the one in danger, so to hell with everyone else.”
First I would say that society would need to change, radically. BOTH male and female social dynamics would need to be grossly altered. Sexual mores would need wholesale revamping.
Best get started then.
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:48 pm
Neal - if you really want to understand the responses you’re getting as opposed to simply trolling, you might want to read this and this and this (especially the opening sentence) and this and this
Then you’ll understand why we’re so bored with comments like yours.
This comment was written by Spicy.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:55 pm
BStu -
I ca relate to the situation you presented and I agree… I don’t take advantage of drunk, drugged or otherwise ‘indisposed’ women either.
And you noticed one of the biggest social dynamics that needs to change…
Socially, currently, there is this code game going on where no one knows what the other really means.
Like in your example she was put off because you didnt ‘take charge’ in response to her resistance… and you sensed the resistance as her not wanting what you were offering.
This nonsensical BS would have to stop.
Socially a girl who wants ‘it’ (whatever it is sexually) is seen as ‘a slut’ and any guy who keeps asking ‘is this ok? Is that ok?” is considered ‘a wuss’.
However then the other side faults them for not properly communicating and each of the participants gets frustrated because the other wont communicate, ignoring their own noncommunication and mixed signals they are giving out.
That is why I said wholesale changes need to be made on all sides and on all levels, and not one side first… all at once, or it will just remain a mess. And this is just a tip of the iceberg aspect, but an obvious one.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:57 pm
BritGirlSF -
Susan is not hear as far as I am aware.
Maybe my reference to her confused you. If so my apologies.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:57 pm
Heck, glancing at her chest or his crotch or either’s buns without the above written permission today is considered date rape.
Uh, yeah. Fuck off, troll.
I’m sorry. Was I too blunt? Figure it’s better to be blunt than do what they do: try and conceal it.
And you know, I have to wonder—how many women are playing ‘games’ when they’ve leanred that men trash them for being slutty? How much game playing is just self preservation?
Susan’s sure rape didn’t happen forty years ago. But she’s wrong. What didn’t happen is reporting it, and I want to live in hers and Neal’s world, where all you have to do is sing, “lalalalala” and it all goes away.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:57 pm
Nice one, Neal. By preemptively accusing PA of attacking anyone who disagrees with you, you force her to prove you right by rightfully pointing out that you are a thoroughly annoying rambling troll. My advice, Pseudo-Adrienne, is to ban him without another word.
This comment was written by Piter.That said, I still think you were a bit harsh on Susan, clueless as she was.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 5:58 pm
Dear Neal:
Signs you are a troll:
1)”Men get raped too.” No one disputes this. But since at a conservative estimate 99% or rape victims are women and 99% of rapists are men, this is akin to interrupting a discussion on preventing highway fatalities and demanding to know why no attention is being given to deaths caused by vending machines falling and crushing people. If vending machine deaths are a particular concern of yours, by all means, please, start a task force, write your congress person, or invent a safer vending machine. But don’t pretend that it is the responsibility of people already trying to solve a serious problem to abandon what they are doing in favour of a problem that you think is more important.
2)”Feminists have created rape by redefining what was once understood as consensual sex.” This is like saying environmentalists have caused deforestation by inventing the word. You may believe this, but your issues aren’t my problem.
3)”But what about prostitution/porn” Do you suffer from some sort of cognitive disorder? Because if so, my apologies, but if not, you’re a vicious little muskrat who delights in stirring up anger and hurt by pretending to be obtuse. Again, if you are actually obtuse, I retract the last statement.
This comment was written by Margaret.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:06 pm
Also, Susan, women were raped at Woodstock. Yep, in your wonderful warm and fuzzy hippy community.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Have you ever considered that maybe the reason you think you don’t know anyone who’s been raped (apart from the girl in Central Park) is because someone with your attitude is the LAST person they would want to talk to? Have you never heard that most rapes happen between people who know each other, not strangers in the park? I’ve heard plenty of women and men who were part of hippy culture say that sexual abuse of women was widespread (and that coercion was an everyday part of life - ie hey baby, why don’t you want to fuck me? you’re just repressed, you need to loosen up!).
Which isn’t a slam against hippies specifically, it’s just that that subculture reflected the exact same bullshit as the rest of our culture in terms of fucked-up ideas about women and men and sex.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:09 pm
>>Have you ever considered that maybe the reason you think you don’t know anyone who’s been raped (apart from the girl in Central Park) is because someone with your attitude is the LAST person they would want to talk to?>>
aka the Katie Roiphe fallacy.
This comment was written by piny.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Jeff -
Sorry, but I take responsibility for my own actions, not the actions of others.
I will also go out on a limb to take responsibility for my inactions where I could reasonably do something to prevent harm and choose not to.
But there are limits with that.
If I see a domestic dispute I may report it, but I will never get directly involved again. When I was 19 I was passing an alley and heard a woman screaming and sounds of struggle. I walked in seeing a guy about 5′10″ beating on this tiny woman about 5 feet nothing… she was crying for him to stop with both arms up blocking as he was beating on her with fists, trash, cans, whatever he could grab! Me being trained and over 6 feet and 230# in good shape at the time he pulls his arm back, I grab it, pull him around, say something like “care to have a go with me instead?”, he tries to throw a punch with his other arm, , I block it, pick him up and throw him into his pile of trash.
I turn to the woman to say soimething like “You ok now?” and what do I get but a beer bottle smashed across my face by her, screaming like a bean sidhe about how she won’t let me hurt ‘her man’!
Well I got out of there fast and bandaged up and never intruded on anything even remotely like a domestic dispute ever again in the past 24 yrs.
But suggesting it is my job to alter society on a wholesale basis is ridiculous to the loony tunes level.
That aint my job, it surely aint my right, and beyond doubt is not within my power.
I know my limits, you should check yours.
I will teach by example. I dont rape, you shouldnt rape.
For the record I have 4 daughters 17-19… I have trained them to defend themselves but not be bullies and how to go through life being aware of their surroundings. Not one has ever come across a situation they could not handle… they knew what to do. And if some guy tries to actually rape one he might well get his ‘parts’ handed back to him.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:11 pm
Oops, jumped the gun and started ranting before I got to the part where PA banned Susan. Sorry, all.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:11 pm
I’m just ignoring the troll and want to address a real issue–I asserted in the original real rape advice column that I thought that women reclaiming spaces that are often restricted because of rape fears might actually help reduce rape. My thought process was that if it becomes normalized that there aren’t or shouldn’t be “boys only” areas, it would go a long way towards dialing down the anger that drives a lot of rapists to rape. Not that I’m saying women should take this responsibility onto ourselves completely–in fact, one very important thing men should do to make more places female-safe is to confront men who take actions to make women afraid of those spaces. Do people think I’m cracked? I tend to think that sexism is a culmulative thing–rapists feel justified in raping women because they are constantly bombarded with messages informing them that they are entitled to control and exclude and hurt women. If we could somehow reduce the amount of entitlement messages men receive–for instance, by making it so that men don’t have places they can expect are female-free where they can reinforce each others’ sexism without having a woman there to make them feel uncomfortable about it–the end result would be a lot less rape.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:13 pm
>That all males, myself included who never raped anyone, should take >responsibility for rape?
>
>I would disagree with that.
Why should all females, myself included who’s never been raped, take all responsiblity for preventing rape? If every woman has to look both ways before leaving her doorstep, every man should bear some of the responsibility. To echo Jeff, it’s not about blame. It’s about stepping up and aknowledging that there is a problem, and taking steps to resolve it.
This comment was written by Kathleen.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:20 pm
ginmar -
Wow…
I have not seen this much divorce from reality since the “Save Terri” wing nuts responded to the autopsy results!
Where do you get that I agreed with Susan that there was not date rapes back then (40 yrs ago)?
I thought I was quite clear that I feel there were.
I just didnt think that having a stupid opinion like she did (well, be charitible, naive opinion) justifies banning. Then again I generally oppose censorship. I consider it draconian, closedminded, and in the end counterproductive as it makes everyone scared to speak their mind for fear of being banned as well.
Now, if someone is just being disruptive, rude and profane especially if not contributing anything, fine they should go.. but I read back and saw that THE RESPONSES to her, just like some to me, were far more legitimately bannable than anything she posted. I may have missed something but from my experience here in the past hour or so I dont think so.
Folks here who jump out at you for no reason than that they disagree but cannot refute or offer a counterargument, those who resort to profanity and those who either misrepresent what was said (or to be charitable again, lacked any comprehension of what they were responding to) seem to be the norm… there has been one, maybe two contrary examples but the majority are as I have described here and above.
Truly sad to see minds so viciously closed.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:21 pm
Neal, please do me a favor and don’t take my personally shared experience and use it to promote your agenda. If I didn’t make it clear, the point of my story is that this kind of experience is just life. Sometimes both parties don’t communicate as effectively as they could. I don’t think any “games” were being played on me. I would never term her behavior as BS. She was into me, I was into her. I misread her and she didn’t take the initiative. Conversely, I didn’t bother to ask her what she wanted and she also misread me if she thought I wouldn’t back off.
My point was that I had the experience that people like you obsess over and it was no big deal. My life will somehow amazingly go on without be getting consumed in blaming this woman for me not getting to make out this weekend. This worst case scenario is no big deal. Treating the lack of getting some as some kind of problem that needs to be resolved, especially in the reactionary manner you propose, is enormously illfounded.
This comment was written by BStu.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:22 pm
Piter -
I didn’t preemptively accuse anyone of anything.
Kindly show where I did if you claim otherwise.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:24 pm
But suggesting it is my job to alter society on a wholesale basis is ridiculous to the loony tunes level.
Not your job. Our job. Every one of us.
I’m not saying you or I have to be some superhero saving assaulted women in alleys, and I’m not saying that I do a better job than anyone else does in changing a culture that encourages rape. But saying “I don’t rape, I’m one of the good guys, so stop bothering me to do anything else” ain’t fixing anything. Start with the small stuff if you prefer, but do something constructive.
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:26 pm
Yeah, dipshit? You’re the one who thinks that date rape was a good time and now it’s been retroactively rejiggered. Well, you know, I could waste my time with such ignorance, but I don’t.
Fuck off.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:28 pm
I’m thinking that maybe it’s time to start a thread devoted specificly to discussing rape that does not occure in the ‘female victims, male rapists’ pattern? Both because sexual violence is an issue that feminists should be (and are) concerned about, no matter it’s victim or perpetrator; and also so that when folks like Neal come on threads like these, we’ll be able to point to something, so that a thread about women and rape does not get derailed by arguments over how feminists supposedly ignore rapes where a women is not the victim and a man is not the rapist.
Would that be possible, P.A.?
This comment was written by audio-visual.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:30 pm
Neal, the troll (sorry hun, but you’re entire tone is dismissive and annoying, thusly, I call you a troll) does have a point. It’s buried in there, but it is a point:
Social mores about sex need to change DRASTICALLY.
I agree. First and foremost, females like sex.
Females do not like being told that they ar sluts when they admit. Females do not like being treated as some sort of prize. They do not like it when guys they were fucking brags to his friends that he totally “scored”. They do not like it when their sexual needs are considered secondary, or hidden under the all-together ridiculous attage of “Girls get pleasure from having their partner happy”. Females do not like being called a “cock-tease” when they don’t want to go any farther. Females do not like having to say “No” five hundred times to a guy and then have the guy get pissy, or even worse, saying “no” 499 times, and then yes just to get him to shut-the-fuck up so she can sleep. Females do not like it when if they are mad at a boyfriend or a husband, and do not feel like sleeping with them, the bf or husband says “You are just using sex as a weapon”. Females do not like it if a guy takes them out to eat, buys them flowers, buys them jewlery, they are supposed to “put out”, and they really don’t like being refered to as “Sure Thing Sue”.
These things make women NOT like sex. Make it something one HAS to do, instead of something that one chooses to do, and it is no longer fun.
Men, you are not entitled to sex. This is a big thing that needs to be emphized over, and over, and over again until it sinks in: YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO SEX OVER SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT WANT IT. They are not being a bitch, they are not being frigid, they are exercising control over their own body. You don’t like it? Guess who’s behavior has to change?
Guys, also, do not like being called, “wuss” “loser” or “pussy” if they are not getting sex, and/or respect a women when she says no. Stop doing that to each other, don’t call your friends these things.
Once those start to sink in to the human consciousness, then rape won’t be such a problem.
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:33 pm
Ginmar:
I think I understand you here. I’m uncomfortable with the notion too. On the other hand, I know a few women who’ve been raped or assaulted who took classes like IMPACT, and not only felt safer, but ins some cases, actualy fended off an attacker.
I don’t like thee idea of holding women responsible, it pains me that self defense is neccesary, but I want people (not just women) to be safer, and I think these classes help.
It’s a fine line to walk, so your comments are helpful. For the most part, I don’t talk about IMPACT type classes in the context of discussing rape.
As for working on changing men’s attitudes, well, most of these classes are conducted for women, by women with the occasional man as a ‘practice dummy’. I’d like to think that most of these men already have good atitudes.
The most important thing we can do, long term, is change attitudes globaly. From a global perspective, rape is far worse in war torn countries, and no amount of self defense classes will stop a gang of soldiers with guns.
This comment was written by Josh Jasper.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:39 pm
Amanda: I think that really could help things. One of the things I’ve noticed is that now that I’ve got more autonomy of association, I tend to avoid “boys only” areas; I suspect other men who don’t want to deal with “macho bullshit” do too. And I think that this intensifies the effect - the attitudes of the worst men in such a group will drive out the moderates, and it becomes an echo chamber. (Look at the men’s rights advocacy boards, for example.)
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:40 pm
And the other thing:
It is NOT MY GODDAMN RESPONSIBILITY TO RESTICT MY ACTIONS!!!
I am not doing anything illegal or immoral if I like walking around, by myself, at night. Guess what geniuses? I work during the day, and it’s hot during the day. It’s cool and peaceful and there isn’t a lot of trafic when I walk at night. If I get raped, it still wasn’t my actions that were blamed.
If I choose to screw everything with two legs, that’s my pregotive. I take a lot of risks, STDS, pregnacy *shudder* general lack of value placed on sex, but I can still do it. If you start spreading it around that I’m a “sure thing” and I tell you that you can go screw yourself, and you rape me, it was still not about anything I did, it was about what YOU did. My actions were not illegal, damaging, immoral, THE RAPISTS ACTIONS WERE.
If I decided that fishnets, tank tops and miniskirts are what make me happy and best express my fashion choices, guess what? Doesn’t mean I’m selling a damn thing, doesn’t mean I’m their for your enjoyment. I am dressing like this for MY enjoyment, not yours. You rape me? My behavior is not the one that needs to change.
If I get drunk and start flirting with every guy at the bar (and I hope my friends are there so I don’t, buy you never know), I take the risk of looking like an idiot, I take the risk of alchol poisoning, and I take the risk of passing out. What I shouldn’t be taking the risk of is getting raped. Again, this is my behavior, and it isn’t hurting anyone, raping is.
If I decide that I want to try and get to WA from ND, I run the risk of being cold, being wet, being hot, it taking a long time, and traveling in uncomfortable conditions. What I shouldn’t be risking is rape. (Well, in the case of MT, I risk being arrested as well, so I’d have to circle that state).
This comment was written by Antigone.Succintly, MY behavior is just fine. A RAPISTS behavior is the one that needs to change. You want to prevent rape? Don’t tell me my behavior should change, tell them that theirs should.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:41 pm
I’m thinking that maybe it’s time to start a thread devoted specificly to discussing rape that does not occure in the ‘female victims, male rapists’ pattern?
Why? Do you feel it would draw away the trolls who don’t want to talk about the male rapists and their (mostly female) victims? Because that does seem to be a topic that gets most trolls on these threads extremely worked up, to the extent that they do not permit other people to discuss female victims, male rapists, even though this is overwhelmingly the most common kind of rape.
There is some equivalence to discussing male victims of male rapists, because often the male victim is - especially if he’s gay - dismissed or belittled in a similar way to female victims. Evidently to some men the ability to rape and get away with it is a privilege they wish to defend - not something they want to see being discussed honestly and openly.
This comment was written by Jesurgislac.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:41 pm
Oh, I wish I could just ignore, but sometimes you need to get shit out of your system, you know?
Bait and switch, Neal. You started out with obnoxious, rude and out of place bullshit, now you go all “hey, let’s all be nice to each other, even though we have different opinions, don’t be so close-minded you know”… Not falling for that one.
Nice apology there (it wasn’t pointed at me but…). “Sorry you’re so confused”. As if no one could be insulted by your comments. Lol.
Eh, no, but was I unclear when I said let’s try this reversal for a while? The point is it possible for most, or some women to be physically stronger, more aware etc. than the average rapist. But plenty of women will never get that far. And I don’t see it as a failure. (Just to make clear, I fully support women getting more assertive and unrapeable, but they shouldn’t have to).
And what the fuck is up with the prostitution/women say no when they mean yes/mixed signals stuff? So is rape about sex or no (you said no, but you still spout these tired cliches.)
Also, you are a liar.
Exclamation mark and all! (Or to nit-pick, depends on the definition of “for a while”, but…)
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:45 pm
Margaret:
you wrote:
Signs you are a troll:
1)”?Men get raped too.”? No one disputes this. But since at a conservative estimate 99% or rape victims are women and 99% of rapists are men, this is akin to interrupting a discussion on preventing highway fatalities and demanding to know why no attention is being given to deaths caused by vending machines falling and crushing people. If vending machine deaths are a particular concern of yours, by all means, please, start a task force, write your congress person, or invent a safer vending machine. But don’t pretend that it is the responsibility of people already trying to solve a serious problem to abandon what they are doing in favour of a problem that you think is more important
I respond:
Why is it that you are so afraid of letting go of your ludicrous position that rape is just against women when you just admitted that men also get raped?
Why do you NEED to have it as JUST a ‘women’s issue’ instead of what it should be… a SOCIAL (both men AND Women) issue?
So males raped are the minority (degree of minority is irrelevant). Why should, as you seem to wish, they just be ignored? Swept under the rug as if the had no value or relevance?
Because it gets in the way of some kind of “All women are good, All men are evil” dogma?
Sure seems that way.
Don’t you realize that by doing so you alienate nearly half the population(men) and some segment of even the female poulation as well with such shrill myopicism?
But ok, so sign number one that I am, to you, a ‘troll’ is that I point out a fact you and your posse desperately wish to ignore or avoid but that you admit is undeniably true?
OK, so trolls speak the truth, gotcha.
You wrote:
2)”?Feminists have created rape by redefining what was once understood as consensual sex.”? This is like saying environmentalists have caused deforestation by inventing the word. You may believe this, but your issues aren’t my problem.
I respond:
I never stated the words you just applied to me falsely. That is a critical thinking flaw, making a straw man against an opponent out of words YOU made up, not something that they themselves have said.
And your analogy following your straw man (you made the straw man, I will let you defend it) is even more hilariously flawed.
What I said is that a lot of what is being called ‘rape’ isn’t and never was… but some extremists have tried to define them as such. And of course one cannot help but notice the one-sided nature of many of these attempts. A woman slaps a man it is her god given right, if a man slaps a woman it is domestic abuse and he should be locked up forever. And I mentioned, granted slightly exaggerated, the policy of a few schools to get signed permission for each and every step (was never sure if they needed to sign off on each thrust or not) which were rightly laughed off about every campus.
That is like seeing wetlands rules being written so ludicrously that a residential backyard that has never had standing water in any part of it more than a few hours barring during a rainstorm or the lawn being watered and has never had a single waterfowl land in it or fish or frog swim in it qualifies as ‘a wetland’ thereby preventing the owners from erecting a swing set for their kid and commenting that such rules are plainly stupid and illegitimate.
THAT would be an accurate statement of my position and a legitimate analogy to follow it up with.
See the difference?
So part two of being shown to be a troll is Margaret falsely mistating your opinion and then making a strawman and making a ridiculous analogy to follow the straw man.
Gotcha.
You wrote:
3)”?But what about prostitution/porn”? Do you suffer from some sort of cognitive disorder? Because if so, my apologies, but if not, you’re a vicious little muskrat who delights in stirring up anger and hurt by pretending to be obtuse. Again, if you are actually obtuse, I retract the last statement.
I respond:
Im not being obtuse, you are being evasive.
I brough up those subjects because a great many little suburbanites who havent a clue in the world about what they are talking about rant and rave constantly that those industries are ‘nothing but rape’.
Since the subject here is rape and our culture and a discussion of such wanted to point out such rubbish right off.
My apologies if you didn’t comprehend it in the greater context.
Maybe it is you being obtuse?
Maybe it is you with the cognitive disorder.
Maybe your kind dislikes it when your statements or those of your fellow travellers come home to roost.
All in all, however, I think this makes you 0 for 3 on the Is Neal a Troll test Margaret.
Ah well.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:46 pm
I swear I’ll try to make some relevant comment about this issue, instead of all this trollfight. Just not feeling very imaginative, and fighting trolls is kind of fun sometimes ;).
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:48 pm
If there was something I did wrong - it was to trust that I would be safe and respected.
I was only at this guys house because the school set it up - a tutor situation. And I trusted him - he seemed Ok. And it was an upper middle class neighborhood in the middle of the day. (Kicking him in the balls wasn’t really possible.) And I expect he is total denial about it or thinks he’s hot stuff or something.
Looking back I can see it was a total set-up on his part and I’m sad to think he probably got away with raping dozens of women. (I didn’t report it). It doesn’t take that many perpertrators for 25% of the women to be attacked.
And I would say that Neal is responsible for his flip and clueless attitude:
“So it depends on the standards you use… today’s standards (everything is date rape”
For Neal:
The National College Women Sexual Victimization (NCWSV) study, a 1996 survey of 4,446 women sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice, defines rape as follows:
Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means vaginal, anal, or oral penetration by the offender(s). This category also includes incidents where the penetration is from a foreign object such as a bottle. Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims, and both heterosexual and homosexual rape. Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape.1
http://www.edc.org/hec/pubs/factsheets/fact_sheet1.html
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:49 pm
But sadly, trolls possess the ability to regenerate very quickly (ok, first and last geeky D&D reference).
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:54 pm
Shorter trolls on the rape threads: So what if you got raped? Let’s talk about how I don’t like feeling like I have to care about a mere female.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:54 pm
piny -
This is becoming a trend…
Where do you get the idea I don’t know anyone who has been raped? Certainly not from anything I ever said.
I said my daughters had not been raped.
How do I know?
Im sure they would have told me because we have a solid relationship and we talk about such things and support eachother.
I dont know what kind of family YOU have but signs are it might have serious issues in this regard for you to baselessly assume such about mine.
Sad indeed.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:56 pm
I went to a high school party once where there was a long line — I assumed it was for the bathroom. But then I saw the bathroom door open, facilities available. So I went to pee. When I came out, I wondered about that line.
Then this guy came out, drunkenly. “Hey guys, this girl is ready and she’s taking on everybody!”
I was stunned. I was more stunned by the non-reaction of most everyone there. Here a serial gang rape was happening to a 17 year-old girl whose “yes” consisted of having drunk too much gin.
Suddenly her friend was there, yelling at the guys. She took her friend away. I saw the emotional wreckage on her face. I’ll never forget. I didn’t know her, and I was so shocked I felt the last thing she needed was a stranger trying to help.
The party went on. Nobody gave a shit. Nobody ever was charged. In fact, I bet most of those guys have not given that girl a second thought in the years since. Some I’m sure have had daughters and worried about their welfare. After all, they know what guys are like.
What guys are like. That’s the passive apology for rape culture. I could go on and talk about the incidents that hit me and my family directly, but the point is not our suffering but the lack of suffering, lack of accountability, lack of consideration by men who do this … and men who watch this happen and don’t even blink.
This comment was written by media girl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:59 pm
Why study rape as a gender-neutral phenom, though? Why? That makes no fucking sense at all. Sorry, but that just pisses me right the fuck off. It’s not a gender-neutral phenom anywhere in the world, and I’m not going to coddle trolls. They get enough as it is. Why do more? Why give them a safe space on a feminist board? All they want is our attention? They deserve nothing but our scorn.
This comment was written by ginmar.Josh, you know what we need to teach men? To be afraid of women. To be afraid of pissing women off when they don’t listen to us. I think that would work just fine.
I’m not a big person but when I was catching shoplifters I managed to scare the shoplifters a lot more than the guys did. Why? Because some guys really fear women. I have to wonder if they think, subconsciously, they deserve it.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 6:59 pm
Amanda -
Interesting, unlike you apparently I dont consider much to be “boys only areas” aside from male locker rooms (there are female locker rooms that are girls only too) and male restrooms (same deal as above).
Excuse me for saying this but I think it is assinine to claim parks and the like to be ‘boys only’ places. I see women and girls in parks all the time.
What are you going to do to ‘reclaim’ them? Try and pass laws banning males from public parks? That would be even more assinine than your underlying premise and wouldnt stand a snowball’s chance on the syrface of the sun of coming to pass.
Puh-LEEZE!
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:05 pm
So a woman who was arguably going to become a troll is banned from this discussion, only to allow it to be hijacked by an obvious asshat?
Makes sense.
This comment was written by cclough.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:06 pm
Kathleen -
Are you serious?
Was that an actually serious question you asked me?
I have never said you should be responsible for minimizing your risks of being raped for anyone but yourself… if you choose to try and help other women, good on you, but it is hardlt required of you.
Your attitude, however, seems to be that of the pedestrian who chooses to cross whereever without looking, wandering in and out of traffic at random, not feeling any need for self preservation or thinking they need to be bothered worrying about such and just putting it on the motorists to guarantee their safety when they act in such a reckless manner.
Good grief! Use some common sense will you?
You try and equate me rightly challenging the ludicrous concept that I should take responsibility for the criminal acts of those I don’t know, don’t see, have no knowledge of their habits and have no power to intervene even if I did….and compare this to your strawman argument that allegedly I expect you to be the protector of all women?
Have you taken your meds today?
Are you sure?
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:06 pm
What cclough said. But hey, I suspect the moderators just haven’t noticed what’s going on.
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:07 pm
Yeah, that’s what Neal is talking about. The good old days, before date rape was anything but a good time—for a rapist.
I fear for his daughters. And I wonder about his ‘good time’ past. He sounds almost nostalgic when he talks about the good old days.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:09 pm
BStu -
WTF?
Where have I taken your story for my ‘agenda’?
What exactly do you claim I ‘obsess over’?
Methinks you doth project too much.
It is seeming like all of you are hopeless wingnuts who havent the critical thinking skills of an average 4 yr old.
Sheesh!
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:10 pm
“Have you taken your meds today?”
Anybody wanna email PA?
I don’t think they have meds for what this asshat suffers from.
Troll: Date rape used to be just having a good time. Now it’s all legislated and organized and shit, and you can’t have a good time any longer. True?
It’s the ‘true?’ for some reason that gets me. Like even he can’t fool himself.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:13 pm
Ah yes, troll strategy to derail a thread #7–pretend that you don’t know what someone is talking about and assume that they are being stupid. Neal, we don’t have a widespread problem of women walking into men’s locker rooms and getting raped. However, we do blame women for getting raped in ostensibly mixed social occasions, which means we are subtly promoting the notion that bars and parties are male-dominanted spaces that women should only enter if they are up for being raped.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:14 pm
Neal, I’m anxious to hear your responses to Kathleen’s post #81 and Antigone’s post #91. I think that they clearly address the issues that the women on this board are trying to explain to you and illustrate both the ludicrousness of both the idea that not being a rapist constitutes a sufficient amount or degree of anti-rape action and the statement that men’s-only places and activities do not exist (you do yourself no credit with the “men’s bathrooms and men’s locker rooms” response — or, perhaps it is an accurate reflection of your interpretive reading skills, in which case, that’s too bad). It’s past my bedtime right now, but I’ll check back to see your response in the morning
This comment was written by Erin.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:16 pm
Jeff -
Where do you get that is all I do?
I said I teach by example. That is not your ‘and leave me alone Im not doing anything but not raping’ line of unadulterated bs.
I taught my daughters… I taught them to teach others. I will do whatever I can but I take no responsibility for anything outside my sphere of influence. It is ludicrous to do so, it will just make you crazy.
Now my sphere of influence happens to include my state legislature. If they try and pass a law promoting rape you can be sure I will be there to speak against it.
If they try and pass a law stupid enough to try and redefine accidental bumping into someone as felony rape you can be sure I will speak against that as well.
You see, overreaching ludicrous crap like the collegew plan to sign off on each step, ludicrous redefinitions and such HARM the cause of combatting rape.
How?
Because it takes a serious subject and makes it into a big joke no one takes seriously… like when those opposed to the ERA got the discussion focussed on ‘personhole covers’ and such nonsense preventing the ratification because by that time it waas seen as nothing but a big joke.
Think about it.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:19 pm
# ginmar Writes:
June 28th, 2005 at 6:26 pm
Yeah, dipshit? You’re the one who thinks that date rape was a good time and now it’s been retroactively rejiggered. Well, you know, I could waste my time with such ignorance, but I don’t.
Fuck off.
I respond:
Excuse me?
Where did I ever say I thought date rape was a good time?
I think in commenting about ignorance you are clearly projecting.
And save the profanity for someone it will shock. I was a NYC cabbie for a couple summers in my youth… you won’t shock me.
Discredit yourself, likely, but shock me? not a chance.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:20 pm
News for Neal -
I don’t care what kind of a relationship you THINK you have with your daughters - with the attitude you’ve displayed here - I would guess you would NOT know whether one of your daughters had been raped.
I would also guess that most women (or girls as the case may) be do not tell their fathers - esp. all of those date-rapes that you don’t consider to be rapes anyway.
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:26 pm
# audio-visual Writes:
June 28th, 2005 at 6:28 pm
I’m thinking that maybe it’s time to start a thread devoted specificly to discussing rape that does not occure in the ‘female victims, male rapists’ pattern? Both because sexual violence is an issue that feminists should be (and are) concerned about, no matter it’s victim or perpetrator; and also so that when folks like Neal come on threads like these, we’ll be able to point to something, so that a thread about women and rape does not get derailed by arguments over how feminists supposedly ignore rapes where a women is not the victim and a man is not the rapist.
Would that be possible, P.A.?
I respond:
That is just so typical and laughably so…
create another thread for a separate part of a complex interrelated issue and send discussion there as if that actually separated the issues.
It doesnt.
But this mere suggestion demonstrates how pollyannish some of you can be, how closedminded and intolerant of anything outside your own pitifully limited little mindset.
It also shows why you will never succeed with your alleged goals of getting people to get along together because you are all about separating yourselves from anyone who might actually have other ideas.
You know nothing about compromise or synthesizing differing opinions into a workable conglomerate.
You are all 100% your way or you consider it a total loss.
And you will not bring the other segments of society to work with you towards a common goal with that kind of mindset.
You will just sit and obsess in your little bubble while the rest of the world laughs at you.
I think DSM-IV has a lot to say about what I have seen here since I started posting… but I wont go into it here.. it is all online tho.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:28 pm
Shorter trolls: That you disapprove of a pro-rape culture proves that you are certifiable.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:30 pm
troll behaviour # 17: selective quoting. What Ginmar actually said was
Oh - and here is where you said it.
This comment was written by Spicy.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:37 pm
Jesurgislac wrote:
Do you feel it would draw away the trolls who don’t want to talk about the male rapists and their (mostly female) victims?
While I don’t really want to placate trolls, I think would be helpful and important to have a place to talk about non-male-rapist-female-victim rapes, so that threads like this one will not get derailed.
ginmar wrote:
Why study rape as a gender-neutral phenom, though? Why? That makes no fucking sense at all. Sorry, but that just pisses me right the fuck off. It’s not a gender-neutral phenom anywhere in the world, and I’m not going to coddle trolls. They get enough as it is. Why do more? Why give them a safe space on a feminist board?
(Assuming this was directed at my suggestion:) I would never propose to look at rape as a gender-neutral thing; I certainly think that even homosexual rapes are highly gendered, and are violence against the concept of women, if not actual women. That said, because the vast, vast majority of rapes are by men, against women, I think it’s not at all a bad idea to have a seperate place to look at how homosexual or other types of rape, so that discussions about rape in general (which means rape by men against women, because that is the general type of rape) can just get on. I just want threads about rape can just go on without distractions; hell, I’d moderate the thread myself if I had to.
Neal wrote:
But this mere suggestion demonstrates how pollyannish some of you can be, how closedminded and intolerant of anything outside your own pitifully limited little mindset.
Look, if this thread were made, you could have your cake and eat it, too; it could be a place where no-one could criticize you for being off-topic when you want to talk about non-male-aginst-female rape. I certainly would like to hear what you have to say, without all of this arguing.
This comment was written by audio-visual.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:41 pm
Neal the troll asks… “Where have I taken your story for my ‘agenda’?”
Probably around the time you said “I ca relate to the situation you presented and I agree…” and then proceeded to co-opt my story to make the exact opposite point even going so far as to accuse the woman I was with of partaking in “BS” and “code games”. Is that new code for “mind games” by the way? You used my story as a basis for reaching the opposite conclusion I was suggesting. I could appreciate your response if you claimed you had a right to co-opt my story to prove your own point, but this “Who me?” act isn’t cutting it.
Oh, and as has been pointed out, you most certainly expressed mocking scorn towards date rape and explicitly expressed fondness for the good ol’ days you when you could get a woman drunk and have your way for her. I was rather aghast in that thread, too.
This comment was written by BStu.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:43 pm
Nope. You can discuss male victims of male violence just fine on a rape thead. What you can’t do is coddle woman-haters like Neal, who will have won. Let him go deal with his own issues on his own board. This is like putting urinals in a lady’s room. It’s like those white eejits who complain that there’s no White History Month. Ban the fucker and teach him a lesson. You want to coddle someone who says shit like this? ?!
think what the hand-wringers TODAY define as date rape was VERY common 40 yrs ago… go out, get your date a bit drunk and when she is inebriated go for it.
What was normal date procedures even less than the above is today considered date rape.
How many movies from the 60s and before have the woman saying no repeatedly while the man plows on until she finally says yes?
By today’s loony standards that was date rape.
Nowadays you almost have to get forms signed in triplicate, notarized, publicized, circumcised, 312 other -izeds, lost, found, filed, refiled, misfiled, put up for a community vote in Botswana and submitted for joint approval by the Pope and Charles Manson before you can even freaking HOLD HANDS, much less get even a peck on the cheek.
SHEESH!
Heck, glancing at her chest or his crotch or either’s buns without the above written permission today is considered date rape.
So it depends on the standards you use… today’s standards (everything is date rape) or the standards of 40 yrs ago (only criminal rape on a date was date rape and maybe not even then)… otherwise you are talking past eachother.
True?
Neal
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:45 pm
# Antigone Writes:
June 28th, 2005 at 6:30 pm
Neal, the troll (sorry hun, but you’re entire tone is dismissive and annoying, thusly, I call you a troll) does have a point. It’s buried in there, but it is a point:
I respond:
EXCUSE ME!?
*I* am dismissive?
It is YOU FOLK who are the ones being dismissive.
I have tried, OH how I have tried, to take most of you seriously but you just won’t allow it, will you?
Im dismissive?
Shya, right… in what part of the twilight zone.
If you want examples of dismissive, I suggest you check out the menagerie of your fellow travellers here.
You wrote:
Social mores about sex need to change DRASTICALLY.
I agree. First and foremost, females like sex.
Females do not like being told that they ar sluts when they admit. Females do not like being treated as some sort of prize. They do not like it when guys they were fucking brags to his friends that he totally “scored”?. They do not like it when their sexual needs are considered secondary, or hidden under the all-together ridiculous attage of “Girls get pleasure from having their partner happy”?. Females do not like being called a “cock-tease”? when they don’t want to go any farther. Females do not like having to say “No”? five hundred times to a guy and then have the guy get pissy, or even worse, saying “no”? 499 times, and then yes just to get him to shut-the-fuck up so she can sleep. Females do not like it when if they are mad at a boyfriend or a husband, and do not feel like sleeping with them, the bf or husband says “You are just using sex as a weapon”?. Females do not like it if a guy takes them out to eat, buys them flowers, buys them jewlery, they are supposed to “put out”?, and they really don’t like being refered to as “Sure Thing Sue”?.
These things make women NOT like sex. Make it something one HAS to do, instead of something that one chooses to do, and it is no longer fun.
Men, you are not entitled to sex. This is a big thing that needs to be emphized over, and over, and over again until it sinks in: YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO SEX OVER SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT WANT IT. They are not being a bitch, they are not being frigid, they are exercising control over their own body. You don’t like it? Guess who’s behavior has to change?
Guys, also, do not like being called, “wuss”? “loser”? or “pussy”? if they are not getting sex, and/or respect a women when she says no. Stop doing that to each other, don’t call your friends these things.
Once those start to sink in to the human consciousness, then rape won’t be such a problem.
I respond:
Nice list.
May I suggest then:
If you don’t want to be treated as a prize stop acting like you are something to be won.
If you dont want to be accused of using sex as a weapon stop using sex as a weapon.
If you dont want to be thought of as selfish, greedy or the like stop acting like it… stop draining guys wallets at bars getting free drinks by leading him on then dumping him when he rightly gets irritated about it when he figures it out… stop insisting that men shower you with gifts… I dont know how many women I have known getting diamonds and whatnot all the time and never getting the men who give them such a bloody thing other tha when they find out it only cost three months pay whining ‘is that all?’ and so on.
If you dont want to se seen as sex objects or looked at by men stop dressing in such a way as to scream out “LOOK AT ME!”. I knowm you only want SOME men to look at you,but sorry male vision doesnt have that level of discernment. W see what is there… not just what you would only like us to see. Example… girl worked in an office I worked at. She was the standard blond pop tart britney model… came to work in accentuating halter tops, short short skirts or shorts, tattoo art from base of scalp to tips of toes, at least a dozen piercings (that were easily visible) and so on. She started a month in making complaints in HR that she did not like the men in the office looking at her. (Of course the male model type in maintenance she was alwas especially strutting for and all over… him she didnt complain about once). Each guy she complained about was called in and interviewed. It was pointed out that 1) it would be unnatural under the circumstances to NOT notice (what did they expect? that they only hired eunuchs?) and 2) there were clearly (this being one) why there was a company dress code that all her problems were because she was violating just about all of it. Needless to say, she was let go for flagrant and frequent violations of the dress code she signed upon being hired, and none of the men were discipled (nor the two lesbians she complained about too).
Maybe you get my point without an exhaustive list, Maybe not. If the latter I likely cannot help you.
But this is why I say it has to be BOTH sides that must radically change. Not just one. And as a third component to the equation, society as well… not just the male and female parts of it.
Due to social inertia I would not expect full change to become significant, even IF we all started working TOGETHER real hard tomorrow morning for a few centuries. 40,000 years or more is a lot of inertia to overcome.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:54 pm
Where’s PA to ban this fucker? He just goes on and on. The desperation of his whines only serves to increase reasonable suspicions as to his history.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:54 pm
Oh, and btw Antigone…
Your ‘you have no right to sex’ does not apply in a marriage.
Granted there are reasonable constructs but to just flat out cut the spouse off (and this goes the other way too… women in marriage have a right to expect a reasonasble sex life with their spouse as well.”
Otherwise you have absolutely no right to expect fidelity.
You cannot have it both ways.
Ask any reputable psychologist and they will tell you the sex drive is natural and suppressing it is unnatural and leads to any number of psychological AND PHYSICAL maladies.
If you are just shacking up and want some kind of basic sex life claim on your paretner, marriage is your option. (if heterosexual… if homosexual unfortunately for now you need to move to where gay marriage is legal, or civil unions, or deal with being outside looking in).
Just to cover something important I missed in your response earlier.
In marriage using sex as a weapon by withholding it as a punishment is kind of a mutually assured destruction process for the marriage. Eventually the one being denied will say “OK I cant get it from him/her I will get it somewhere else” and that almost universally leads to eventual ending of the marriage.
Neal
Keep that in mind.
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:57 pm
Yeah we get your point. Proibably not the one you intended to make though.
Now will you go?
This comment was written by Spicy.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:59 pm
“Men get raped too.”? No one disputes this. But since at a conservative estimate 99% or rape victims are women and 99% of rapists are men,”
Quick pedantic point: while I am fairly certain that 99%+ of rapists are men, I would doubt that 99%+ of rape victims are women; I have a feeling that male-on-male rape is more common than that. On the other hand, it is probably true that in most of the male-on-male cases, the victim is the “woman,” i.e. the penetratee, rather than the penetrator.
On the issue of whether or not women rape men and whether or not rape should be looked at as a gender-neutral phenomenon:
Well, in the abstract rape is not about sexism or male power or privilege, etc. But in actual practice, rape is akmostly always committed by males, and mostly against females, or when against males, in a way as to give the male the “female” role (i.e. the rapist penetrates rather than forcing the victim to penetrate them). So in analyzing rape in our society, the fact that it is overwhelmingly committed by males against females, or those who are seen as females, is something that should be considered one of the key points.
In other words, we are not talking about rape as an abstraction; we are talking about actual rapes and real society. So while in theory rape can be studied apart from gender; rape as it actually exists is obviously tied in with gender, and as such that needs to be discussed.
This comment was written by Glaivester.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 7:59 pm
ginmar wrote:
You want to coddle someone who says shit like this? ?!
It’s probably naive of me, but I think that a lot trolls become trolls when they say something stupid in anger, and then get flusterd trying to take back something they know they shouldn’t have said. I don’t think that Neal really meant what it sounded like. I’m sure he wouldn’t want his daughters treated like young women were 40 years ago (or they way they’re treated now, for that matter).
This comment was written by audio-visual.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:01 pm
You’re giving him too much credit. He was fondly remembering the good old days of date rape, remember.
It’s his job not to be an asshole. Plain and simple. He’s failing.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:03 pm
# Jeff Writes:
June 28th, 2005 at 6:39 pm
Amanda: I think that really could help things. One of the things I’ve noticed is that now that I’ve got more autonomy of association, I tend to avoid “boys only”? areas; I suspect other men who don’t want to deal with “macho bullshit”? do too. And I think that this intensifies the effect - the attitudes of the worst men in such a group will drive out the moderates, and it becomes an echo chamber. (Look at the men’s rights advocacy boards, for example.)
I respond:
You know, Jeff, those in the men’s rights advocacy boards would look in here and see the same ‘echo chamber’ that you acuse them of having.
Likely both would be right.
That is what comes from 100% screw the other side extremism… Polarization.
Some in those groups do have a point though…
The one sided nature of ‘progress’ on womens issues.
To them they are the ones always giving up where they were predominant (as likely they should) but for all the gains women have made they give up almost nothing. So many still expect the guy to pay for the drinks, pay for dinner, be the breadwinner while she hangs around the house (dont go off on housework, seen this attitude in women who have their husbands pay for cleaning services), demand primacy in child custody cases and so on where women in society have at least been perceived as being in the better position.
So there is an impression that women want the best of both sides and to leave men with the worst of both sides.
Whether true or not, all encompassing or not, trhere is still enough of it to keep the impression alive.
And that will never help getting the two sides together, now will it?
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:05 pm
Neal Feldman Writes:
June 28th, 2005 at 7:54 pm
“Your ‘you have no right to sex’ does not apply in a marriage.”
—
I’ve got news for you:
“Currently, rape of a spouse is a crime in all 50 states and the District of Columbia”
I googled it just to make sure:
http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32701
——
This comment was written by cloudy day.Neal - you might want to rethink you’re entitlement to sex misconceptions.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:10 pm
A point about Antigone on #91:
“If I get drunk and start flirting with every guy at the bar (and I hope my friends are there so I don’t, buy you never know), I take the risk of looking like an idiot, I take the risk of alcohol poisoning, and I take the risk of passing out. What I shouldn’t be taking the risk of is getting raped.”
Agreed. But I hope you agree that if a female friend told you she was planning on getting drunk in the company of men she didn’t know you would advise her against it. My main concern is that people don’t take “it’s not your responsibility” to mean that people shouldn’t be taught to be wary of risky situations.
This comment was written by Glaivester.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:10 pm
Does sound like that’s what he wants it to be, though, doesn’t it? My, my, Neal, keep doing that inadvertant revealing stuff. You do protest too much.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:12 pm
# Antigone Writes:
June 28th, 2005 at 6:40 pm
And the other thing:
It is NOT MY GODDAMN RESPONSIBILITY TO RESTICT MY ACTIONS!!!
I am not doing anything illegal or immoral if I like walking around, by myself, at night. Guess what geniuses? I work during the day, and it’s hot during the day. It’s cool and peaceful and there isn’t a lot of trafic when I walk at night. If I get raped, it still wasn’t my actions that were blamed.
If I choose to screw everything with two legs, that’s my pregotive. I take a lot of risks, STDS, pregnacy *shudder* general lack of value placed on sex, but I can still do it. If you start spreading it around that I’m a “sure thing”? and I tell you that you can go screw yourself, and you rape me, it was still not about anything I did, it was about what YOU did. My actions were not illegal, damaging, immoral, THE RAPISTS ACTIONS WERE.
If I decided that fishnets, tank tops and miniskirts are what make me happy and best express my fashion choices, guess what? Doesn’t mean I’m selling a damn thing, doesn’t mean I’m their for your enjoyment. I am dressing like this for MY enjoyment, not yours. You rape me? My behavior is not the one that needs to change.
If I get drunk and start flirting with every guy at the bar (and I hope my friends are there so I don’t, buy you never know), I take the risk of looking like an idiot, I take the risk of alchol poisoning, and I take the risk of passing out. What I shouldn’t be taking the risk of is getting raped. Again, this is my behavior, and it isn’t hurting anyone, raping is.
If I decide that I want to try and get to WA from ND, I run the risk of being cold, being wet, being hot, it taking a long time, and traveling in uncomfortable conditions. What I shouldn’t be risking is rape. (Well, in the case of MT, I risk being arrested as well, so I’d have to circle that state).
Succintly, MY behavior is just fine. A RAPISTS behavior is the one that needs to change. You want to prevent rape? Don’t tell me my behavior should change, tell them that theirs should.
I respond:
True, you are under no legal obligation to restrict your actions.
Be as reckless and irresponsible as you want to be.
Just don’t come crying to me when something bad but preventable happens because of it.
As you say you can be the #1 slut on the planet… but it puts you at risk of all manner of things INCLUDING but not limited to, STDs, pregnancy, a reputation that could limit you socially or professionally and so on… including putting you at increased risk of being raped. And if you were the #1 slut on the planet and a date raped you, how likely do you think he would ever be convicted?
Less than zero? Just about right.
See my example above about the pedestrian playing in traffic.
Have you heard the term contributory negligence?
People are expected to act reasonably for the circumstances. If I were to wander around Harlem with a shirt that said “I hate niggers” I have the RIGHT to do that, free speech. But would I be a moron with a deathwish to do so? Ya Betcha.
It is not reasonable to cross your arms, pout and stamp your little foot and demand the universe be nice to you.
Face it… the universe made the shark… the universe is not a nice place generally speaking. Survival and happiness in it are possible though not guaranteed, but take work, effort and bending to the universe as much as you want the universe to bend to you.
Maybe this is too deep for here. If so, my apologies.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:13 pm
Why does every risk for women boil down to rape, though? Why? EVery damned time, it’ s always rape. It’s not women we’re talking about. Why do men rape in so many different situations?
You can’t go to bars, dorms, your own home. You’re not safe anywhere, because there’s rape everywhere. Yet we’re talking about women. Why?
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:13 pm
Neal, if rape is “about feeling better about themselves by showing they are superior (in their minds)”, then please explain how your inflammatory trollish crap separates you from rapists other than your self-proclamation that you have never raped (um, in a criminal way of course, not all those times you got “your date a bit drunk and when she is inebriated [went] for it”).
This comment was written by OMFG.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:15 pm
Some people were guessing at statistics… here are a few:
In 2001, 248,000 people were raped/sexually assaulted in the United States. This represents an 8.3 percent drop over a year.89 According to victims, only 39 percent of all rape/sexual assault was reported to law enforcement agencies during 2001.
Law enforcement agencies across the country received 90,491 reports of forcible rape in 2001, an increase of 0.3 percent since 2000. Of these, 44.3 percent were cleared.
In 2001, 91 percent of victims of rape/sexual assault were female.
http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32291
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:16 pm
True, you are under no legal obligation to restrict your actions.
Be as reckless and irresponsible as you want to be.
Just don’t come crying to me when something bad but preventable happens because of it.
As you say you can be the #1 slut on the planet…
So this is the dipshit you all want to give a special place to?
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:20 pm
Your ‘you have no right to sex’ does not apply in a marriage.
Of course it does, at least in the U.S. Very few states recognize a marital exemption to rape laws.
If your spouse denies you sex, you can divorce them. But you do not have any right to force them to engage in sex with you.
This comment was written by mythago.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:25 pm
# Jesurgislac Writes:
June 28th, 2005 at 6:41 pm
I’m thinking that maybe it’s time to start a thread devoted specificly to discussing rape that does not occure in the ‘female victims, male rapists’ pattern?
Why? Do you feel it would draw away the trolls who don’t want to talk about the male rapists and their (mostly female) victims? Because that does seem to be a topic that gets most trolls on these threads extremely worked up, to the extent that they do not permit other people to discuss female victims, male rapists, even though this is overwhelmingly the most common kind of rape.
There is some equivalence to discussing male victims of male rapists, because often the male victim is - especially if he’s gay - dismissed or belittled in a similar way to female victims. Evidently to some men the ability to rape and get away with it is a privilege they wish to defend - not something they want to see being discussed honestly and openly.
I respond:
This is exactly what I am talking about.
This thread is called “New Rape Culture and Gender Thread” not “Rape subject from only the perspective of angry man-hatimg women Thread”.
The subject of rape is universal, why do you insist on subdividing it to excise men who are also harmed by it?
In this it is you being dismissive.
You are also being dismissive by just calling anyone not of your mindset ‘a troll’.
A troll is someone who drops in, says a bunch of inflammatory off topic stuff that does not further discussion and usually then leaves without responding to the firestorm they stir up.
I have done none of these things.
Nothing I have posted here is incendiary or inflammatory. Just because some oversensitive misreading obsessives chose to launch flames at me for speaking the truth on subjects clearly within the title topic of “New Rape Culture and Gender Thread” makes them inflamed, not my posts inflammatory.
What I have posted is to further discussion on the subject as the thread is titled, to wit: “New Rape Culture and Gender Thread”.
And I have not left without responding. I have tried to correct misrepresentations, tried to point out how your mindset and practices regarding anyone not of your mindset etc is harming your greater goals not helping them and pointing out how these various subtopics are related and interrelate since you seem to scared to accept it for some reason.
A truism is”Be wary of those afraid to face facts and accept reality, for while potentially dangerous the are mostly ineffectual.”
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:26 pm
While I don’t really want to placate trolls, I think would be helpful and important to have a place to talk about non-male-rapist-female-victim rapes, so that threads like this one will not get derailed.
Well, if y’all don’t mind LiveJournal, I started a PHMT community a few weeks back for good-faith discussions of that sort of thing. Though somehow I don’t think that’ll help this situation, as (a) I think the people dwelling on this are actively trying to derail, and won’t be satisfied with “ghettoization” of their point, and (b) there’s no way I’m letting him in to disrupt that community.
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:43 pm
To them they are the ones always giving up where they were predominant (as likely they should) but for all the gains women have made they give up almost nothing. So many still expect the guy to pay for the drinks, pay for dinner, be the breadwinner while she hangs around the house (dont go off on housework, seen this attitude in women who have their husbands pay for cleaning services), demand primacy in child custody cases and so on where women in society have at least been perceived as being in the better position.
Okay, here’s where I give up. Does anyone here “expect the guy to pay for the drinks, pay for dinner, be the breadwinner while she hangs around the house”? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? (incidentally, another quote that belongs in the AFI 100)
You’re basically making the same tired arguments as this guy [PDF].
You’re not only unwilling to help, you’re making things worse. So fuck off. Whine about how the horrible feminists won’t listen to your oh-so-rational and inoffensive arguments if you want (or read some of the older threads about “civility” if you’re interested in understanding why this sort of thing isn’t welcome); just fuck off. I’ve helped you derail this thread far too long.
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:45 pm
Neal,
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Nothing you said confused me. I understand exactly what you mean. I think you’re sexist, willfully ignorant and deeply unpleasant, and that your comments about date rate alone reveal that you have nothing useful to offer on this topic, but it’s not because I don’t understand what you mean. I understand only too well.
And by the way - Susan isn’t “hear”? Are you implying that she’s deaf? I believe that you meant she isn’t HERE, which as I already pointed out I did not realise when I wrote my post. Apparently your reading comprehension is about as impressive as your knowledge of the English language.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:53 pm
Oh boy-Jesus-titty-fucking-Christ.
Ban Him, he’s irritating. Make him go away. Make him go away right now, there is nothing that he is saying that is even worth listening too.
fuck… I’m going to respond:
If you don’t want to be treated as a prize stop acting like you are something to be won.
How the hell am I acting like a prize to be won? Excuse me?!? How is ANY girl acting like a prize to be won? By being attractive?
If you dont want to be accused of using sex as a weapon stop using sex as a weapon.
Sex isn’t a weapon, women don’t have it. It requires two people, hun. Making it into a business transaction makes it hurt the women a whole hell of a lot more than it hurts the guy.
If you dont want to be thought of as selfish, greedy or the like stop acting like it… stop draining guys wallets at bars getting free drinks by leading him on then dumping him when he rightly gets irritated about it when he figures it out
You buy me a drink? The only thing you’re entitled to is the pleasure of my company, and depending on how annoying you are, that’s debatable. You I think would be a one-drink limit. You DON’T need to buy a women a drink you know. You could probably just get to talk to her by not being annoying and having something of value to say. I’m not “leading you on” and there isn’t some sort of algorithum that says “x number of drinks = sex”. You show yourself here.
… stop insisting that men shower you with gifts… I dont know how many women I have known getting diamonds and whatnot all the time and never getting the men who give them such a bloody thing other tha when they find out it only cost three months pay whining ‘is that all?’ and so on.
Hun, you’re hanging out with the wrong women then. Again I go back to you don’t need to buy them a damn thing, try with finding out why they want the gift. Is it really the gift they’re after, or is it some sign of affection or attention? And if they are really that shallow, find someone who isn’t as shallow. Sex doesn’t factor this AT ALL.
If you dont want to se seen as sex objects or looked at by men stop dressing in such a way as to scream out “LOOK AT ME!”?. I knowm you only want SOME men to look at you,but sorry male vision doesnt have that level of discernment. W see what is there… not just what you would only like us to see. Example (really long winded, individual account where the girl was acting unprofessional blah, blah, blah, men can’t control themselves, we need to cover up)
We are not dressing in a fashion that screams LOOK AT ME. Each women is dressing how she LIKES too. If I wear a mini-skirt, it is not for your amusement, your entitlement, it is for MY amusement. Our showing of skin does not equate for your need of sex, or your arousal. And even if you do get aroused, it still doesn’t entitle you to sex. The interesting thing, we don’t have to act on every little impulse we have. For instance, sexist comments make me want to kill people. Their actions are causing a resulting response in me. As an adult, I do not act on that impulse. Do the same.
Be as reckless and irresponsible as you want to be.
Just don’t come crying to me when something bad but preventable happens because of it.
Okay, very much missing the point. It shouldn’t be considered “reckless and irresponsible”. If a guy did the very same actions, NO ONE would get mad at him.
As you say you can be the #1 slut on the planet… but it puts you at risk of all manner of things INCLUDING but not limited to, STDs, pregnancy, a reputation that could limit you socially or professionally and so on… including putting you at increased risk of being raped. And if you were the #1 slut on the planet and a date raped you, how likely do you think he would ever be convicted?
Less than zero? Just about right.
And that’s wrong, and completely fucked-up.
See my example above about the pedestrian playing in traffic.
The difference? I don’t have a right to play in traffic. I do have a right to all those other thing.
This isn’t a matter of what IS. This is a matter of WHAT SHOULD BE. Restricting my actions as a female is enabling rapists, not preventing them. The only person who’s actions should be restricted is the rapist.
Face it… the universe made the shark… the universe is not a nice place generally speaking. Survival and happiness in it are possible though not guaranteed, but take work, effort and bending to the universe as much as you want the universe to bend to you.
Maybe this is too deep for here. If so, my apologies.
The universe didn’t make a rapist. And we don’t just throw up are hands and say “well, there’s nothing we can do about it”. If that was true, then let’s get rid of all the jails.
And that last comment perfectly illistrated what I mean by “dismissive”
If there was justice in the universe, you’d wake up tommorow morning as a reasonably attractive women with a self-esteem problem. Enjoy
BAN HIM.
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:53 pm
# Tuomas Writes:
June 28th, 2005 at 6:41 pm
Oh, I wish I could just ignore, but sometimes you need to get shit out of your system, you know?
Bait and switch, Neal. You started out with obnoxious, rude and out of place bullshit, now you go all “hey, let’s all be nice to each other, even though we have different opinions, don’t be so close-minded you know”?… Not falling for that one.
I respond:
Sorry but Im not falling for your straw man.
No bait and switch on my part. There was nothing obnoxious or rude or out of place in my initial posts.
If you want obnoxiousm rude and out of place I suggest you instead look to the RESPONSES from you and your closedminded an in large part foulmouthed friends.
You want dismissive? I suggest you look there too.
You wrote:
Maybe my reference to her confused you. If so my apologies.
Nice apology there (it wasn’t pointed at me but…). “Sorry you’re so confused”?. As if no one could be insulted by your comments. Lol.
Again you seem to just be an oversensitive prat. I had made a reference to something in a post that the responder I responded to seemed to misinterpret… so instead of outright accusing her of actively choosing to misrepresent my post and position (read:lying) I have the benefit of the doubt that maybe my reference had confused them and for that I sincerely apologized.
It is very sad to see you are of such a combattive extremist mindset that even a compassionate restatement (elsewhere in the post you took that snippet out of context from) and a sincere apology are taken by you through your clear prism of myopic hatred to be an attack.
Very sad indeed.
You wrote:
Tuomas I do not understand your question… I was not suggesting self defense classes to the rapists.. was suggesting to those who do not wish to be as likely victims.
Was I unclear?
I respond :
Yes, apparently you were. Here is what you said that I had replied to (aint copy/paste a wonderful thing when used PROPERLY?)
——
rape can be prevented without living in a cave. Self defense training, preparedness and most importantly *** being aware of one’s surroundings and always analyzing possible threats *** is essential.
Why would a rapist need such things? (I know what you meant, but let’s try this reversal for a while).
———-
How else would YOU objectively, if you even Can be objective at this point, read that response?
You wrote:
Eh, no, but was I unclear when I said let’s try this reversal for a while?
I respond:
What possible relevance outside of your personal twilight zone could such asn irrelevant and ludicrous reversal have?
You wrote:
The point is it possible for most, or some women to be physically stronger, more aware etc. than the average rapist. But plenty of women will never get that far.
I respond:
Then I guess I have a much higher opinion of women than you do.
I have seen a 7 yr old girl no more than 60 lbs toss a 200 lb grown man around a gym like he was a raggedy ann doll. She was a yellow belt. I am of the opinion that anyone, woman, male, whatever, can train equally or superior to her. Barring infirmities but we have to deal with average folks… but I dont see much point of discussing quadriplegics running in central park, do you? Blind? Seen em trained. Deaf? Seen em trained. One arm? Seen em trained.Seen some take on three armed attackers with noth arms strapped to their sides.
So you keep with your minimalist defeatist vctimthink mindset… I will assume they are capable until proven otherwise on a case by case basis, ok?
And how bloody tough is just being aware and alert? Think that takes a lifetime to learn, eh?
Again you seem to have an incredibly negative opinion of women and their capabilities indeed.
You wrote:
And I don’t see it as a failure. (Just to make clear, I fully support women getting more assertive and unrapeable, but they shouldn’t have to).
I respond:
Ah yes, the pollyanna comes out… shouldn’t have to.
And I need to eat, guess a healthy ablebodied person should not have to work to put food on the table or a roof over their head. Oh happy day, what a wonderful universe, we shoulnt have to!
I would love to just fly off to Bermuda or Rio whenever I want… Pay for it” I shouldnt havr to, right?
I think the picture is now clear about this nonsensical reality denying pap about ’shouldnt have to’. Right?
You wrote:
And what the fuck is up with the prostitution/women say no when they mean yes/mixed signals stuff? So is rape about sex or no (you said no, but you still spout these tired cliches.)
I respond:
Where did I ever say any of that was an excuse to justify rape?
That associatiohn resides only in your fevered brain and that of some others here.
Those were brought up in specifuc contexts for specific reasons. For more details I suggest acrually READING the relevant posts cor COMPREHENSION. If you can, that is.
You wrote:
Also, you are a liar.
last one for a while I promise!
Exclamation mark and all! (Or to nit-pick, depends on the definition of “for a while”?, but…)
I respond:
For someone as dishonest as you demonstrate yourself to be here to so desperately reach like this.. oh PUH-LEEZE!
LMAO!!!
That was the last of my originating posts. Eveything else has been IN RESPONSE to the post of another… Since you clearly seem to lack the wit to comprehend the difference ( I believe my first response first line was a wow comment about how fast there were responses.
Seems to me you are qualifying as a troll more than I ever could.
You are truly a sad and pathetic excuse for a human being. I pity you. I pity more anyone forced to deal with your BS.
Neal
This comment was written by Neal Feldman.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 8:56 pm
Ah, somebody help me out here, I thought I turned of the italics.
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:00 pm
We shouldn’t have to. That’s not being Pollyanna, that’s the truth. WE shouldn’t bloody have to.
Do you think that guys should have to take self-defense classes to avoid being raped? Do you see guys taking anywhere near the same level of procaution that women have to on a daily basis? Are guys raised with the mindset that the other sex only sees them as only useful as a dick?
No?
We shouldn’t have to.
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:01 pm
Fuck you and fuck your fake pity. Get a life.
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:02 pm
Neal;
Since neither Amp, the main blog administrator, nor PA, the blog writer and administrator of this thread are available, I feel compelled after watching your behavior on this thread escalate into inflammatory baiting and insulting to ask you to cease posting until PA comes back to give you either permission or asks you to leave the thread. Since I’m the only other administrator available I feel I must step in, but I am hesitant to moderate her thread. I genuinely feel, however, that your behavior is not what she would want for it, so am going out on a limb and temporarily verbally banning you from participation until she’s here to make the call on her own.
That said, upon reading this response the only response I feel is valid prior to your ceasing posting on the thread completely is an ‘understood and sorry for causing any unwarranted disruption to the discussion’.
If you have any questions or arguments, please feel free to email Ampersand.
This comment was written by Kim (basement variety!).Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:10 pm
Ah, fuck it. I still think a thread devoted to discussing the dynamics and causes of homosexual sexual assault would be useful. That’s all I have to say.
/me leaves thread.
This comment was written by audio-visual.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:19 pm
I wear jeans and tshirts. On rare occasions, I’ll wear a skirt. On ever rarer occasions, I’ll wear a mini-skirt. At work, I wear button-up blouses and dress pants. I don’t normally wear halter tops.
Occasionally, I’ll get drunk.
I’ve slept with four different guys in my lifetime.
I took self-defence classes, I’m up to a blue belt in Tae Kwon Do.
I walk with my keys between my knuckles.
I like to walk, alone, at night, in Grand Forks North Dakota.
When I’m home for the summer, I like to hike up Sehome hill during the day, which is heavily wooded and next to the University, and very well insulated from noise, it’s peaceful.
I have jobs that require me to work until 10, 11, 12, 1, 2 at night, and I walk back to my car, or accross campus because my car is in the way far parking lot by myself.
I have a lot of guy friends. Thusly, I do in fact go to their rooms, apartments, bedrooms, by myself with them. Occasionally we even drink.
Do I deserve to be raped?
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:20 pm
FYI for the board.
A little googling shows that “Neal Feldman of Salem is a parental and family rights advocate and a longtime critic of how child protection agencies operate in Oregon and elsewhere.”
http://www.fightcps.com/2002_07_14_archive.html
I expect that is the same Neal Feldman that has been arguing here.
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:20 pm
PA and/or Amp
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.PLEASE ban the troll. This one is far more offensive than Susan was. This one is a waste of oxygen, and arguing with him will do no good to anyone.
And yes, I know I was guilty of addressing him to. Knee-jerk reaction (emphasis on the “jerk” part).
In the meantime, how about we all take a vow to just ignore him so that the grown-ups can talk?
Now why can’t I find PA or Amp’s e-mail address? It’s too hot today and my brain seems to be melting. I ws thinking one of us could contact them and politely request that the troll-banning commence.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:27 pm
There seems to be a consistent pattern among trolls like this, including long rants of pseudo-logic, with lots of repetition, setting up straw men to knock down, declaring the illogic of everyone who disagrees with him, and then declaring victory. Add in a healthy dose of victim-mind paranoia and you have a verifiable MRA nutcase.
But leaving trolls to their mudholes, I find it very interesting when men declare themselves authorities on the life experience women have in this world. Sure, men’s views are perfectly valid from their own perspectives, but I would hope some would have the decency of recognizing that when it comes to what it’s like for a woman to live in a rape culture, they don’t know nuttin.
In our society, most men behave well most of the time. Some are downright gentlemanly. But quite a few are obnoxious, and all too many are pretty fucking scary and dangerous. What the rape culture does is give them cover. While most men probably would not beat their wives or girlfriends, most men also would not intervene if they saw a man slapping his girl around. If a girl is raped at a party, the scorn in our society is for the girl, not for the men who raped her.
I’m coming in late and can’t really add much to what’s been said (and re-said) already. I’m glad I missed the troll war. It’s bad enough living with apes in the world without grappling with their apologists.
This comment was written by media girl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:28 pm
“It is seeming like all of you are hopeless wingnuts who havent the critical thinking skills of an average 4 yr old.”
“As you say you can be the #1 slut on the planet… but it puts you at risk of all manner of things INCLUDING but not limited to, STDs, pregnancy, a reputation that could limit you socially or professionally and so on… including putting you at increased risk of being raped. And if you were the #1 slut on the planet and a date raped you, how likely do you think he would ever be convicted?”
and…
“This thread is called “New Rape Culture and Gender Thread”? not “Rape subject from only the perspective of angry man-hatimg women Thread.”
Oh these things aren’t inflammatory at all. Suggesting or hinting that the female commenters and the moderator on this thread are man-haters, or refering to women as “sluts” because they have “too much” sex for your liking isn’t inflammatory at all. No, you’re just some poor guy whose being misintepreted by a bunch of pro-slut-man-haters.
You see Robert(this paragraph is for Robert because he called me out),….this is why I have lost all patience for these people. I’m tired of being nice to idiots. They drop in, say things deliberately to derail the thread so they can steal the spot light, and make it all about them. I usually don’t get involved in my threads unless the shit has hit the fan. And I can’t put up a new thread about the Rape Culture without getting a trollish-moron or two by the fourth, fifth, sixth comment. We don’t talk about the subject, we don’t talk about the post, we spend 200+ comments responding to the inane ramblings of a zealous troll posing as an intellectually honest commenter–which is bullshit. Never mind they disrupt the entire thread and discussion, never mind they say inflammatory things (or hint it in their comments) about women and the female commenters and the moderator, never mind they dismiss other people,….No–you want me to coddle them and make them feel special for their interesting points that they purport as being absolutely true (because hey–they were never raped/sexually assaulted so it must have never or rarely happened, and they don’t need stats to prove it, they can just refer to the rest us living in some wacky “rape-obsessive twilight zone”), and give them far too much bandwidth than they deserve. I don’t care, Robert. We hardly discuss anything on these threads because we keep playing tag with trolls. Cite one time when I have said I would be kind and gentle to commenters exhibiting trollish behavior? There, now you’ve had your special attention, moving back to Neal (and always remember, I don’t care, and I refuse to suffer for the sake of allowing trolls to waste bandwidth)….
Neal, your comments were inflammatory. You suggest and hint within your comments that the women on this thread are “man-haters” because we’re focusing on how men’s role when it comes to rape. Other people have declared you to be a troll and disrupting the discussion, so hence, you are banned. Remember Robert, I_don’t_care. Besides, you’re not one of my professors, so your high-horse lectures are meaningless to me.
This comment was written by Pseudo-Adrienne.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:30 pm
All the rape apologists on this board are beginning to worry me that they have very bad personal reasons to condone rape.
This comment was written by Amanda Marcotte.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:35 pm
If the troll war is over, I’d like to ask a question:
Is it possible that one motivation for blaming the victim is that it makes us feel more secure? That is, if you can blame the way that the victim acted for her victimization, you can reassure yourself that you (or someone close to you) won’t be victimized because you (or someone close to you) will behave much more sensibly?
If we tell ourselves that bad things only happen to bad people, then we can feel that we have more control.
This comment was written by Glaivester.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:37 pm
PA, it might be productive to create an invitation-only thread. Invite all the people who you think are non-trolls to participate, and just auto-delete anyone not on the list.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:40 pm
Glaiv, I think there’s a lot to that. It’s been noted before that often women will be harder on rape victims in trials than men will be, in an effort to distance themselves from her pain and terror.
This comment was written by Amanda Marcotte.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:49 pm
Neal said
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.“Trust me if a woman doesnt want REALLY doesnt want to get undressed it aint easy”
Which I’m willing to bet he knows from personal experience.
Sorry to feed the troll everyone, I just couldn’t resist it.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:54 pm
Glaivester asked
“If the troll war is over, I’d like to ask a question:
Is it possible that one motivation for blaming the victim is that it makes us feel more secure? That is, if you can blame the way that the victim acted for her victimization, you can reassure yourself that you (or someone close to you) won’t be victimized because you (or someone close to you) will behave much more sensibly?
If we tell ourselves that bad things only happen to bad people, then we can feel that we have more control.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.”
I’d say that you’re right on the money. I think that people use the same logic when talking about a lot of crimes (mugging, robbery, car theft, whatever). Admitting how random most crime is is a scary thing.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 9:59 pm
Two things that really resonated with me upon reading these comments are the point that Antigone makes that she and others should not have to restrict their actions to “prevent rape” and the rant Neal made about how “everything” now counts as rape. These seem like two sides of the same coin: laws have been tightened/better enforced from, say, 40 years ago, but women are still blamed because of their actions - really, Neal seems to be saying it’s the actions that are the problem, since they should be coded as consent rather than, for instance, normal behavior. One thing that might improve this situation would be heading it off when people are young by talking frankly (*gasp*) about sex, consent, dating, communication, etc. That is, making a common message about what is and is not okay and communicating that to all children; personally, I’d like to see this replace the monologue (or series of monologues) that are commonly given to girls and young women about how to protect themselves. Included in this message, and hopefully to the culture at large (i’m speaking from an idealistic perspective here), should be something about consent and how it can stop at any point. After watching a movie in a class intended for those teaching fellow students about health, I was appalled when many of my classmates felt the woman in the film was given mixed messages. Yes, she was kissing the guy. Yes, she was in bed with him and they were naked. And yes, everytime he took out a condom or made a move towards intercourse, she said no. To me, that’s a perfectly clear message and one that isn’t allowed when women are told not to put themselves in “compromising” situations - i.e., any sexual situation. In the class, people said she should have thrown him out for even asking, or gotten herself out of the situation - these comments, like many comments about date rape, ignore the fact that women should have choices, sexual agency, and also that there are *feelings* involved in many cases. The first time your partner asks you to have intercourse and you don’t want it, are you sending mixed messages if you say “No, I don’t want to” but still kiss the partner instead of throwing them out of your bed, never to speak to them again? Focusing on what women should do to avoid rape doesn’t address how to cope with situations embedded in emotions and social constructs (like most rapes are, since most rapists know their victims). I guess I’m wondering what other people think about the possibility of communicating clear standards of communication and conduct (including the right to say *yes* as well as no) as a way of influencing the rape culture. This could also address the conception of sex as something men must get from women in any way possible (i.e., the idea that one “scores” and that people who can’t consent are people to score with…).
(Sorry, I know this is a bit off topic of what people had been talking about, and doesn’t address gender as well as I would like it to, but I wanted to maybe start something not related to trolls and their ideas…)
This comment was written by epi.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 10:00 pm
Actually Robert, Amp and I, and I think Kim too, have been discussing doing something like that, due to the way these threads end up with trolls running amok. Oh and everyone, raise your hand if you want me to put up my email address and contact info. I don’t put up my email in order to avoid spam such as online casinos, mortgages, music downloads, porn, Viagra (what the hell am I going to do with Viagra?), and other things. But I’ll put it up if you folks want me too, just in case you have a particular question for me or something. Please don’t send me any webcam stuff. Not knowing what you people look like adds to the nice little illusion I have going ;-)
“Is it possible that one motivation for blaming the victim is that it makes us feel more secure? That is, if you can blame the way that the victim acted for her victimization, you can reassure yourself that you (or someone close to you) won’t be victimized because you (or someone close to you) will behave much more sensibly?”
Yes, it’s the “well I’m not as stupid as you for doing that, so rape will never happen to me,” faux-security-blanket complex.
This comment was written by Pseudo-Adrienne.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 10:13 pm
That’s a good question actually - how do we go about communicating a better “frame” for sex to kids? Because, as the troll above, Aegis etc demonstrate, it’s pretty damn hard to change people’s frames once they’re well established. What would feminist sex ed look like (nothing like the sex ed I got in school, that’s for damn sure)? And what should/could remedial training for those who’ve already been subjected to the poisoned framing look like?
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Also, so we even know where and when kids pick up their frames? I was really surprised by epi’s story above, because I don’t remember the girls in my school reacting that way to the sex ed videos we saw, or to movies and TV in general. The concept that women could refuse sex at any point was pretty commonplace, at least among girls. Epi, what timeframe are you talking about? How old were the kids? I’m wondering if something has changed in the culture since I grew up. Actually I’m fairly sure it has.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 10:16 pm
I’d be interested in going back to the issue Amanda brought up way back in 84 (I skipped over most of Neal’s stuff - there aren’t enough hours in the day…). I think getting rid of the “no girls” mentality would go a long way toward solving a lot of sexist problems. I work at a place that had, until a few years ago, an all-men bar - no women allowed. Women pay the same dues to use this place that men do, and finally their objections overturned the “all-men” rule. Then the “titty twister” mentality kicked in, and (I find this most interesting of all) the men started defending their territory with a veritable piss-ring of pornography. Any woman going in to use the place got to walk past a bulletin board full of Hooters paraphenalia and booby postcards from Hawaii. I’m not completely anti-porn (or at least not anti-sexual imagery), but I do think men have traditionally wielded it to keep women in their place, and it has been very effective. If we’re going to get rid of the “boys only (show us your tits!)” mentality, what do we do with Hooters?
The other part of the equation is that we need to train boys from an early age to relate to women as people like themselves, the same way girls learn to relate to men as people (I read somewhere that girls are generally willing to identify with male protagonists in stories - Harry Potter, for example - but that boys were far less likely to identify with female characters). I appreciate the men who are exceptions to this rule (including many of the posters here), but in general, men seem to have little interest in women who are not pretty and young (or unusually sexy for an older woman) - and they do not identify with these females at all: they are absolutely “other.” These men, when they discuss “women,” are usually generalizing solely about this small subset of womankind (this came up over and over again in the “women’s sexual power” threads here a few weeks ago). Until men can stop doing that, I don’t see any hope of men as a group seeing women as a group as being enough like themselves for them to understand the full horror of rape and really try to put a stop to it.
By the way, media girl: what an awful story.
MG
This comment was written by Mary Garden.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 10:22 pm
PA, please do post your e-mail address so that we can bring things like the troll of the day to your attention. I do sympathise with the spam issue (for some reason I get penis enlargement spam, even though I do not in fact have a penis - maybe they’re thinking I could purchase the pills as a gift?), but it would be useful to be able to contact you when necessary.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Limiting access to rae threads might work to allow those of us who actually want to have a real discussion talk to each other. My concern is that it might end up excluding new people who have something useful to say.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 10:27 pm
*raises hand*
I’m pretty sure I’m not a troll :D
There is a point where guys do honestly become confused about consent, beyond the “oh, she was easy, so of course she wanted sex” set.
No means no, right up to, and even after, penatration. If a girl was “into having sex”, but then something changes like she suddenly doesn’t feel right about it, that’s her preogative to stop. Or, in the case of everyone’s favorite doctor, she passes out, consent has herewith been revoked, as you cannot give consent. If a girl says “no”, it really is better for everyone involved to respect that she’s saying no. If she doesn’t say anything, it is in everyone’s best intrest to ask her to clarify if she’s okay with it.
There are exceptions, I think. But, those exceptions still require a great deal of communication. For instance, the best sex I’ve ever had was with my ex-boyfriend came home, picked me up off the couch and took me to the bedroom. He didn’t ask for consent, even though I was still consenting. The big difference? We had been dating for quite some time, we were on equal footing with each other, power-wise, we had discussed fantasies (that being one of mine) and he respected me enough that if I would have said no, he would have stopped. I know, because he tried it another night, when I was busy studying. I said I had to study, and he backed-off.
“Implied consent” is where there’s a problem. You wanna stop rape? Pretend like there is no such thing. Her wearing a mini-skirt does not imply consent. Her drinking around you does not imply consent. Her coming to your room does not imply consent. Her kissing you does not imply consent. Her saying “no” at a particular juncture, but still kissing you, does not imply consent.
And, worst and most damaging of all, if she says no, or doesn’t say yes, but orgasm during sex, that does not mean that it wasn’t still rape.
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 10:29 pm
Sorry everyone for playing my part on feeding the troll. There’s no way to “win” a flame war, I should keep that in mind.
I also agree with Glaivesters point. There also seems to be certain norms that societies set as the so-called “stupid, but legal behaviour”. For example, in the town I live in, walking home drunk from a bar and getting mugged (or raped) is rare (aqcuintance and date rape is more common, and domestic abuse isn’t exactly non-existent either), and there is hardly any victim-blame there. It is very common thing for men and women of all ages to do (to walk drunk home, drinking alcohol is almost a sacrament for many finns of both sexes), and IF people were getting mugged and raped by doing just that I suspect there would be public outrage, and people would outright DEMAND safer streets from politicians (and would be willing to pay for it in form of taxes). I think that definitely plays a role in this, how much rights do we demand (and of course, no one is demanding stuff like “pay for my brand new Mercedes”, simply rights to have their personal integrity and property protected). Point in this rambling is: It is just and fair to demand safety in public areas. I think these instructions to follow are fine in itself, but I fear they DO deprioritize the need for public safety, and are, in a sense, falsely empowering. (If I am strong,if I am “good boy/girl”, if I don’t drink, etc. it won’t happen to me [and statistics show otherwise]…). Mind you, I am not saying that some of this advice isn’t indeed very sensible, and that it shouldn’t be either or, but knowing politics, if some issue isn’t strongly demanded there’s little incentive to work on it. There is also much that inviduals, civilians can do without putting themselves in risk, like calling for help, “not looking the other way” etc.
It seems to me, that these “that’s just stupid” calls on women who dress in a particular way, or drink, or flirt, or be trusting, are quite clear indication that there indeed is a sort of rape culture that puts all women in a disadvantegeous position. And I agree with Jeff and AndiF on the point that it isn’t exactly a good thing for men, just adding this: If you don’t have ideas about the “proper place of a woman” as a fearful thing to be protected, as some indeed do. (And the next animal analogy may suck, but I have a small town/rural background so bear with me ;). If the rapist are “wolves” and women “sheep” then chivalrous, protective men set themseves up as “shepherd dogs”, and validate themselves as good, with the existence of evil. Those concepts cannot exist in absence of each other… As some have pointed out, not raping shouldn’t be worthy of praise, it should be the norm! And also, rapist as big, bad sort of “hardcore” types in some cool way is also wrong, but exists in some circles [think about Mike Tyson]…)
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 28th, 2005 at 11:38 pm
I feel there are two issues here: What’s sensible, and what’s right. Sure, I’m sensible. I’m not going to tank up the car at midnight. I’m not going to go alone to a 10:30pm movie. I’m not going to go placing myself in what I’m aware might be dangerous situations.
But dammit is it right? A guy doesn’t have these fears — or not to the same degree or in the same way. And I don’t always know what’s a dangerous situation. I was raped by my boyfriend. Do I deserve blame for that?
If a rape culture hung over men, I think we’d be having a different discussion. If we had a nation-wide rash of rape assaults on men, there would be outrage. There would be headlines. It would lead the evening news. Congress would have hearings. The President would declare his determination to stop this.
But it mostly happens to women. No outrage. No headlines. Often not even acknowledgement by the police or the courts.
This comment was written by media girl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 1:43 am
Now that we’re back on target and troll-free
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.I agree with MediaGirl that the distinction MediaGirl is making is valid. However…there are some people who are simply unable to do what society deems prudent. People keep bringing up the ‘walking at night in a bad neighborhood” example. Well, what if you’re poor and that’s the only neighborhood you can afford? What if you have to work nights?
So, I think that rather than focusing on what women can do to reduce risk, there are two more productive things we could focus on.
1. What can we do to reduce/minimise/dismantle the rape culture? It would be particularly useful to focus on what men can do, because I truly believe that firstly, the men who are likely to be rapists are unlikely to care very much what women have to say on the subject, and secondly, men are more succeptible to peer pressure from other men. If men were faced scorn, criticism and even ostracism for other men for rape and for displaying attitudes that support rape, I think that might be the single most effective thing anyone could do.
2. What are the ways in which we can recognise men who are likely to committ acquaintence rape? What behaviours should be viewed as big red flags warning women to stay the hell away from these men? Laying some of this out would have multiple benifits. Firstly, it shifts the focus from women’s behaviour (which isn’t the cause of the problem anyway, and analyzing/ changing which doesn’t work anyway) to men’s behaviour (which is where the problem actually lies). Secondly, it highlights the idea of a rape culture - that there is a link between the fact that the culture condones men invading women’s personal space, speaking to them disrespectfully, harrasing them in the street etc., and the fact that rape is so common. It places rape on a continuum of behavior. It reminds people that women have a right to their bodily integrity, that they aren’t just bodies to be acted upon. It’s also a hell of a lot more useful as a way of teaching young women how to protect themselves from predators than telling them to lock their windows. It gets at the idea that male abuse of women is NORMALIZED, and that there’s a link between the idea that it’s OK to catcall a woman on the street and the idea that if a man rapes a woman he’s just “being a guy”.
Does this make sense to anyone else?
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 1:59 am
Also, I’m starting to get wierded out by all the women here saying things like “Sure, I’m sensible. I’m not going to tank up the car at midnight. I’m not going to go alone to a 10:30pm movie. “. I walk around alone after midnight all the time. I go to meet friends at bars way after 10:30 and I walk alone to get there. I sometimes take public transport home. Am I a freak? I just think it’s odd that we, who know very well that all the precautions in the world won’t help if someone is really determined to rape us, and who also know that we’re far more likely to be raped by a friend or co-worker than some random guy on the street, still go out of our way to detail how “careful” we are.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Honestly, I’m not that “careful”. I refuse to live like that. The way I see it, if I do agree to live like that then the people who want the rape culture to continue have already won. They’ve succeeded in sticking me in a box and forcing me to stay there. And stastically speaking, being “careful” in that way doesn’t really do much to protect me anyway.
Sorry to pick on MediaGirl, hers was just the first example I found. I’m just starting to wonder if I’m some bizzare freak of nature because I WILL NOT live my life afraid to leave my house after dark. Does everyone else on here really live their lives this way, constantly limiting their movements in order to stay safe? Or are we buying into the “but I’m a nice girl, I’m being careful, you can’t blame it one me if I get raped” mythology?
Again…no blaming, no accusations. I’m just wondering if I’m alone on this, or if we’re all unconsciously incorporating the rape culture’s messages into the way we talk, even when we talk to each other.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 4:12 am
BritGirlSF - perhaps because we’re both British?
I too am not “careful”. I’ll go to a 10:30 pm movie all by myself, if I feel like it: I’ll walk home alone or take public transport, just as I like. I’ve always gone places by myself and while I’ve sometimes felt wary, I’ve seldom felt threatened.
I know women who are too scared to walk for five minutes down a quiet street after dark, or are afraid to cross a public park alone at night. These women make me angry - not they themselves, but the fear which has been instilled in them.
This comment was written by Jesurgislac.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 4:30 am
BritGirl,
I think there a lot of women who don’t restrict their activities. There was a thread over at BoomanTribune on just this subject it got a lot of positive response.
Besides, going out at night by yourself is something that a lot of women have to do — like 2nd and3rd shift workers. My job requires travel, a good deal of the time by myself. I not only go out at night, I’m going out in cities with which I’m not familiar. And I have no intention of stopping. I’m sensible about it but I’m not going to be hyper-cautious or fearful.
What’s more I’m not convinced by all the discussion of high-risk behaviors. At best, they only seem useful as a possible prevention of stranger rapes; I don’t see how they are going to do much about acquaintance rape.
Again…no blaming, no accusations. I’m just wondering if I’m alone on this, or if we’re all unconsciously incorporating the rape culture’s messages into the way we talk, even when we talk to each other.
Actually, I was thinking about this in terms of Susan’s “there was no date rape” 40 years ago. As I commented then, there definitely was but we wouldn’t have called it that and what’s worse (and this is something that I feel very ashamed of), when our friends were assaulted, we never thought of accusing the guy of anything. We really did just call it a “bad date”. And that’s something I think a lot of middle-aged women DO have to take the blame for — buying into “you can’t blame a guy for trying” and thus, making sure that the same attitude went blithely on into the next generation.
That’s why I don’t care how shrill some troll like Neal thinks we are or how unfair aegis thinks we are. Not accepting the norm and be willing to raise the issues over and over and over is the right way to keep that attitude from propagating through yet more generations.
This comment was written by AndiF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 4:33 am
Don’t you guys think having a locked thread so we can safely discuss rape is kind of a symptom of a rape culture in and of itself? When some guy absolutely won’t take no for an answer and has so much contempt and hatred for women that he has to vent it to their faces and expresses nostalgia for the days he could rape at will—why can’t we just ban these assholes immediately and have done with it? We’re just showing them how intimidating they are. A far better message would be how vile and pathetic they are.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 4:43 am
Ginmar, I don’t think they can be banned immediately all the time, because P-A, Kim and I can’t be online all the time.
There are a lot of trolls who get banned based on their first post, which is never even visible. So some of them are, in effect, being banned immediately, but since you never see them you don’t know about it. :-)
This comment was written by Ampersand.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 4:50 am
Gin, I don’t think they’re intimidating at all. I suspect that the reason they don’t get banned more quickly is that a. the moderators are not here all the time. Sometimes they don’t notice trolls like Neal. and 2. I think a lot of feminists are hyper-aware of the “shrill” stereotype and go out of their way to try to counteract it and try to look “reasonable”. Thing is, there are some people who cannot be reasoned with.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 4:54 am
Jesurgislac, I think it is partly a Brit thing. I have a couple of friends here who are Brits and they pretty much go wherever and do whatever too. I was running around all over London by myself at 18, and Glasgow at 15.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 5:04 am
AndiF
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.That was pretty much what I was trying to say. If we know that restricting our own movements doesn’t work, why do it? I’m wondering if people feel the need to point out that they are following the “rules” of proper female behaviour because the rape culture has browbeaten them into doing so.
Any yes, all the supposedly helpful “safety tips” ignore the fact that some women HAVE to be out and about at night. What do these idiots think would happen to hospitals if all the women staff refused to work nights? And the “avoid bad neighborhoods” thing - what if that’s where you live, and you can’t afford to move?
And I do think that older women have a reponsiblity not to do the “things were so much better in my day” thing. This is part of what’s been bugging me ever since we started talking about this. I feel like we’re failing young women if they’re still getting the message they need to restrict their own behaviour, and that that will keep them safe. I want to figure out what I, personally can do to help counteract the effects of the rape culture, expecially the effects it has on young people, because that’s where it all starts.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 5:21 am
Amp, if there are people you must ban from the first post….*shudder*—Sorry, but when a guy like Neal jokes about, “Trust me, if a woman doesn’t want her clothes taken off…” or whatever in public— …!
But I still think backing away is a bad idea. Sends the wrong message.
And I don’t give a shit what they call me. I can either ignore them or tell them to fuck off. But letting them back us into a corner out of the public is a bad, bad idea.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 5:58 am
No BritGirl you’re not alone. I got too much of that paranoid use of ‘you could be raped’ as a way to limit my movements as a teenager, and the only (luckily) few instances of molestation and harassment I endured even as a child were in familiar places and by familiar people, including relatives, so I grew up not giving a fuck about any notion of danger or risk from strangers, real or imagined. I have always automatically avoided situations and people I didn’t feel comfortable with, but not because the first thought was rape, just my own mood. Walking alone at night, travelling on my own, hitchiking, getting smashed with near-strangers, ending up crashing at places of people I’d only just met etc. I did all that because that’s what I wanted to do at that time, period. Some were stupid things, maybe, but I had a lot of fun doing them! I’m glad my trust in people at least insofar as them not turning out to be psychos or total shits was not misplaced. It’s nothing to do with me though.
This comment was written by noodles.I guess the level of worrying depends on personal experiences really. Anything could happen anytime to anyone, personally I am a lot more fearful of car accidents since I lost more than a handful of friends and acquaintances that way and was in a couple of bad accidents myself so I hate and avoid cars like the plague. Rape is the last thing on my mind in terms of risks precisely because it is so random and because it depends entirely on the intentions of the attacker, not some precise ‘risk’ situation like travelling over the speed limit.
I do appreciate advice on self-defense as I think it can be useful in any number of situations, and the training is actually fun and it’s always a good thing to do something that gives you more confidence with your body and strength.
Anyting to that end - building confidence - is good, because it actually is good for you, regardless of the fact you may never ‘need’ it. Or that it may not be of any help at all in an actual attack.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 6:13 am
BritGirl,
Yes, I think we are very much in agreement.
The only ting I would disagree with is this:
And I do think that older women have a responsibility not to do the “things were so much better in my day”? thing.
I actually don’t think that Susan’s attitude is typical of our generation (I’m guessing that she is a few years older than me). I think what is more typical and what we are responsible for is what I described — a generation of women who accepted that anything short of violent rape wasn’t sexual assault or rape. So what we did was to support a culture that has led yet another generation of women to, as you say, buy into the message that they need to restrict their own behaviour, and that will keep them safe.
To prevent rape and sexual assault, both men and women must recognize them as such. I think most men are sincere when they say they wouldn’t rape or sexually assault a woman. The problem is that some of these same men will in fact do just that but neither the man nor his victim will actually define the action for what it was.
This comment was written by AndiF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 6:23 am
Noodles
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.The thing is, those aren’t actually stupid things to do. If you were a man no-one would tell you that they were. Living your life as if you have the right to go where you want and participate in whatever activites you choose is not stupid. It’s called adulthood.
This is the most insiduous and offensive thing about women being advised to “be careful”. It’s the way we usually talk to children. No-one should be speaking to an adult that way. Accepting that frame means accepting being treated like a child. It’s infantilising. The natural response to being spoken to this way should be “how dare you speak to me like that?”.
I’ve actually tried that response on people offering unsolicited “advice” by the way. It’s an eye-opening experience. They quite literally don’t know what to say.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 6:29 am
AndiF said
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.“I actually don’t think that Susan’s attitude is typical of our generation (I’m guessing that she is a few years older than me). I think what is more typical and what we are responsible for is what I described … a generation of women who accepted that anything short of violent rape wasn’t sexual assault or rape. So what we did was to support a culture that has led yet another generation of women to, as you say, buy into the message that they need to restrict their own behaviour, and that will keep them safe. ”
That’s actually what I was trying to say. I’ve heard variations of “well, once you get to a certain point men just can’t stop themselves” from female relatives all my life. I’ve also heard lots of blame the victim in cases of acquaintance rape. I actually once found myself talking to my Mom about getting into an argument with my boyfriend about something he wanted to do and I didn’t, and me just flat-out telling him it wasn’t going to happen. She looked at me like I had two heads and said “but he’s your boyfriend, don’t you want to make him happy?”. So yes, there’s a generation gap there.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 6:36 am
Oh, hey, BritgirlSF, I know they’re not intimidating. But the idea of having to have a rape discussion thread be locked off to protect the participants—I mean, what next will we have to do?
I wanted to get back to something I said earlier. All this crap about reasonable precautions ignores some things;
1. The horror that overtakes you when you realize that someone you know is going to try and rape you;
2. The fact that no karate really works against t hat;
3. And the fact that women are already taking precaustions.
Why is it always about rape? I mean, a guy gets drunk—he gets mugged. A guy gets lost—he gets mugged, maybe beaten up. A guy gets a flat tire in a bad neighborhood–he gets mugged. A guy gets drunk on a date—who knows? But they just never consider rape as a fear. Meanwhile, in every one of those situations, people would tell a woman she was ‘lucky’ she didn’t get raped. Almost like they want her to get raped.
But you could avoid all those things, and still get raped, because there are so many ‘nice guys’ out there who have a definition of rape that goes like this:
Alley. Gun. Not me. Not white. Miniskirt. Ergo: party, drunk girl, blue jeans—not rape. Score! The central facet of their definition, though, is their self-centered ability to define rape as nothing they do. The definition of the crime has to revolve aroudn their conveniances.
And all the self-defense in the world won’t protect you when it’s someone you know and trust. How do you deal with the disillusionment? How do you deal with the idea that you are just a piece of sexual meat to most of the world? And how do you deal with it when one of the one or two people you thought viewed you as a person suddenly gets you alone and the air changes and you realize that you were wrong about them, too? What self defense tactic do you use? You can’t offend them, you can’t call what they’re trying to do to you rape because in their self-deluded world, it’s called scoring or whatever. Other people’s reality enages them because it’s not about them. Calling them rapists at that moment–the minute the door locks—-and calling it rape seems likely to get you killed. Their whole world would get changed.
That’s why self defense classes and karate and shit are useless and that’s why these guys have so many friends and relatives who fimly believe they’re innocent. They really believe it. Making them change their minds is what we’re trying to do here, and it’s not going to be accomplished by keeping the dialogue in still more locked rooms.
So what do you do?
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 6:53 am
Plus, lots of women, like lots of men, are simply too small or too out-of-shape or too uncoordinated to fight off a big drunk man or three. This is perfectly fine, and it’s ridiculous that the response to, “I’m being attacked,” is, “Have you heard of Krav Maga?” We have the police so that people don’t have to be warriors. I’m not a brown belt for the same reason I can’t extract my own teeth or raise my own cattle. No one’s telling me that I should take self-defense classes so as not to get mugged, or that I should hire a security guard to watch my home.
Not to mention what Rivka said about how the same social dicta that insist that women should be accomodating insists that women not start kicking ass when attacked. “Make nice and maybe he’ll leave you alone,” is reflexive. I still smile big and draw my voice up a few notes when someone threatens me or makes things difficult for me. That response is part and parcel of the idea that women have the greater responsibility: that they must manage and regulate male behavior without compromising male entitlement. It’s not going to be okay to take men down until we start thinking of rape as something men are obligated to police.
This comment was written by piny.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 6:55 am
I think most men are sincere when they say they wouldn’t rape or sexually assault a woman. The problem is that some of these same men will in fact do just that but neither the man nor his victim will actually define the action for what it was.
The question is, if they did define the action for what it was, would they still sincerely say they wouldn’t rape or sexually assault a woman? I’d like to think that most would, but I think the vehemence with which many men defend the narrow conception of those crimes stems from the fact that they like to say they’re the “good guys” but don’t want to actually have to be good, because they’re afraid of “missing out” on sexual “opportunities.”
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:24 am
Susan says: “I’ve been around the block a bit, and one of my many friends was raped once, long ago. Mostly it doesn’t happen. And didn’t happen, when we were all a lot younger. It was quite rare, actually.”
Then she goes on to say “(Please for the love of God spare me the ‘you-all were RAPED RAPED and you didn’t even know it!!!’ line of argument.) ”
Uh, well, that’s way it wasn’t “so common” 40 years ago. Because rape was defined as some guy jumping you, beating you within an inch of your life, and forcing you to have sex. If it was someone you knew, or your husband, or if you were drunk or considered loose, it wasn’t “real rape.” And people didn’t come forward. And many still don’t because of the attitude you just demonstrated.
I’ve been around the block myself, and yes, rape is pretty common. Hanging out with six female friends, five of them disclosed they were raped. It wasn’t “stranger jumping out of the bushes” rape. It was all done by people they knew.
And as I got older, more women I knew were raped. By their husbands, their boyfriends, their friends. Problem is, they aren’t going to tell people about it when they get the self-righteous and smug BS of “What were you doing/wearing? How were you acting? Why did you drink/let him in/refuse him sex/lead him on/sleep in your own bed/leave your window open/get in the car/be alone with him/be out that late/” ad nauseum.
They aren’t going to talk about it to people who dismiss it as “not real” rape because they didn’t call it rape when it happened.
Katie Rophie once asked if rape was so common, why didn’t she hear more of her friends recounting their experiences? Well, gosh, her shitty attitude towards women who came forward might have a lot to do with it. The prospect of someone cross-examining you and giving you so much patronizing dribble about “real rape” doesn’t inspire much confidence.
And Neal (and any other rape apologists), take your own advice about presenting one’s self. If you don’t want to be treated like a snivelling misogynist ass monkey, stop posting like one.
This comment was written by Sheelzebub.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:24 am
Jeff raises an excellent question. I hear a lot of men insist that various date rape-type situations are in fact not rape. The drunk girl at a party for example, or the girl who was kind of pushing them away but didn’t actually tell them to stop, or the one who just didn’t seem at all into it and kept turning her face away from him and looked upset afterwards but never actually told him he was a rapist.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.The questions is, do these men actually not understand that their actions in these instances are rape, or are they just CHOOSING not to understand? Are they lying to the people they’re talking about it to, or are they lying to themselves?
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:26 am
Wow, what a thread!!
I wanted to respond to AudioVisual’s post #151:
“Ah, fuck it. I still think a thread devoted to discussing the dynamics and causes of homosexual sexual assault would be useful. That’s all I have to say.”
Sure, it would be useful. No one is arguing it wouldn’t. But until we can have a successful thread about the impact of male on female rape (regardless of the woman’s sexuality), then I’m not going to burn up energy worrying about homosexual sexual assault. Gay men and lesbians don’t levy rape against my freedoms in the way that heterosexual men do (and my one experience with rape was with another woman). Gay men and lesbians are not trolling threads about rape and telling us that we are off our rockers, or need medication, or we’re just angry ball-breakers.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:31 am
Katie Roiphe is a piece of work. Who would confide anything, never mind something as traumatic as rape, to a self-righteous little twit with all the compassion and self awareness of a deck chair?
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Actually I think Roiphe was one of the first examples of the whole “we conservatives are so marginalized and oppressed” meme.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:36 am
Robert writes:
“PA, it might be productive to create an invitation-only thread. Invite all the people who you think are non-trolls to participate, and just auto-delete anyone not on the list. ”
To be completely honest, Robert, I think your participation in rape threads is becoming creepy as hell. You rarely talk about rape; yet you insist on trying to delimit the discourse (re: civility). Now you’re suggesting that we talk about rape behind closed doors; that we gate-keep trollish behavior.
Why do you try so hard to control *how* this discussion takes shape? What’s in it for you? Why do you even care? You say inflammatory things all the time, so why do you deem others rude or uncivil? Why do *you* see an imperative to hide our discussions from the public? Why is that a better suggestion than banning trolls who just can’t seem to listen to polite requests to drop their trolling? Why do you assume we are either ignorant or naive enough that we can’t spot trollish behavior from the get-go?
In a thread about rape and how that socializes women, you suggest that we should hide rather than trust our gut instincts.
Fuck that.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:40 am
Defining themselves as good guys only because they don’t commit horrendous crimes against women is the ultimate red flag. That way they need for there to be rapists so they always have that contrast. Plus they can use it to get laid. They don’t have to actually be good; all they have to be is not bad. Watch how offended some guys get when you don’t give them a cookie for not being rapists.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:43 am
gin, have you ever seen the site http://www.heartlessbitches.com ? There’s a section there about “nice guys” that you might find very entertaining.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:43 am
To answer again, I think a lot of it plays into our culture’s perception of sexuality - men as entitled, oversexed and needy, women as asexual gatekeepers, and the whole “nice guy” thing.
I think the common mindset for a lot of the men who justify their narrow definition of rape is the perception that the “bad boys” who don’t have any reservations about the sort of acts BritGirlSF described have sex more often than the “nice guys” who don’t do this sort of thing do - and by our society’s standards, less sex = less fulfilling sex life. Even if said sex is with someone so drunk that the act is one step away from necrophilia.
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:44 am
Jeff Wrote:
“The question is, if they did define the action for what it was, would they still sincerely say they wouldn’t rape or sexually assault a woman?”
—
In my experience, the men that I chose to have contact with - were always very respectful and mutual about anything we did. (But yeah, I expect the perp was in total denial - as I expect they all are - that is part of how they maintain their ego).
So I don’t see all men as being clueless. But I consider myself to be pretty selective and any guys giving off vibes of entitlement or any kind of macho priviledge were avoided by me.
Media girl’s story of the men lined up frightens me - because that scenrio would tend to indicate that a much larger percentage of guys would participate in a rape if they were not doing the initiating. And think nothing of it. The party went on.
That is why it is up to everyone - to be willing to put your social reputation on the line and call rape what it is and call the police. I love hearing the stories of people challenging the would-be rapists who want to leave with the (more than likely) intoxicated would-be victim.
—-
This comment was written by cloudy day.As far as Susan’s assertion that she didn’t know anyone who was raped - there was less rape, etc. I think it’s mostly a matter of people not talking about it. I told my best friend, my husband and a psychologist (who was very flip about it - he might have been a perp, too).
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:45 am
PS The letters that they get from the whiny self-defined “nice guys” are truly priceless.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:49 am
Watch how offended some guys get when you don’t give them a cookie for not being rapists.
Too true. It gets even worse if you suggest that they have an actual responsibility to do more than “not being rapists.”
(I get away with it a little more, I think, because I’m male too - they can’t say I’m putting all the burden on them or that I just don’t understand what it’s like or the other excuses.)
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:50 am
As part of the child abuse prevention training I took to be certified as a chaperone at my daughter’s school, this is the statistic that freaked me out:
1 out of every 6 girls will be sexually abused by the time she is 18
They used a fairly broad definition of sexual abuse, but still.
We have to start working to change the rape culture early. We’re already teaching kids about sex abuse, teaching them to speak up and report it, teaching them to respect their bodies and other people’s bodies. We should build on that as they get older. I really like the suggestion in post #43 for public service announcements.
This comment was written by Lee.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 8:04 am
Britgirl? I’ve actually written for that site.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 8:08 am
Gin, I think I love you.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Now that I’ve buttered you up, how do I get to write for them?
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 8:33 am
Jeff
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.What the hell does “you just don’t understand what it’s like” mean anyway? Do they honestly think they’re going to die if they don’t get laid?
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 8:35 am
Write something and send it in. They’re bitchy in the best possible way.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 8:43 am
It seems that rape, especially date-rape, is more widespread in the US than Europe, or at least Scandinavia, so there must be a sociological factor.
Seem from the outside, the frat boy mentality of the US has a lot to do with glorifying, or at least accepting, rape. What is needed is a mentality change, or rather mentality changes:
1) The victim is the victim, not the cause.
2) The rapist was not doing something acceptable.
3) No, means no. At any time.
4) The women decides how she wants to dress (within the laws), and which person she wants to have sex with (within the laws).
5) No, you are not allowed to touch, unless given permission (implicit or explicit) - if in doubt, you haven’t got permission.
6) Buying a drink, dinner etc. grants you the right to that person’s company, but nothing else, and not for longer than the person wants to grant it.
… and many other changes.
This comment was written by Kristjan Wager.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 8:46 am
Hmmmm, I should probably clearify:
doesn’t mean that everyon in the US has a frat boy mentality, rather it means that the frat boys that exists in the US has a lot of the blame.
This comment was written by Kristjan Wager.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 8:48 am
What the hell does “you just don’t understand what it’s like”? mean anyway? Do they honestly think they’re going to die if they don’t get laid?
Nah, I think that for most of them it’s just an easy way to deflect criticism from women.
I think that part of the to-do over “not getting laid” is that we’re in a culture that regards female sexuality (when it acknowledges it at all) as arbitrary, capricious and random, and perceives the “one chance only” situation as the norm rather than an indicator of problems with the situation.
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 9:10 am
Quite right Jeff. At the same time male sexuality is regarded as some kind of primal force that must be satisfied for the male to function.
This comment was written by Kristjan Wager.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 9:16 am
Kristjan, don’t kid yourself, nor prop up the rest of hte world as examples of rape-free societies. They may have fewer rape reports, but that’s all they’ve probably got less of.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 9:19 am
Jeff: I think that part of the to-do over “not getting laid”? is that we’re in a culture that regards female sexuality (when it acknowledges it at all) as arbitrary, capricious and random, and perceives the “one chance only”? situation as the norm rather than an indicator of problems with the situation.
Kristjan:… doesn’t mean that everyone in the US has a frat boy mentality, rather it means that the frat boys that exists in the US has a lot of the blame.
I’d take these two ideas in a slightly different direction. It’s not so much a frat boy attitude as it is a jock attitude. And what’s at stake when they don’t get laid, is that the other “jocks” will think they lost and what’s worse, they lost to a woman. And it’s also seen as largely a zero-sum game, for the guy to win, the woman has to lose. That’s why they can, I think, so easily rationalize that what they are doing isn’t sexual assault and not see themselves as rapists or abusers — winning the game is all that really matters.
This comment was written by AndiF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 9:26 am
Ginmar, the rest of the world is decidedly not rape free, but Scandinavia has less rape (reported and estimated) than the US, measured per capita. I am not saying that those countries are perfect (they are not), but it might be worth finding out what the root of this difference is.
This comment was written by Kristjan Wager.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 9:36 am
Having some Scandanavian ancestry, I have some ideas on that. One is that women, even women in “traditional roles” of 100 years ago, were and are very strong willed. Coming from a farming culture, there’s not much use for too much macho posing. That’s not to say men don’t simply assume the privilege of ruling, but there’s a lot of respect for women’s strength and wisdom.
Perhaps even more influential is the overall culture of repressing emotions. Maybe that’s a cultural coping mechanism that comes from having lived cooped up in mostly small homes through very long winters. It is just easier if everyone keeps their thoughts to themselves. It happens to a fault, and Garrison Kiellor (sp?) has made a career out of making fun of that.
Of course these are all grand generalizations, but ultimately it seems that the more women are respected the less women are raped. Seems obvious, doesn’t it?
This comment was written by media girl.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 9:38 am
I think, so easily rationalize that what they are doing isn’t sexual assault and not see themselves as rapists or abusers … winning the game is all that really matters.
This reminds me of a disturbing quote I found when discussing strip clubs on another feminist forum:
“It is just a big game. They want your money. You want THEM. The object is to maneuver them into a situation where they will do more than usual, for less money. Of course, there is always the question of who is getting hustled..but if the customer has a good time, and she makes some money …then who cares?”
I think a similar attitude applies in other sexual interaction - that it’s a competition between men who want sex and women who don’t. (I’m thinking the whole “play by play” sequence in “Paradise by the Dashboard Light” here.)
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 9:41 am
In response to the idea:
“Kristjan, don’t kid yourself, nor prop up the rest of hte world as examples of rape-free societies. They may have fewer rape reports, but that’s all they’ve probably got less of.”
—
It seems to me if one believes that societies CAN improve the rape culture and that there are things that people are doing in a culture that promotes the acceptance and perpetuation of rapes - then one would have to think that other societies are better or worse.
It does seem like it makes sense to try to figure out the comparative differences.
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 9:59 am
WRT other countries, we have to be very careful. Sometimes people are just plain in denial and use their denial to justify the sexist status quo.
I lived in Japan for some time, and everyone was quite fond of talking about how safe it was. One guy I knew (a fellow American who’d lived there for a while) insisted before I left that there was no rape there–”Don’t ask me how I know, I just know it,” he said. Others, both foreign and Japanese, would assure me that it was very safe, it wasn’t America, Canada, or Europe where it was so dangerous.
That would have been the end of it, except it simply wasn’t true. One of my students–an older man–freaked out on me when he found out I had been out alone at ten o’clock at night in the city. It wasn’t safe, he insisted.
The rape denial worked in much the same way it worked with Susan–i.e., it doesn’t happen/is very rare, what you’re describing isn’t “real” rape, etc. This false view of a safe, rape-free country was also used to excuse or rationalize the institutionalized sexism within Japan–how bad can the double-standards and discrimination be when we have such a low rape rate? (Much like people used the supposedly low rape rates of the fifties and the “old days” to excuse or rationalize the greater institutional sexism of those times.)
This is not to deny Kristian’s assertion–I’ve never been to Scandanavia. I know there are societies where it is not as widespread–and those societies usually have a more equitable distribution of power between men and women.
This comment was written by Sheelzebub.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 10:11 am
This makes me so sad . . .
“Don’t behave as something to be won”
Any advice for that? Because just being a female seems to put me in the category of something to be won. I have no idea how not to except perhaps to stop dressing attractively, perhaps gain a lot of weight. Then I could have the thrill of being something to be scorned instead. Not much of a choice.
“Don’t use sex as a weapon”
Men say this when they have a fight with a woman and she doesn’t want to have sex. Fighting with a man is not an aphrodesiac. If I don’t want to have sex after a fight it is not because I am using sex as a weapon but it is because I am not in the mood. Not being in the mood is not a violent action, and therefore is not a weapon. The only way you can use sex as a weapon is to force it on someone unwillingly, or condemn someone for their consensual sexual choices.
Seriously, this thred is just depressing.
This comment was written by Linnea.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 10:22 am
I am aware that you can percept your own country in a too positive light, and living in Denmark, I might be in danger for that - especially since I’m male. However, I have quite a few foreign students as friends, including several women, and their perception is the same as mine.
This comment was written by Kristjan Wager.Of course, I live in Copenhagen, and from what I hear, rape (and the ignoring of same) is more widespread (per capita) in the smaller towns, so it might just be because of this, that I percept Denmark as safer. However, 1 fifth of Denmark’s population lives in Copenhagen.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 10:53 am
Linnea, when many guys talk about using sex as a weapon, they mean the women are withholding sex (refusing consent) as one part of their arsenal in disputes. We all know another “weapon” of this passive-aggressive type is the silent treatment, which guys also complain about.
I know anecdotally of only one woman, my college roommate’s mother, who would reject petitions to access the Pussy Oversoul unless they were accompanied by rich gifts. But I also know anecdotally of 2 men (husbands of 2 of my friends) who refuse sex as a punishment to their partners. So it’s really all about control, which is so stupid - how can you control enthusiastic participation?
This comment was written by Lee.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 11:06 am
Interesting thing I looked at here, and this might not have anything to do with anything:
Where the wage-gap is pretty small, rape instances are much less as well.
Wonder if the less-rape coorelates with more respect for women? Nah.
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 12:34 pm
The women use sex as a weapon thing invariably comes from a man who thinks it’s humiliating to feel desire for a woman, presumably because he wants the approval of someone he feels superior to.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 12:41 pm
>> It seems to me if one believes that societies CAN improve the rape culture and that there are things that people are doing in a culture that promotes the acceptance and perpetuation of rapes - then one would have to think that other societies are better or worse. It does seem like it makes sense to try to figure out the comparative differences.
Absolutely. Of course for someting like rape you still have to rely on official figures of reported rapes, or estimates, and it is not easy to find them. Still, it is a starting point for comparison, nothing to do with having a contest for ‘this country is better than that’ (which is just silly), but just to try and consider both similiarities and differences in attitudes, mentalities, social and legal approaches, and how they can possibly relate to incidence of rape.
It’s a fact after all that rape and violence on women are a lot more widespread in societies where women have less civil and political rights and less involvement in public life.
One striking difference in that respect between Scandinavian countries and everywhere else is that they have a lot more women in politics.
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 1:13 pm
The Global Gender Gap:
Top 10 Countries - with the least gap ( the US is 17th)
Sweden
Norway
Iceland
Denmark
Finland
N. Zealand
Canada
U.K.
Germany
Australia
http://www.weforum.org/
(see link to Gender Gap Study on right side)
” Many of the countries where women are fairing well have formal government bodies charged with studying gender inequality and recommending policy solutions to correct it. But not the United States — no, siree.”
http://www.mothersmovement.org/noteworthy/noteworthy.htm#wef
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 1:20 pm
Neal -
This comment was written by natural.Your response #124 reminds me why I have never personally told anyone about what happened to me when I was 14. My friend - just happening to be a male - and I were in my parents’ bedroom. His friend was in the den talking to my little sister. He closed the door, threw me on the bed and forced his hand into me. I kicked and screamed for my sister, but apparently his friend had closed the den door and turned up the volume on the tv. The next day, he and his friend came over and wondered why I was upset. He didn’t rape me, they said. What a gentleman. The point is that both of them thought I gave him signals that this would be acceptable, and I was a bitch for getting mad “after the fact”. Truth is, after he started hurting me, I did stop fighting. I guess I changed the no to a yes. To my attacker, I was depriving him of the sex he deserved for spending time with me. I still remember the blank but determined look on his face. It has been 17 years.
Attitudes like yours have kept me from talking about it. You can think that I used him as a friend or acted like a prize all you want. But several years later, I have now come to peace with the idea that I was not responsible. And yes, I still have certain problems being alone with men.
Your comments both minimize a victim’s trauma and the attacker’s responsibility. Your comments potentiate self-blaming by the victim. You obviously do not see the total range of behavior some people (gender neutral) are capable of acting out. And most of all, you fail to see that, although either gender can be the victim or the attacker, it is the female gender that is overtly affected the most. I realize that nothing that I or anyone else on this thread can write will alter your opinion. But I feel I have the responsibility to tell you that you are wrong.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 4:39 pm
I guess I changed the no to a yes.
No. You changed to “no, but I can’t gain anything by fighting you off.”
This comment was written by mythago.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:07 pm
I’m late, but, Amanda - awesome point in #84
Mary, from my experience (I work in the kid’s section of a large bookstore) your comment about girls being (more) able to identify with protaganists of the opposite gender than boys, is very, very true (sadly). IMHO this is both indicative of, and contributes, to male privilege and rape culture.
BritGirlSF and Jesurgislac, I also occasionaly tank up at midnight, often get off work at midnight, and I occasionaly go to late movies alone. But then, I studied in England for a year, and it was during that year that I started not worrying so much about such things. The first time I went out to a club with some friends and ended up leaving early by myself. At first I was shocked that they weren’t more concerned and that no one insisted I stay or that someone walk home with me.
Although, in the end, it was the question of whether or not I should travel by myself or with other American students (that I wasn’t really friends with) during breaks that was the real turning point for selectively ignoring all this good “adivce” I’ve been given. A lot of people thought I was crazy, but there was no way I was going to curtail what might be my one chance to see Europe to fit the tastes of people that I didn’t really have that much in common with only because it is “crazy” for me travel alone in Western Europe simply because I am a woman.
This comment was written by Jenny K.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 7:26 pm
In reading the posts I have become more aware of how much the constant barrage of misinformation and attitudes affects all of us. The messages that are thrown about in our culture about roles are received by everybody, men and women, and that many actually believe the nonsense; such as,
The notions from the conservative Church, women are the cause of the fall, women are to be submissive to men, and a woman’s role is to complete a man. (Not humanly possible.) I see ordaining female Priests as a big step to moving in the right direction, as well as more feminist theology available and taught in the Church.
That the folks in power are to come up with the solutions to save those they are controlling. (I see this a lot in race issues as well, it is the majority trying to “fix”? the minority… wouldn’t consider giving power to the minority… the majority is afraid if they did, the minority will treat them as poorly as they were treated.) The majority also has the position of identifying the problem, with women and rape, go figure; the problem is always the woman as it couldn’t be the men controlling things that is the cause of the problem. More women and men telling the truth about what rape is and is not, and holding people accountable has to happen in larger forums.
Folks are afraid that empowered people, in this case women are a threat. Don’t get out of your box; independence scares the crap out of guys who have built things to where they are in control and are always right. It is just the opposite in reality, what a great space to be in, one where respect and accountability rule the day as opposed to fear and intimidation.
Rape is a terrorist action that serves to keep people under control from fear and intimidation. It feeds into the idea that women need men to protect them, and that women are not capable of taking care of themselves. What do women need to be protected from if not men? What a ridiculous idea, women need men to protect them from men, that is ludicrous, but it is an idea that many put stock in. (I do not believe that long term, women being better fighters is the answer, or having to act as if one can take on the world in public. Who needs more roles? Isn’t that what is a strong part of the root of the issue, all these phony man made roles?) Getting real about who we are, and being OK with that (no threats) seems to make better sense then intimidating men so they will go find someone else to rape instead.
Blessings.
This comment was written by Rock.Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 8:47 pm
To bring together Kristjan’s comments about Scandinavia and the comment about the jock mentality…
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.I follow ice hockey. Right now there’s a labour dispute, so most of the European players are back in Europe. Within a few months of this happening, two Swedish players who usually play in the NHL were arrested for rape (in Sweden). Which got me thinking. I find it hard to imagine the same guys being arrested in, say Canada, or Detroit, for rape. In fact, my first reaction was that if it had happened over here the whole thing would have been hushed up and they would never have been arrested, and if they had it probably wouldn’t have made the papers.
So, maybe part of the issues isn’t just the “jock mentality”, although personally I think that’s a HUGE part of the problem. Maybe part of the problem is not just that the mentality exists, but that society as a whole has decided that a certain set of men essentially get a “get out of jail free” card and are allowed to abuse women with impunity. Ie, the issue is predominantly one of a power disparity between groups, kind of like lynching in the pre-1960s South, where people know very well that something is wrong but it is allowed to continue because one group simply has so much more power than the other.
It would be interesting to hear Kristjan’s take on this (or Tuomas if he’s still here). I have no idea if they usually have these kinds of problems with athletes in Scandinavia at the same rate we do here, or if it’s that something about Scandinavian society makes it less likely that rape gets covered up, or if maybe the real issue is that these particular guys usually play in the US, ie they have spent several years steeping in American or Canadian jock culture.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 29th, 2005 at 8:59 pm
Also, to be clear, the get out of jail free card concept doesn’t just apply to jocks. See any of the multiple rape cases involving the Kennedys.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 8:06 am
Actually, Amanda, I think he uses it to justify his horrendous acts against women. If they have a weapon and aer using it against him, why, he’s entitled to disarm them, isn’t he?
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 9:52 am
Rock wrote…
“…many actually believe the nonsense; such as…
That the folks in power are to come up with the solutions to save those they are controlling.”
The fact is that a lot has been changing from within that has led to women being in positions where they can affect change more directly - and become “folks in power”.
I saw a case play out where a child molester came before a male judge who instead of accepting a perfectly good plea bargain which would have put the perpetrator behind bars for 16 years - suggested the guy might want to think about it?(seemed to suggest he shouldn’t make such an agreement) and reset it for a later hearing. When it came up again the female judge who was then presiding - suggested if anything it was too light of a sentence and gave the guy quite a hard time before accepting it.
Recently there was the Louisiana case where the male judge sentenced the man who raped and impregnated his 12 year old daughter to a suspended sentence and probation. That is outrageous. I would be surprised to see a woman judge pass such a light sentence on such a crime.
Of course it’s all through the system and women are not always more harsh in their sentencing than men. It starts with people willing to bring charges, police getting involved - the prosecutor who decides whether to file a case. The attitudes of the prosecutor and how serious that person takes the situation makes a huge difference. There are a lot of rape cases that some prosecutors don’t believe they can win - so they don’t try it - others who would try them with the attitude of winning the case and they do.
—–
That is just one aspect - there is also the influence of political parties - like the Republicans with Bush and his personal example of the docile wife. (The last “election” with Kerry and his “opinionated” wife was interesting. I’m still waiting for a female presidential candidate.) The influence of political as well as sports or other media celebrities is huge.
People were mentioning the jocks and what they get away with. Just the attitudes of the Kobe Bryant defenders was an example of what happens when charges are brought up against someone with name recognition and hero status.
Sure people can fight it from within their social networks and that is important. But people in many states do vote for prosecutors and judges, etc. (I think it varies by state) - the more people know about the people they are voting for the better. And it’s all the better to get more feminists of the male and female varieties into those jobs that matter.
And one of these days we’ll get “a formal government body charged with studying gender inequality and recommending policy solutions to correct it.”
This comment was written by cloudy day.And it will take people being able and willing to take that on. (Of course the way things go with that - if we had one now - Bush would use it to undermine what gender equality exists - because that is how he operates).
Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 9:59 am
You have a link to the Louisiana case?
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 10:23 am
BritGirlSF wrote:
There is no comparision between the number of cases in the US and in Scandinavia - I can’t offhand think of any cases involving a Danish athlete, except for one case involving a boxer who was declared innocent (I can’t comment on the case, as I don’t know the details).
Part of this might be because athletes doesn’t play for a college or high school team - they play for a sports team, that has nothing as such to do with any education. This means that they don’t win prizes for their school or college, but instead are regarded as students like everyone else, and thus don’t get glorified like they tend to be in the US.
Part of the reason why they got arrested could be that the level at which it is considered rape is much lower in Sweden than in the US. So they might have gotten away with it in the US, but not in Sweden - I don’t know if this is the case, but it’s plausible.
This comment was written by Kristjan Wager.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 10:46 am
For ginmar:
http://www.nola.com/newsflash/louisiana/index.ssf?/base/news-17/1119653943105060.xml&storylist=louisiana
—
Prosecutors want tougher sentence for father
6/24/2005, 6:17 p.m. CT
The Associated Press
Â
NEW ORLEANS (AP) … Prosecutors on Friday asked a judge to reconsider the sentence handed out to a man accused of raping his then 12-year-old daughter, leaving her pregnant and with a sexually transmitted disease.
A 37-year-old man, who pleaded guilty to a charge of aggravated incest, was sentenced to six years, but given credit for the more than two years he was in jail awaiting trial and had the balance of the sentence suspended by Criminal District Judge Benedict Willard. Willard also ordered the father to serve six years on active probation.
The penalty for aggravated incest is 5-20 years with or without hard labor. Under Louisiana law, a person convicted of aggravated incest could receive a sentence of five years probation.
“Jones committed an unspeakable crime against his own daughter and he should be punished appropriately. A six-year prison term for this crime is grossly inadequate,” said Orleans Parish District Attorney Eddie J. Jordan, Jr.
Assistant District Attorneys Kimya Holmes and Tiffany Peters say the probation is illegal because the aggravated incest law specifies a probation of no longer than five years.
The girl was attacked by her father while sleeping in his house during a weekend visit.
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 6:05 pm
How do you aggravate incest?
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 6:37 pm
He got time served and probation? You’ve got to be fucking me!
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 6:58 pm
Horrifying.
I would guess that the reason for the lenient sentence is that his child support is the girl (and any siblings) primary financial support. He goes to jail, no child support, they’re in poverty.
That would be an awful judgment to have to make.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 7:18 pm
My comment is awaiting moderation? What’s that for?
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 7:38 pm
Yeah, Robert, I kind of doubt it.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 7:56 pm
“My comment is awaiting moderation? What’s that for?”
Some times, even for the regular commenters, if you say certain words or place them in a certain fashion in your comment, the comment-moderator program will pick it up. Just to make sure it isn’t spam. It’s really trigger-happy like that, but it does help us get rid of the spam.
This comment was written by Pseudo-Adrienne.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 9:46 pm
Oh, okay. Thanks.
This comment was written by Antigone.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 10:30 pm
Britgirl:
I would like to add to Kristjan’s point one other aspect of culture that is missing here: The frat boy culture. Sure, there are university student men who are misogynistic and group together, but there are few official or pseudo-official fraternities or sisterhoods. Usually free-time activities for university students and parties are done by both men and women participating (who outnumbers who depends on the field of study… parties for computer science students have more men and social sciences and, indeed most fields of study have more women. But then again it’s not rare to see parties that include students of different fields to have parties to get more even gender distribution).
I also think that Finnish culture differs somewhat from other scandinavian cultures… more so than say, the difference between Denmark and Sweden (one possible reason is different language, Swedish, Norwegian and Danish are related languages to each other while Finnish is only related to several dying languages in the former Soviet Union, Estonian, Hungarese(?). So the other scandinavians don’t understand a thing we’re saying and Danes sound to us just like Swedes but with hot potatoes in mouths[sorry Kristjan ;)]). Finnish culture seems much more private and private issues are not discussed, and people are discouraged from doing so. Therefore I can’t really say whether (date/acquintance) rape is truly so much rarer. Public rape certainly is, because we take great pride in having a safe society where people can walk around drunk or dressed in whatever way. Not to say that particularly different from the norm -people aren’t looked at…
Also rape penalties are ridiculously low. There probably is condemnation towards rapists as a whole, but one case was few years ago when a man had raped a woman, and the judge decided to change the verdict to on probation for an absurd reason: The mans employer had endorsed the man and told he is a good worker (is never late etc.) so I think rapists, still get of rather easy in Finland. There is also the issue in plenty of Scandinavians (Finns in particular) to consider the own socity/country pretty much flawless and anyone suggesting otherwise is met with scorn.
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 10:39 pm
What I mean by ridulously low sentences is, about half of the rapists go on probation instead of jail and jail time, if there is such a thing, is year or two. That is quite short time considering the offense…
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 11:48 pm
Tuomas
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Frat boy culture might actually be a better term to use, since there are plenty of young men affected by it who are not athletes (even though there are similarities between the two). Which is what I was getting at a while back by pointing out that we might actually be able to give women useful advice in terms of what might offer them some protection from rape, not by telling them to limit their own behaviour, but by pointing out that men suffering from a severe case of frat-boy-itis are probably a very high risk group in terms of date rape, and should probably be viewed with extreme caution. The vast majority of the cases of date rape I know of involved guys who fit this pattern (varients of which can be found in other cultures - see the term “lad” in the UK). In fact I think you could generalise and say that the prevalence of rape is unusually high amongst groups of men which are generally homosocial (ie those in which men primarily socialise with other men and women are effectively excluded, such as sports teams, fraternities, some branches of the military etc). Thus, if you wanted to give anti-rape advice to women, telling them to stay the hell away from these kinds of guys might not be a bad idea.
What concerns me about the US (and what may in part explain why the rape stats are so startlingly high on college campuses here) is that right now we seem to have a pop culture that admires frat boys to an almost fetishistic level. Young men get a lot of positive reinforcement for being that way. Young women are encouraged to date those kind of guys. I think that if men want to help minimise rape a good place to start would be not encouraging frat bot behaviour, ie when guys display typical frat boy behaviour point out that they’re acting like jerks instead of patting them on the head and giving them a treat. In my experience men here often treat those guys like some sort of performing monkey - get them drunk and watch them go. Their behaviour is seen as entertaining, rather than crass and stupid, which is closer to the truth.
Yeah, can you tell I don’t like frat boys?
Report this comment to the moderators
June 30th, 2005 at 11:54 pm
Also, for Tuomas - my impression of Finnish culture (had quite a few Finnish friends in London) is that it’s rather more “macho” than Scandinavia as a whole. Not to the frat-boy level, but more in an old-fashioned way. It also seems to share with it’s Baltic and Russian neighbors a tendency to heavy drinking (as does Scotland, where I’m from). I suspect that drinking and rape go hand in hand in almost every culture.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.FYI, I think that the word you were looking for was “Hungarian”. I’ve heard that theory before, that the Finns are related to the Magyars in Hungary.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 12:39 am
How do you aggravate incest?
IANAL but not all incest is created equal. An 18 year old girl and her 17 year old brother playing topless snuggle is a faaaaar cry from a father raping a little girl. They both fall under the same rubric, but one is, well, different.
Another way of thinking of it is that a reasonably understanding person is probably not going to condemn the participants in the first instance; the father ought to be beaten and thrown into a pit for life, just for starters.
It could also be the case that in the state in question, “rape” and “incest” are strongly divided in the law books, and a case of incest which is also a rape (rather than some consensual “Blue Lagoon” scenario) would be considered “aggravated”.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 12:44 am
Finnish culture is definitely more macho than Scandinavia in general. More militaristic also. And old-fashioned way is a good observation… But the thing is that Finnish women are also more “macho”, than swedish women, for example (at least in my experience, swedish women seem more traditionally “feminine”, and Baltic women and Russian women especially seem more “feminine”, to the point that it is an insult to say to a Finnish woman that she looks like Russian. It is the same as saying “You look just like a whore”). I also think Finnish machoism is rather different than, say, Italian machoism, and seems very much focused on physical prowess and drinking capability, for example. Loudness and aggressive behaviour (when not drunk) is much frowned upon.
You could have a slightly biased sampling from Finnish culture as plenty of finns never leave their homeland, and the culture, come to think of it, is actually far from homogenous (were your friends from Helsinki area?, Ostrobotnia? Karelia? Savonia? Häme? Lapland? Big city or rural? All these areas have somewhat different norms for behaviour, and if you are familiar with the culture, you can tell even without the accent giving some away immediately)
I think it is fairly evident from your posts ;). And come to think of it, I see the frat boy culture sadly creeping in to culture here, from American TV-series and movies, and I have seen the negative aspects of Finnish culture combined with frat-boy behaviour, as in having the traditional virtues of humility, honesty and reliability replaced by frat boy “virtues” yet retaining the bad things about our culture, like alcohol consumption, stubborness, and unwillingness to show emotion or discuss sensitive issues. Some of the most extreme misogynists I have met were just that way. And all cases of date rape, or behaviour that indeed sounded very much like date rape that I have heard of were done by just that kind of guys.
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 1:12 am
Tuomas
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Most of the Finns I knew were from either Helsinki or Turku. I agree that Finnish women are more “macho” too. I had a friend in London who I once saw hit a guy over the head with a bottle of vodka because he was harrassing her in the street late at night. Definately not something I can imagine many other women doing (I have to admit that I was actually quite impressed with her at the time, but then I was only 18). The thing I found most distinctive about all the Finns I knew was that they were very uncomfortable with overt displays of emotion, unless they had been drinking, at which point they would become suddenly both cuddly and a bit maudlin at the same time, if that makes any sense. It did seem to me that the differences in behavior and expectations between men and women were less extreme than many other cultures.
From an outsider’s point of view it’s funny how much Finns and Russian don’t like each other (one of my best friends now is Russian). I’ve never been quite sure why, unless it’s just proximity and historical rivalry, the same way the Scots and the English sometimes don’t like each other either. Although now that I think about it, it may be the contrast between the Finnish emotional reserve and the Russian tendency to get gushy and emotional at the drop of a hat. Both sides seem to make the other very uncomfortable.
It’s sad that the frat boy culture is taking hold over there too. Of all the things the US could be exporting, frat boys are one of the least appealing (before anyone thinks I’m just slamming the US, I’ll happily concede that British lad culture is just as bad). I’d be interested to see how many other people see the frat boy/date rapist connection. When I think of the cases I know about the correlation is pretty striking.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 1:14 am
I just noticed comment 211# from media girl, and I must say it is right on target. I don’t see gender roles abolished at all here, but the roles seem to allow much more participation for women in politics, and many other fields. Traditional roles here just seem very different from traditional anglo-american values. And macho posing is definitely frowned upon, and considered very unmasculine, and silent determination and hard work are the defining masculine traits. Feminine “princess” role is very much absent, and women aren’t considered prices so much. I think the harsh conditions and harsh history have much to do with that.
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 1:26 am
I’d be interested to see how many other people see the frat boy/date rapist connection. When I think of the cases I know about the correlation is pretty striking.
It aligns pretty well with my own experiences. There’s a definite streak of entitlement in many American athletes. In some this is a healthy development of a strong ego, but many go way over the line. (The difference between being cocky and being a prick, so to speak.)
I think the blame in most of those cases lies pretty squarely on the fathers, for failing to provide proper role models, and for failing to create a healthy psychological environment. (Not necessarily gender role models, just in general.) You take a kid whose dad is simultaneously telling him that he’s a superstar and worthless, and then have that dad model behavior that treats women as objects, and you get someone with “potential date rapist” written all over him.
(Not to take away any responsibility for the boy or man in question; he’s gotta be responsible for his own actions. But I’d assign the blame per se to the previous generation.)
Rape (date and otherwise) is a problem that men have to fix, one boy at a time.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 1:41 am
Let’s not forget something else about rape and the criminal justice system: it is a violent crime where victim’s testimony typically is not enough to convict the suspect. In Texas, people have been executed on unreliable witness testimony, but in rape the victim almost always is considered unreliable. How’s that for loading the system?
That’s why girls and women are counseled: If you’re raped, go to the hospital and get the “rape kit” work. Without physical evidence — i.e., bruising, scratching, semen, etc. — you in for a rough ride and limited chance of winning a conviction. And if it’s “date rape,” you can pretty much forget it. In our culture, wearing a short skirt to a party is seen as giving sexual consent.
You can’t win for losing.
This comment was written by media girl.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 3:21 am
And in today’s news, Robert and I actually agree on something and they celebrate the opening of the very first figure skating championship in hell…
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Although I wouldn’t place all the blame on the fathers. I think blame can be distributed throughout society on this one, and I’ve seen plenty of mothers make excuses for their badly behaved sons too. In the case of athletes I would look specifically at the role which coaches and other older male athletes and team-mates play, and at the fawning adulation of the press and surrounding community which helps to build up the athletes’ sense of entitlement.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 3:26 am
I’d love to hear Amanda’s take on this particular issue to, since she grew up in Texas, where football is sort of the unofficial state religion (I used to live in Texas too so I know of what I speak).
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 5:17 am
About the “frat boy” situation:
This comment was written by emma.I went to a university where fraternities were prohibited. Everyone there was amazed at the (comparatively) rare occurence of date rapes and the atmosphere of respect for women in the university. Of course, it’s hard to say if the respect for women led to the prohibition of frats, or if the prohibition of frats led to the respect for women…
But whether the chicken or egg came first, it was a wonderful place to go to university.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 5:41 am
BritGirl:
*Sort of off-topic*
Not to turn this whole thread into a discussion on Finnish culture, but I figured out I need to answer couple of things:
First of all, the cuddly and maudlin thing correlates perfectly with my experience (I tend to become over-friendly and over-happy myself when drunk, only slightly maudlin) and I suspect the fact that many Finns do indeed suppress their emotions has much to do with the hard drinking here (it may be the only to way to get emotional in a socially approved way, as strange as that may sound).
Second, I think the Finns/Russians point has next to nothing to do with cultural issues or emotionality. For example, Finns from Karelia (where my mother’s family is from, it is south-eastern Finland btw) are much more emotional and affectionate than Finns from, say Helsinki and Turku. Yet Karelians on the average hate Russians even more than other Finns. It is a tragic thing, IMHO, as Finns and Russians would probably have much in common.
It is all about history… In particular the WW2, which to Finland meant Winter War (Soviet Union attacks Finland in winter 1939 without approval from international community or a declaration of war before the attack, Finland loses the Karelian Isthmus and the city of Vyborg, but gains a defensive victory), the Continuation War (Finland attacks the Soviet Union to take back the land lost alongside Germany’s Operation Barbarossa, with German assistance in equipment. Germanys fortunes turn alongside Finlands, next comes the Soviet counter-offensive which is [just barely] stopped, but Finland cannot wage prolonged war and makes a seperate peace) and the Lapland War (Finland, after finally making peace with the Soviet Union and losing more land has to drive the Nazis who were attacking from northern Finland to Soviet Union out from finnish soil). These events are most crucial in finnish history (and during our independece day (6th December) these events are much more discussed than the actual day Finland became independent)… And as wrong and sad it indeed is to hold grudges against an entire nation and group of people based on history it is essentially the main reason. Russians are seen as opressors and conquerors. And I think the not getting along is mainly on our side due to these historical grudges and the resulting behaviour.
It may also be that much anti-Russian bias is due to fact that many Russians in Finland indeed are criminals, prostitutes and pimps, and probably due to the fact that Finns do not associate much personally with Russians,and many who do are indeed johns visiting Russia or Russian prostitutes for sex, and johns would be quite bad ambassadors of our culture.
To get back on topic, I also agree that with Robert about the parenting thing… With the added point that other sources also affect the development of a young boy, and the model of man that a young boy has can indeed be someone other than the father, and some have many role models (but I agree that parents are the most important ones).
This comment was written by Tuomas.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 5:55 am
Readers given to reading long papers by criminologists might be interested in this report - part of the British Crime Survey - based on interviews with a properly selected sample of the population. Those interviewed in this case were aged 16 to 59.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hors237.pdf -
It is a PDF file and there is rather a lot of it. Date is 2002.
From a quick scan - while the CIA reckons (World Factbook) that there are well under 19,000,000 women in this age group, the study estimates that of the current population under age 60, some 754,000 have been raped.
The report recommends changes to the law: these changes have since been made.
This comment was written by maureen.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 5:56 am
continuing Tuomas’ off-topic but interesting digression…
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.I did suspect that history might play a part in the Finnish-Russian mutual distrust, which is why I used the Scots and the English as an example (the Scots being the smaller, poorer country invaded by the bigger, stronger neighbor in this case). I’m Scottish and many Scots hate the English to this day, which is sad because they have more in common than they think and the continuing enmity helps no-one. One thing I’d add though - in my experience the Russians do distrust the Finns because they perceive them as cold and unemotional. Russians are generally rather proud of their emotionality. Are you familiar with Alexandra Kollontai (sp?) She’s an interesting illustration of the Russian/Finnish thing IMHO.
As for the Russian Mafia issue, I’m going to avoid that for fear of completely derailing the discussion (though as you can probably tell I have a strange sort of fascination with that part of the world).
OK, back to the main topic now…
Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 6:16 am
Of course, it’s hard to say if the respect for women led to the prohibition of frats, or if the prohibition of frats led to the respect for women…
I’d guess neither - it’s more that such a school isn’t likely to attract the sort of men who think Animal House is an appropriate model for their behavior.
(Incidentally, as one who’s nominally a “frat boy” myself, I really hate how the term is used to encompass those who display just about everything wrong with entitlement culture, regardless of whether they’re actually in a fraternity or not.)
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 6:24 am
Jeff, if you can think of a better term that everyone will understand the meaning of I’d be happy to use it.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.FYI, clearly not all men who were in a fraternity fit the “frat boy” stereotype. I have a friend who’s about as un-frat boy like as you can imagine who was in fact in a fraternity. I think he joined for future job networking purposes. But the term does serve as a useful verbal shortcut.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 6:44 am
Texans’ have pretty much the exact view of the sexual entitlement of athletes that you’d imagine. Where I grew up, football players raped willy-nilly and everyone was especially harsh in blaming the victim. Some would even tout the guy’s status as a football player as evidence that he was innocent. I never understood why, though I suppose it’s more the the whole athletes get laid anyway, so they don’t “have to” rape.
The irony of that is somoene who is told that he is so overwhelmingly entitled to sex with whoever he wants whenever he wants is more, not less likely, to get enraged when told no and just force himself on a woman. When you point that out to people, they tend to agree, but until then they tend to fall into the rapist mindset and think that all women automatically consent to sex with athletes without question.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 6:46 am
In addition, I would point out that while everyone agrees that football players don’t “have to” rape and therefore are always innocent all the time of it, they then turn around and warn girls they love never to be alone with one. Basically, we inadvertantly endorse an athlete’s “right” to rape, if you will.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 7:11 am
Amanda - wierd story. A guy I basically grew up from when I was 2 and he was 7 with played football at A&M. Our families are friends so we grew up together - when I was a little kid this guy was basically like a big brother to me. Between 10 and 15 for me, which would be 16 and 21 for him, we didn’t see each other (fathers posted to different countries). Last time I saw when he was 16 he was a GREAT guy who I used to love hanging out with.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.So, next time I see him he’s in his junior year at A&M and on the football team. And this guy who I grew up with is looking at me like I’m a piece of prime rib. At a family dinner I was talking about a band I wanted to go see and he offered to take me, since my parents didn’t want me to go alone. His Mom freaked out and dragged him into the kitchen, where I heard her saying “don’t you dare even think about laying a hand on that girl”. She was actually shaking. Now I know this woman very well. She wasn’t worried about him getting into trouble, she was scared for me. When he suggested taking me to the gig his Mom looked absolutely terrified. And even at 15 I knew EXACTLY what she was afraid of.
How seriously fucked up is that? His own Mom assumed that if left alone with a pretty girl he would rape her. She didn’t seem to think that actually stopping him from raping girls in general was an option, she just stepped in to protect me because I’m a family friend. And before he started playing football this was a great guy. All it took was about 5 years of football to turn him into such a monster that his own mother didn’t trust him.
I was kind of hoping that maybe he was a one-off case where something just went terribly wrong, but going by your comments apparently the problem is pretty widespread.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 7:11 am
So if we take the ‘frat boy’ attitude and combine it with jock attitude, we get the all-american date rapist. One thing I was trying to say when I brought up the jock attitude is that these are attitudes that popular culture encourages and glamorizes. So guys latch onto these attitudes as indicator of cool (the gangsta attitude is another one of these popular culture wet dream), regardless of whether of what their actual background is.
This comment was written by AndiF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 7:20 am
A related question for the women here - does anyone else ever feel seriously guilty for watching/supporting professional sports for this reason? I love hockey as a game, but sometimes I feel really uncomfortable with the fact that maybe I’m actually financially helping to support the athlete-entitlement complex by buying tickets, jerseys etc. And I think it’s kind of depressing that even I, as bold as I usually am, don’t feel comfortable going to games without taking a guy with me. It’s just not worth dealing with the harassment that comes with going alone.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 9:08 am
“One thing I was trying to say when I brought up the jock attitude is that these are attitudes that popular culture encourages and glamorizes. ”
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Nail, hammer, bang.
This is part of the core of “rape culture”. If you watch any media aimined at young people, you will see that this is portrayed as a desireable way to be. Not only are boys encouraged to act this way, girls are encouraged to want to date these kinds of guys. They are being taught that the frat boy/jock attitude is the mark of a sexually desireable guy. Which, if my and your guess that these attitudes go hand in hand with rape is correct, is a completely ass-backwards thing to be teaching young women.
It’s also, IMHO, about teaching young women not to have any boundaries. The media is brainwashing young women into believing that having clear boundaries, refusing to participate in things they don’t like etc makes them uncool. I think that they’re reframing the whole idea of saying “no” to anything as a sign of being unhip.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 9:13 am
That would be aimed at young people. Ahem, typing is clearly not my strong point.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 9:15 am
I’ve been to a few hockey games without thinking much of it, but the last time was the last time. I had a burgeoning feminist consciousness by then and I was enjoying the skills of the players until a fight broke out.
The fight didn’t bother me as much as the reactions of the people in my section. The way they cheered for the fights more than for goals and screamed “Kill ‘em!”, “Bash his face in! Yeah!” was so upsetting I cried. I tried to hide it from my hockey fan sweetie because I didn’t want to ruin his good time, but he knew I was crying and he knew why.
I got a similar feeling the last time I saw Jerry Springer’s show. People with emotions bubbling over into fights I can understand, but the Roman Colosseum-like vitriol of viewers to scenes of violence I don’t get.
This comment was written by Samantha.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 9:18 am
Someone wrote:
“I would look specifically at the role which coaches and other older male athletes and team-mates play, and at the fawning adulation of the press and surrounding community which helps to build up the athletes’ sense of entitlement.”
Following up on the “frat” boy/jock etc. line of thought….
I think there are guys in frats, guys on sports teams, guys in the military who want to be a part of the culture of the group that says they should disrespect women and condones or even encourages rape to be part of the group. It’s like a gang mentality - only with social respectability thrown in. (Not to say that all guys in a frat/a sports team/in the military buy into that frame - but enough do - that people recognize it as a “thing”).
And just like it is being exported around the world - our media reinforces it here as well . Like some of the shows on Comedy Central reinforce it. Esp. something like “The Man Show.” But nothing reinforces it as much as guys wanting to be accepted by the group - and doing whatever they perceive to be required to do that. And buying into the notion that if they are a part of the group - they are entitled to whatever.
It’s bad that some women buy into the notion that these guys have elevated status - because that must encourage the perception as well.
That is a sad story from BritGirlSF and the A&M guy. Seeing someone who was a friend change like that.
It’s not like all groups of guys - like a group of guys studying physics or something - have an anti-women mentality (that I know of). I think it’s part of a creepy, antisocial tradition that is passed down in these certain macho-oriented groups.
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 9:22 am
Unfortunetly in our school culture, athletes have an explicit right to do whatever they please. How many colleges have hushed up stories of girls reporting a rape by a student athlete where the victim was the person punished. Only at university have the figured out a way to literally punish victims for coming for.
At my high school, the student athletes (male, of course) committed countless acts of violence and vandalism without every being punished. At long last they went to far when they destroyed a statue of Mary at a nearby Catholic high school as a prank. Even still, their teammates couldn’t stop decrying the injustice that 2 of the 6 people involved were kicked off the team and went around with petitions demanding their reinstatement. Even when caught red-handed, they were stunned to have to answer for their crimes. I shudder to think what else those monsters did that never got out.
Its not all athletes, but the atomosphere is one of intense peer pressure on any athlete who looks at this behavior is wrong. Most who disagree seem to either fall to the pressure or choose to shut up.
This comment was written by BStu.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 9:44 am
It’s not like all groups of guys - like a group of guys studying physics or something - have an anti-women mentality (that I know of).
Misogyny seems fairly common in even those male-only groups that don’t receive the sort of societal approval that athletes in popular sports get. There was a lot of unfriendliness and harassment toward women in the computer science department at my undergrad university, thanks to a few men who were overtly sexist and a lot more men who just kept silent.
For that matter, look at Slashdot. (I don’t know if it’s changed in the last couple years, but I doubt it.)
This comment was written by Jeff.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 9:50 am
Samantha
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.I can live with the fighting, oddly enough. I tend to see it as a good time to go to the bathroom. What bother me is that it feels like a very woman unfriendly environment. I feel like if you’re there without a man a lot of people assume that you’re there to try to seduce one of the players. The first time I went alone one of the players passed me a note via a trainer with phone number and hotel room details. He seemed to have just assumed that I would be quite willing to sleep with him and would come running when I was called. I think he was genuinely surprised that I wasn’t interested. It was like the idea that there might be women there who didn’t want to sleep with the players and might actually be there to, you know, WATCH THE GAME never occured to him. That was what really freaked me out, and when the sexism of the general environment hit me. That and the Boob Cam that roves around the arena looking for amply endowed women to take close-ups of.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 10:00 am
BStu, I think that this phenomenon is at its worst on college campuses. You could make a pretty good argument that colleges should get rid of their sports teams purely because of the risk they pose to the female students. For what it’s worth, I think that big-ticket sports should be de-coupled from the college system completely. These are not students, they are to all intents and purposes pro athletes, and I don’t think they should live on campus. The presence of an insular, elite group that is basically unacountable for their actions is inevitably going to cause problems. Plus, isn’t the purpose of a university supposed to be teaching the students?
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 1:02 pm
I suppose the guys see themselves as some kind of a prize - because they are in a certain frat, or on a certain team, etc. I’m just guessing from the “messages” I’ve picked up. But it seems like since they have objectified themselves that is may be all the easier for them to psychologically objectify women. And to just assume they themselves are desirable.
And the whole pro-sports thing, or a lot of it anyway, I’ve come to see as a kind of anti-feminist backlash. The male sports figures have become more and more idolized over the past 30 years or so. I think it’s a matter of men wanting to believe they are superior to women (even if they are just one of the guys watching). That women can’t compete with men on a football field. That women might play basketball - but not as good as men. That idea. It’s probably why they like the Hockey fights - because women don’t.
It’s interesting that while over the past 30 years women have made great strides in schools even funding/having sports for women - this side thing has been going on to emphasize male “supremacy”. Which has made the Danica Patrick thing interesting - since she is quite capable of competing with the men. For example certain men’s reactions like Ecclestone (of Formula One - a circuit she isn’t even racing on) who said to Patrick and to some reporters, “Women should be all dressed in white like all other domestic appliances.”
http://cbs.sportsline.com/autoracing/story/8587277
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 1:21 pm
“Women should be all dressed in white like all other domestic appliances.”?
[snort] My blender is bright red. My food processor is dark blue. These guys need to get out more, on so many levels.
http://www.kitchenaid.com/home.jsp
This comment was written by alsis39.Report this comment to the moderators
July 1st, 2005 at 1:27 pm
“These guys need to get out more, on so many levels.”
Yeah - according to him I should dress in stainless steel.
This comment was written by cloudy day.Report this comment to the moderators
July 2nd, 2005 at 8:03 am
Interesting debate - it seems to me that my original line of thought, that the jock/frat mentality could explain the frighteningly high rate of rapes in the US compared to Scandinavia, could very well be part of the explanaition. At least from peoples’ impressions and experiences as expressed here.
This comment was written by Kristjan Wager.Report this comment to the moderators
July 2nd, 2005 at 10:56 am
wow what a heated discussion, so many good points made by many, I agree that a person should be able to go where he or she wants without fear of harm that is their right, unfortunantly not everyone agrees with respecting that right (criminals and rapists)
so while I have the right to go out at night, which I don’t I am terrified to, and I do resent that fact I am terrified, adn I have the right to live free from fear of attacks, I realize that the reality is quite different, this will never happen as long as there are people who abuse free will and decide they will not respect others the way they want to be respected. one sided as it were.
as long as people feel they are entitled to what others have, and these others are not willing to give them what they have (body, money, time, life) then they will force themselves on those and take what they want regardless of whether they have that right or not.
kind of like what nations do in time of war or in the case of slavery you don’t want to work for me, or submit to my rule, so I am going to take it by force.
I think the term is that I am looking for is pride, pride in this instance, not to be confused with pride in your work or pride in your family etc, is the feeling of superiority, or God given rights that they do not really have, it is in their imagination.
and one poster wrote that the rapist, in this instance, if punished only gets madder and not rehabilitated by prison. then when they get out they are even worse then when they went in. prison doesn’t change attitudes or the heart conditon, only the person can do that, only the bad person can change themselves into a good person, but only if they use their free will to achieve it and desire it..
trouble is, many bad people don’t want to change, they like what they are doing, these repeat rapists who are imprisoned come out and continue to rape, maybe they should be executed? or maybe castrated that way they can’t get an erection, or even have sexual desires, of course that doesn’t change their mentality, and they may still try to rape using other methods. maybe that would make them madder and do worse?
maybe just put them in prison with no chance of parole that way at least people are protected even if the criminal is not rehabilitated.
and as for those football players and other athletes they are only part of the problem if in fact they are having the entitlment mentality and are not punished for raping and if the victim is persecuted.
the attitudes of those in authority need to change, they need to have penalities for one for rape regardless of the circumstances, the woman was drunk (did he put something in her drink maybe?) or whatever, or she was only hesitant and he wasn’t sure if she was willing or not, when in doubt he should refrain and leave the area or situtation promptly.
trouble is the reward of rape is stronger than the penalty for it, since so often the woman doesn’t report it because of the victim faults mentality frightens her away, and sometimes she feels responsible, which she may or may not be. they say that about half of all rapes go unreported. lot of times the victim feels shame, but it is sad because she is not the criminal the rapist is, of course with respect to guys there are situations where the woman took advantage so that rape is no less a criminal act.
and those who do report it treat the guy like he is the victim, and you know what? alot of it can be blamed on the media too not just the justice system, of course media could be reflecting society attitudes to, but it at least continues to feed it.
every movie, or sit com (like heat of the night, or james bonds movies, movies like the classics etc, some westerns are guilty to and the like) has a guy pursue a woman, the try to kiss her and she pulls away and is resisting him half the movie, but towards the end of the movie the guy forces himself on her she resists a while then all of a sudden is all in his arms recipercating,
that sends the message from what I can tell is that the woman who resists will give in sooner or later, or that she really is only playing hard to get, or her no means yes.
and let’s not forget scenes in movies where a woman is held hostage or kidnapped or finds herself surrounded by a gang such as biker gangs or street gangs and the camara shows the guys’ gauking at the woman and looking her over, and saying things like I get her first, or she’s all mine guys or whatever, never is there a scene where the guys are only interested in the reason for the kidnapping money or trying to get her boyfriend or husband to coorperate on something, and they (the producers) can’t stand the thought of having a woman in the scene where sex or violence against her sexually is not involved.
it is probably due to their having sexual fantasies themselves and what they would like to do but won’t due to penalites, penalties which have nothing to do with shame but rather with finanacial considerations or loss of freedom.
all this sends the message to boys that womans’ role in life is sex, and pleasing the man, and that man only have to be forceful since woman like that. (of course that is only in their imagination).
of course most rape is not all about sex, is about violence hatred against woman, and i am sure most men, correct me you men if I am wrong, know that one of the things woman fear the most is being raped,
I personally won’t put myself into a situation (on purpose, can’t say if I will when mentally out of it or dealing with illness which dulls my mind) where I can become a victim, tho I don’t feel responsible to control what a man does, he is responsible for what he does, and I don’t feel it is my job to be gatekeeper, it only because I know people out there will look for oppertunities to get you if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, so to speak, and if I want to avoid being a victim I have to remain vigilance, tho there are no guarnatees here.
but if I were to become a victim I wouldn’t blame myself, it is not my fault that a person has decided to attack me that is there decision not mine, I can’t control others I can only control what I do, and hopefully in a crime situation i can defend myself adequatly to get out of the situation. the courts lawyers and such need to recognize this.
so in other words i have a right to go where I want, I can go into a biker’s bar, or a dark alley or walk down mainstreet in a bathing suit, but why would I? if I am attacked in those situations I am not at fault, but why put yourself in a dangerous situation unecessarily?
I mean I could be dead right? If I go swimming in the ocean full of hungry sharks adn I get attacked that doesnt mean I did wrong, I just put myself in a bad situation, knowing there were sharks there.
I did nothing wrong but I still suffer harm because of not thinking of self preservation first but rather I was thinking I have the right to do it and I am going to do it,.
we know how silly that kind of thinking is. stopping and punishing rape adequatly starts in the hearts and minds of people, (let’s face it some mommas have been guilty of coddling their sons when they do wrong, whether rape, stealing a car, taking drugs or fighting or harassing others for whatever reasons, so attitudes must change and mamas, papas, teachers, police, mayors, governments, court systems etc, all must stop blaming victims for crimes when they were just exercising their rights to walk down the street or go to a bar with a few friends to enjoy company with some drinks, and stop trying to find reasons to blame the victims of any crime, (such as you deserved to get rob since you pulled out your wad of money in front of others, or you dressed to lightly, or you said something to someone, words can’t hurt you unless you let it, and thus you got beat up. that sorta thing.
RR
This comment was written by roberta robinson.Report this comment to the moderators
July 3rd, 2005 at 12:13 am
I would think even more so. They don’t have the societal approval they feel they deserve.
This comment was written by Charles A. L..Report this comment to the moderators
July 5th, 2005 at 6:38 am
I’ve been away for several days and am still trying to make my way through this thread, but one thing has really knocked me flat.
I can’t even respond to it right now, but the following, said by ginmar in #185 is just so exactly what this is all about: “And how do you deal with it when one of the one or two people you thought viewed you as a person suddenly gets you alone and the air changes and you realize that you were wrong about them, too?”
How is it that people don’t understand this? How devastating this is?
This comment was written by Crys T.Report this comment to the moderators
July 5th, 2005 at 11:11 am
If I go swimming in the ocean full of hungry sharks adn I get attacked that doesnt mean I did wrong, I just put myself in a bad situation, knowing there were sharks there.
Sharks aren’t human beings. You’re saying that the decision of a man to rape you is no different than the instinct of a shark to eat you.
This comment was written by mythago.Report this comment to the moderators
July 5th, 2005 at 9:00 pm
Thank you, mythago.
That is exactly why all the arguments that boil down to “yeah, but women should still be (more) careful” bug me so much.
Such arguments have the underlying assumption that, unlike other criminals, rapists are as unsentient as sharks or cancer, and thus all rape prevention methods should focus on keeping women away from rapists, instead of the more effective method of dealing with why men become rapists.
This comment was written by Jenny K.Report this comment to the moderators
July 5th, 2005 at 10:30 pm
Actually, if you twist it the shark thing isn’t that bad analogy, although the person who posted it is clearly a moron. The key word here is “hungry” sharks. People go swimming in the near vicinity of sharks all the time. If you’ve ever been in the water in Hawaii, California or Florida you’ve been within biting distance of a shark (don’t even get me started on South Africa or Australia). How is a person supposed to know if the sharks happen to be hungry today? ESP perhaps?
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.So, in a way walking around in possesion of a vagina IS analagous to swimming in shark infested waters. The rapists/hungry sharks are out there, and if they are determined to attack you there’s really no foolproof way to avoid them. The problem is that at first glance the rapists/hungry sharks look just like the non-rapists/not at all hungry sharks. Most men are not rapists, and most sharks are not going to try to eat you. The thing is, you usually can’t tell that you’ve run across one who IS going to attack you until it’s too late to escape. In both cases it’s almost completely random, and staying trapped in your house because you might be raped if you’re out and about is every bit as illogical as staying out of the water on your vacation to Hawaii because you just might end up running into a hungry tiger shark.
This is of particular interest to me as I live in the Bay Area, where we have lots of great white sharks. Everyone knows this, and yet people still surf here. Occasionally surfers do in fact get attacked by sharks, and yet despite them having known the risks they were taking by getting in the water the media somehow manages to refrain from blaming them for being attacked. Unfortunately they do not extend the same courtesy to rape victims.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 5th, 2005 at 10:46 pm
So, in a way walking around in possesion of a vagina IS analagous to swimming in shark infested waters.
Going swimming is a deliberate act. Being female isn’t.
This comment was written by mythago.Report this comment to the moderators
July 5th, 2005 at 11:14 pm
Going swimming is a deliberate act. Being female isn’t.
How do you know? Do you remember what happened before your body differentiated?
I believe that by definition the question of whether we decide our sex is unknowable. (Albeit I’ll concede that unassisted reason would seem to lend its support to your assertion.)
However, the decision to remain somatically female seems to be increasingly discretionary, with the march of time, culture and technology.
It will have interesting ramifications for feminist (and other gender) theories when a reasonable answer to perceptions of misogyny will be “if you don’t like being a woman, stop being one.”
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 5th, 2005 at 11:19 pm
Mythago - duh. After everything I’ve written here you do you honestly think I would be suggesting otherwise? What I was getting at is that the people making the analogy clearly think that a woman leaving her house without a male escort, or being alone with a man under any circumstances, is taking the same sort of deliberate risk as someone surfing off of Ocean Beach, within a few miles of the Farralon Islands. They also suggest that women should assume that all men are predatory by nature (the “hungry” part of the hungry shark analogy) and react accordingly.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.I think that in the case of rape our society does treat men as if they were sharks, ie predatory by nature, and not as people with the ability to control their actions. I also think that they are completely unaware that this is what they are implying. I’m always surprised that more men do not find this assumption insulting.
I would also point out that many of the men making analogies like the shark one do actually seem to think that merely being female is a deliberately provocative act. It’s rather like the way some homophobes think that gay people are deliberately provoking them just by being gay.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 5th, 2005 at 11:44 pm
Hmmn… let me try that out with religion.
Is a reasonable answer to perceptions of anti-Catholic bigotry “if you don’t like being a Catholic, stop being one?”
This comment was written by Ampersand.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 12:34 am
Is a reasonable answer to perceptions of anti-Catholic bigotry “if you don’t like being a Catholic, stop being one?”?
Obviously.
Another reasonable answer is “stand and fight”.
The portion of people who choose the latter goes down, in my experience, when the former becomes an option. Which, as I originally surmised, will have interesting ramifications in areas where historically, “stop being one” has not been an option.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 6:52 am
“However, the decision to remain somatically female seems to be increasingly discretionary, with the march of time, culture and technology.
It will have interesting ramifications for feminist (and other gender) theories when a reasonable answer to perceptions of misogyny will be “if you don’t like being a woman, stop being one.”?”
Uh, yeah becauase you can never have too many ways to BLAME THE VICTIM rather then getting men to own up to and change their misogyny.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 9:54 am
BritGirl, I agree that the shark attack analogy has some explanatory power, though of course it falls apart if carried too far — as others have pointed out, extreme measures and far fetched scenarios aside, being female is immutable, and sharks cannot be held accountable for their actions.
I think rape is also analagous to lynching, but that analogy also has significant failings. First, though as an enforcement mechanism for an unequal society, both operate about the same, the participants in lynching were consciously engaged in defense of the unequal society, while I doubt that most rapists understand that this is the effect of what they are doing in any sophisticated way. Second, and connected to the first, lynchings were public events, and the participants happily acknowledged that they were involved in a lynching, whereas rapists are at pains to deny that they rape.
(Some folks may also believe that lynching is different because many rapes do not result in death, but too many do, and many more women are raped every year than African-Americans in the Jim Crow south. Some folks will never accept, and are offended by, analogies of rape to historical atrocities such as lynching. These people are of course entitled to their view, with which I respectfully disagree.)
Much like rape, and because it acted to enforce larger oppressive norms with wide support, though lynching was criminal, it was rarely prosecuted and had (has) plenty of apologists.
BTW, BritGirl, I just noted from your comments that you’re a Scot! (Here’s tae us! Wha’s like us, damned few, an’ their ‘aw deid!) e-mail me at t525881@verizon.net. I have a question.
This comment was written by Thomas.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 10:27 am
Uh, yeah becauase you can never have too many ways to BLAME THE VICTIM rather then getting men to own up to and change their misogyny.
Q Grrl, how is noting that the landscape of an issue might change as the options available to people change blaming the victim?
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 10:34 am
Because you seemed to conveniently forget the role that men play in the issue. **shrug**
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 10:40 am
We decide our sex?
It’s a decision?
You can stop like you can stop smoking?
Also, how is being target of mysoginy and/or rape equal to “not liking being female”?
I’m lost.
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 10:46 am
I think Robert needs to read more Ursula LeGuin before he launches his career as a science fiction novelist.
This comment was written by Lee.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 10:48 am
Ampersand: but you can indeed change religion. Let’s try that with racism instead. “If you don’t like being target of racist insults/attacks whateer, stop being black/hispanic/arab/asian/etc.”.
For best effects, that line should be practiced in front of a a black/hispanic/arab/asian person, face to face, and see what happens. I suspect it wouldn’t be so fun and easy and painless, to drop remarks like that, off-line.
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 11:38 am
Awesome, a whole new frontier in victim-blaming–if you don’t like being treated badly, get a sex change!
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 12:20 pm
Q Grrl, what role do “men” have in the issue of the ability of people to switch their somatic gender? Yeah, men have a huge role in the larger questions of sexism, misogyny, etc. So what? Does that change the fact that it is becoming increasingly possible to make a relatively smooth gender transition? (Relative to the past, not to an absolute measurement of “easy”. I’m sure it’s still a very difficult adjustment.)
If you cannot think about the implications of technological change on social problems because it violates some taboo, then you are doomed to be perpetually behind the curve in terms of your comprehension of what is actually going on.
The fact that people can change external gender with increasing ease is already causing interesting changes in the movement for women’s rights. When it reaches the level of a relatively simple outpatient surgery - and it may well reach that point, and fairly soon - then the changes will be seismic.
[Bit that didn't seem to have much purpose, beyond talking about another poster's personality, arbitrarily deleted by amp.]
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 12:59 pm
When it reaches the level of a relatively simple outpatient surgery - and it may well reach that point, and fairly soon - then the changes will be seismic.
Aaah, gender reassignment, that’s what you were talking about. I see. Yeah, it’s very likely it’ll become as easy as removing a mole. After all, it’s not like it involves extensive hormonal changes and psychological adaptation as well as complicated surgery. But nevermind that.
Very entertaining idea, that anyone would want to change sex just because of someone else from the opposite sex behaving like a moron/sick fuck (depending on degree of offense caused) towards them.
From castration of sex offenders, to surgery for the (potential?) victim, I cannot decide which one is a crazier form of biological essentialism.
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 1:13 pm
Robert, I don’t think it’s fair to assume that Q Grrl and others are unable to discuss or appreciate the theoretical implications of easy sex reassignment. Certainly, I recognize that it has interesting implications. But it’s a hell of a tangent, for two reasons. The minor one is that sex reassignment is no picnic either as medicine or as a life choice, and will not become an easy option in the near future.
The major reason your thought is really an unenlightening tangent is this: unless you are willing to say that it is acceptable to expect a woman to get sex reassignment to avoid the possibility of the criminal violation that is rape, the possibility that she could do so adds nothing to the analysis.
It seems you’ve been taken aback by the comments that suggest your line of thinking leads to victim-blaming, but I don’t think you should take those comments as personal insults. Rather, I think those commenters were shorthanding a line of reasoning that, quite correctly in my view, demonstrates that the availability of sex reassignment is only of moment in this discussion if one assigns responsibility for rape to the victim.
To summarize, while the advances in sex reassignment are wonderful and have many interesting consequences down the road, their implications for rape are really about nil. It’s an interesting thought, but not on this thread.
This comment was written by Thomas.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 1:23 pm
Cut it out Robert. You can’t possibly be that dense.
The analogy was the rape of women to swimming in an ocean w/ sharks. You brought up some bullshit about somatic gender — which by that particular diversion completely hides the role of men in rape and a rape culture. It also heavily implies that if women don’t like the fucking crap they get dealt by men, they can and should just change sex. Or was that gender Robert? Like I said, blame the victim. I don’t see you suggesting that men become women so that they avoid or stop raping women.
This comment was written by Q Grrl.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 2:54 pm
Ah, I think I got it. Feminists should just stop whining about rape, it’s like all they associate to being female is rape rape rape mysoginy rape rape rape, no wonder someone suggests a sex change.
Do I get a prize?
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 3:03 pm
You brought up some bullshit about somatic gender…
Actually, someone else mentioned that one aspect of this whole discussion is that we don’t get to select our gender. My response was to note that this fundamental premise of the argument is changing due to technological progress. I didn’t bring up the topic of gender decisions; someone else did.
…which by that particular diversion completely hides the role of men in rape and a rape culture.
If by “hides” you mean “doesn’t start from square zero and recapitulate the entire discussion of rape and rape culture”, sure. Christ, my posts are long enough as it is. Do I need to restate the entire freakin’ thread in order to make a new point about something?
You know, I empathize with the claim that feminist conversations often get diverted from the original topic, often by some anti-feminist or MRA who comes in with a song and dance about irrelevant topics. I don’t feel that’s what I did. A point was left open, I addressed it, nothing I had to say was particularly controversial.
Would it kill you to say “Interesting, but not really what I want to talk about…what I want to talk about is [X, Y, Z].” ? Instead of yet another “oh God, it’s a DIVERSION” diversion? If you think my point is stupid or without merit, then ignore it, and let the wash of all the many other things you want to say cover it over in the flow of the thread.
This is a conversation, not a gun battle. It’s amazing how much power y’all (broadly grouped) continuously give me, and anyone else not singing from the songbook, to “hijack” your discussions. If you don’t want to talk about what I want to talk about, then DON’T.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 3:04 pm
Even better, noodles, is that it’s a cure! If all women become men, then there won’t be anyone left to have those pesky ” perceptions of misogyny”. And as a side benefit, we will have solved the abortion problem, too.
This comment was written by AndiF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 3:13 pm
AndiF, but then we’d all be buggering each other, because in the end it’s the testosterone that causes rape and abuse, boys will be boys, it’s all biology, isn’t it? so if we were all male, the whole world would turn in one giant Guantanamo, and the tabloids wouldn’t even have the consolation of putting a Lynndie England on the cover.
No, I think we’d be better off with changing all men to women, after all, that’s what feminism always wanted to achieve, or so I’m told, by people who hate women.
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 3:24 pm
Of course, if there was only one gender and if humans had no sexual organs and reproduced by parthenogenesis via incubating eggs in their hair and sexuality was limited to the act of sneezing, then and only then sexual abuse would be not just reduced but completely eradicated from society 100%, which would require a complete reassessment of feminism and gender theory, but that’s another episode of the Wacky Wacky World of rape discussion derailment.
Now I’m going to apply to Extreme Makeover to give me a sex change because someone called me a bitch and now I hate myself. Wish me well.
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 3:54 pm
> nothing I had to say was particularly controversial.
To you. Though I find it hard to imagine how anyone could genuinely fail to see that suggesting that getting a sex change might be an option to avoid rape might be a little “controversial”.
“If you don’t like what I write ignore it!”. It doesn’t work that way. It works like this: if you don’t want people to respond to your posts, do not post them. You cannot write something and then passive-aggressive expect to dictate how other people respond to it. Someone will ignore it, someone else will want to reply to it. It’s up to them, not you. This goes for every single person who writes anything on the internet. You write it, it’s up for debate.
Also, your “diversion” was not a failure of re-phrasing everything that had been written on the topic, duh. It was in your outlandish suggestion of sex change surgery as some kind of response to mysoginy.
It might also help if you didn’t go “y’all” and “sing from the songbook” about anyone else that is not you and has the oh insolence to contradict you.
That’s all, very simply. Feel free to ignore it, of course. It’s not up to me how you read mine or other people’s comments. Cheers.
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 3:56 pm
Okay, I was originally going to post about the previous thread on rape culture, and Aegis’ absolutely mind-blowing statement that if women said yes to sex all the time, rape would never happen. Is that a direct link, because I was seven when I was raped, so I’m not sure if some woman somewhere consenting to sex would have prevented my being raped (you know, like saving Tinkerbell in Peter Pan by clapping and saying “I believe in fairies”). Or should I just have given up the pussy, and assumed that really, the teenaged guy in question was simply trying, unsuccessfully, to “induce” me to have sex with him.
I’m not particularly touchy about what happened to me, and it isn’t a difficult thing for me to talk about (thanks, mom and dad!), but I have to say that that particular insinuation about some presumed rape cause and effect had me shaking with anger.
And now I realize that I should have asked mommy and daddy for a sex-change operation instead of an Easy-Bake Oven for that seventh birthday present. Good Lord, but they would have been surprised to see that in a letter to Santa.
Or does the fact that I was seven mean that I didn’t have all of these wonderful “outs” that are apparently available to post-pubescent women, like sex changes, or instructions for correct inducements for pussy access? When you talk about the rape of a minor, does it become any more apparent to these men who want to talk dating tips that what’s really happening is that a female body — any female body — is seen by some men as an appropriate object for sexual attention, regardless of the wishes and intents of the owner of that body?
Because, I assure you, the kid who raped me wasn’t interested in inducing me or in the fine art of seduction. He was horny, he couldn’t find someone his own age and size who was willing, and he wanted to stick his penis in something. I was just there.
Can we make it clearer than that, fellas?
This comment was written by Erin.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 4:06 pm
In my proofread, I realize that I didn’t close the tag after women, which was the only word in that paragraph that I intended to emphasize. Also, in hindsight, I find my choice of phrase in saying “I’m not touchy” to be really amusing, but then I have an unconventional sense of humor (oh wait, as a feminist and rape survivor I’m supposed to be humorless by definition — double definition! I’ll note that for the future)
This comment was written by Erin.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 4:08 pm
Though I find it hard to imagine how anyone could genuinely fail to see that suggesting that getting a sex change might be an option to avoid rape might be a little “controversial”?.
I didn’t say that.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 4:22 pm
Robert, unless one is saying that a sex change is an acceptable accomodation to avoid the risk of rape, the availability or ease of sex reassignment does not impact any particular woman’s interaction with the risk of rape. Therefore, while you didn’t explicitly say “that getting a sex change might be an option to avoid rape”, it was the clear implication of the reasoning. See #296 above.
If you’re explicitly disclaiming that sex reassignment is a measure a woman can be expected to take to avoid being raped, now would be a good time to say so. In that case, as I said above, your thought experiment in the future of gender as sex reassignment becomes easier is interesting, but is tangential at best to rape.
If you’re not willing to explicilty disclaim that sex reassignment is a measure a woman can be expected to take to avoid being raped, then your comment is exactly what the more exasperated commenters have said it was.
This comment was written by Thomas.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 4:49 pm
Dear magic-HTML-tag-fixing person:
Thank you!
[You're quite welcome! --Amp]
This comment was written by Erin.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 5:04 pm
Robert, unless one is saying that a sex change is an acceptable accomodation to avoid the risk of rape, the availability or ease of sex reassignment does not impact any particular woman’s interaction with the risk of rape.
This simply does not follow. My rhetorical stance has no bearing on whether sex reassignment surgery would impact a particular woman’s risk of rape. You assign far too much power to my words. If sex reassignment surgery will or will not impact a particular person’s risk, then it will do regardless of what I say about it. It will also have whatever impact it has (or doesn’t have) regardless of the reasonableness of the action. It is unreasonable to ask a woman to spend her life living in a missile silo, interacting with the outside world solely through telepresence, in order to avoid the possibility of rape. And yet despite that unreasonableness, such a woman would in fact run a much lower risk of rape, among other things.
Causality functions regardless of my opinions, and regardless of whether we agree with the causal mechanisms.
If you’re explicitly disclaiming that sex reassignment is a measure a woman can be expected to take to avoid being raped, now would be a good time to say so.
OK. Sex reassignment surgery is not something that a woman could reasonably expected to undergo in order to avoid the risk of rape.
Duh.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 5:05 pm
How do you know? Do you remember what happened before your body differentiated?
I had two X chromosomes long before I had a nervous system.
However, the decision to remain somatically female seems to be increasingly discretionary
It isn’t, currently; certainly it’s not something a child or a teenager has access to.
Robert, it’s one thing when you decide to be provocative and bait the liberals; it’s tedious when you backtrack and say you were just speculating and therefore nobody should have taken you seriously.
This comment was written by mythago.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 5:26 pm
Yeah, that’s true, children and teenagers don’t have access to it. Did I say that they did?
No. I said that the decision seems to be increasingly discretionary; i.e., it’s easier this year than it was last year. If this is mistaken, please provide something other than a counterargument to a point (children) which I did not make.
I am not backtracking and have not reversed or weakened my original statement. I am disputing the blatant misreading of what was a very clear text. One of the fundamental premises of the argument, that gender is unchosen and unchangeable, is changing due to technological developments. This has interesting implications - none of which have anything to do with sinister patriarchal attempts to blame 7-year olds for their rapes because they didn’t go to the surgeon.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 5:44 pm
Yeah, that’s true, children and teenagers don’t have access to it. Did I say that they did?
No, you just failed to take into account that there are female children and teenagers, for whom remaining female is not especially discretionary.
You were responding to my comment that “being female isn’t” (i.e. isn’t discretionary, as swimming in shark-infested waters would be) with a challenge that I have no way of knowing whether I chose to be female. Which is a little odd, unless you know of a scientific basis for showing that a fetus controls the genetic expression of its sex-based chromosomes by some act of will.
Yes, it is interesting to speculate what would happen to our ideas about gender if gender were entirely discretionary. But if you make this response in the context of a discussion about how being female automatically makes one a target for sexual assault, it’s silly of you to get in high dudgeon (again) that people treated your speculation as something other than idle musings.
This comment was written by mythago.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 5:45 pm
This fucking rules. I’m totally gonna get a pecker plastered on if that’s what it’s going to take to get justice in the world. Can I still wear a dress, though? What if I get raped anyway, because someone suspects I used to be a woman and wants to put me in my place, like in that movie “Boys Don’t Cry”?
This comment was written by Amanda Marcotte.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 6:06 pm
Robert, in 282, you questioned the assertion of another poster that being female is not deliberate (as opposed to going swimming). You wrote that the question of wether we choose our gender is unknowable. And you asked “do you remember before your body differentiated”.
Presumably, because the ‘body’ differentiates in sexual terms at embryonic stage, you were asking if anyone remembers when they were embryos.
It sure is funny if it was meant as a joke.
Then you wrote: It will have interesting ramifications for feminist (and other gender) theories when a reasonable answer to perceptions of misogyny will be “if you don’t like being a woman, stop being one.”?
Now you’re saying you’ve been ‘blatantly’ misread? So presumably you didn’t mean that that was a “reasonable” answer, and you also didn’t mean it made any sense to speak of “deciding” which sex you are, and “remembering” anything about being embryos?
(I’m even not sure I followed the link between rape, “perceptions of mysoginy” and “if you don’t *like* being a woman”, but nevermind that).
One of the fundamental premises of the argument, that gender is unchosen and unchangeable, is changing due to technological developments.
No it’s not, it cannot and will never be able to reduce gender to a simple matter of choice - it isn’t so even now, for people who go through the surgery. It is not like being born in that sex. And even if it should become technically simpler as surgery compared to now, it still is in no way simple and easy process overall, because it’s not just about technology. And the fact that children cannot have access to it is very relevant. If you can “choose your gender” (actually, have gender reassignment surgery - different thing) only after reaching the age when you are legally responsible for yourself, and after required counselling and medical consultation, and going through a whole process that will never be able to be condensed in one day because it’s not limited to surgery, then no, it is not “choosing your gender”. Duh.
Only people who really have a genuine disconnect there choose that gender reassignment option. Not out of bad experiences with the other sex. Out of the fact they don’t see themselves fitting in the biological sex they are born into.
As to “one of the fundamental premises of the argument, that gender is unchosen” - see, when people observed that, unlike going swimming in a sea that may be populated by sharks, being female is not chosen, they’re not saying that to mean “oh, being female sucks, but we’re stuck with it”. They’re saying that in response to people who treat rape like something where it’s the actions of women that are relevant to the outcome of rape occurring, or even just the fact of their being women.
Because you don’t sound stupid, you must know all this very obvious matter-of-fact stuff already, hence, the impression people tend to get is that you’re just baiting, and taking the mickey.
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 6:26 pm
PS to - (I’m even not sure I followed the link between rape, “perceptions of mysoginy”? and “if you don’t *like* being a woman”?, but nevermind that). Actually, my only guess is that the notion at play there is that women who focus on rape and mysoginy (and perceptions of it, which as perceptions might not be true) do so because they are not happy being female, so that the reasonable answer can be “if you don’t *like* being female”. As opposed to women discussing rape as an area of personal and political focus and social interest, without any of this implying they don’t *like* being women.
If I’m black or hispanic or arab, again, something one is born into, I can focus on racism against hispanics/blacks/arabs, without the thought of being your classic Fox-News presenter like white anglo-saxon blonde ever even crossing my mind as a desirable thing. If someone told me “well if you don’t like being …, you can change it” (technically possible and far easier than gender reassignment! bleaching and whitening and plastic surgery, eww), that would mean a) they believe one thing is superior to the other; and b) that being enraged at racism against my ethnic group means I don’t *like* being part of my group.
This comment was written by noodles.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 6:29 pm
I don’t believe that I accused you or the patriarchy of raping me, Robert, and I’m offended that you obviously and deliberately used my words to make some sort of hyperbolic point, which was absolutely uncalled for. When women talk about their experiences being made light of by men, this is the kind of thing they mean.
The absolutely non-hyperbolic point that I was trying to make is that we, as a society, like to behave as though rape victims have some sort of role in getting themselves into a situation where someone uses their bodies as objects. The obvious point to me, given my background, is that when we look at the rape of a child, the inanity of most of those accusations becomes glaring.
The teenager who raped me was NOT a pedophile; he thought he’d get away with what he did because he didn’t think that, as children, my friend and I would even register what had happened and that, as females, we would be too embarrassed to tell anyone what he had done. He felt safe because we weren’t people to him, merely opportunities. That, Robert, is rape culture. Pay attention to the fact that it doesn’t only have an impact on dirty, dirty sluts.
I find your willingness to use my experience as a way to somehow back away from your “gender is no longer immutable, so if you don’t like it you’ve got a choice, ha ha just kidding” comment disgusting.
This comment was written by Erin.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 6:52 pm
I’m with Thomas on this one - unless we are now moving the discussion into the realm of science fiction, Robert’s comments are simply irrelevant and should be dismissed and ignored.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Although to be honest, anyone who would misuse Erin’s painful personal experience in order to make a rhetorical point deserves a few good smackdowns.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 7:20 pm
Erin, although I disagree with your characterization of my action, I ought not to have referred to your experience other than respectfully. I apologize.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 6th, 2005 at 8:37 pm
Ahem……I’m feeling the urge to go not-quite-off-topic again by bringing in another pop culture reference…..
So everyone likes Batman Begins, right? (If you haven’t seen it, go - now - and beware of spoilers below.)
Well, two of the main themes of the story are that (to borrow a line from another story) what is right is not always what is easy, and that often the best way to combat crime does not involve violence. While Batman does choose violence, much of the story is about how far he will not go and learning that his father’s way of fighting crime, creating uncorrupt, healthy institutions, is ideal in the long term.
The point of the movie is not, as one character tries to convince us, that Wayne Sr. should not have placed his family in dangerous a situation, or that it was his responsibility to get out of it. Instead, the story explains how it it society’s responsibility to make sure that people can go about their business unmolested, and it is the responsibility of every citizen to help society become that way.
It’s not so much that Liam Neeson’s character doesn’t have a point, it’s that he misses the larger lesson: the Waynes have indeed been engaging in true crime prevention and the problem is not that he was unable or unwilling to fight his attacker, but that more people weren’t doing as he was.
The same can be said for the people who go on and on about what women should and shouldn’t do. It’s not so much that women shouldn’t be careful, or that we don’t have a responsibility for ourselves but that the people giving this advice (besides often giving bad advice to begin with) are missing the larger lesson: that it is everyone’s responsibility to reduce crime and ensure that people can go about their business unmolested. Simple desire for something is never the only reason people become criminals, and the best crime prevention does not focus on putting up physical barriers between potential criminals and what they desire, but by reducing the other factors that create criminals.
People who talk about women’s responsibilities with regard to rape - but never theirs or society’s - are simply following the bad advice of Liam Neeson’s character, no matter how often or how loud they may talk about how bad rapists are.
This comment was written by Jenny K.Report this comment to the moderators
July 7th, 2005 at 12:29 am
Erin - FWIW - I’m so sorry that happened to you.
This comment was written by Spicy.Report this comment to the moderators
July 7th, 2005 at 7:39 am
For Hades’ sake, Robert, can you not see why these “musings” are coming across as completely disrespectful and inappropriate?
I shouldn’t have to change my gender to avoid rape. I shouldn’t change who I am to avoid danger–I should goddamn well be able to live freely without worry of being attacked.
[And seriously, nobody please tell me we don't live in that kind of world. I know we don't. Call me Pollyanna for fighting to create that kind of world.]
This comment was written by Sheelzebub.Report this comment to the moderators
July 7th, 2005 at 8:52 am
Sheelzebub, in all fairness, Robert has now explicitly disclaimed that he thinks you should “have to change [your] gender to avoid rape.”
On the other hand, as I’ve said, I think that this concession means his speculation about sex reassignment is of essentially no relevance to this thread.
This comment was written by Thomas.Report this comment to the moderators
July 7th, 2005 at 10:02 am
Well, of course he’s going to back down now. He’s just gotten smacked around for it.
This comment was written by ginmar.Report this comment to the moderators
July 11th, 2005 at 5:51 am
Thomas, got your comment and sent you an e-mail as requested.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 11th, 2005 at 8:14 am
BritGirl, I didn’t get it. I tested the link above and it works. t525881@verizon.net. Did you mistype, or is there a server problem?
I don’t mean to play secret agent here — I’m just after travel advice.
This comment was written by Thomas.Report this comment to the moderators
July 11th, 2005 at 8:29 am
Re: #104
Media Girl said:
“I was more stunned by the non-reaction of most everyone there. Here a serial gang rape was happening to a 17 year-old girl whose “yes” consisted of having drunk too much gin.
Suddenly her friend was there, yelling at the guys. She took her friend away. I saw the emotional wreckage on her face. I’ll never forget. I didn’t know her, and I was so shocked I felt the last thing she needed was a stranger trying to help
The party went on. Nobody gave a shit. [...] After all, they know what guys are like.
What guys are like. That’s the passive apology for rape culture. [...] the lack of suffering, lack of accountability, lack of consideration by men who do this … and men who watch this happen and don’t even blink.”
————————-
Forgive me if it is inappropriate to backtrack to a single point that’s relevant to the topic, though the conversation seems to have passed it, unnoticed. If this is improper, please ignore my question.
Re: #104
Media Girl, it goes without saying that your disgust is well-placed ““ directed at the group of boys who lined up to participate in the sexual assault of an intoxicated girl at a high school party you attended.
I understand why you also blame the boys who failed to intervene to stop the assault from happening, though they did not themselves participate in it directly. If there ever was a pure example of “rape culture” ““ the culture of permissiveness that either promotes, forgives, or looks the other way when it comes to this kind of crime ““ then this must be it. I would use this real-life example to prove it to a skeptic.
But, in the scene you described, could you explain why you singled out the complicity of the *male* bystanders in the crime against this woman– though you yourself did not intervene in what you identified as a gang rape? Am I wrong in reading that you view the male bystanders as being more complicit than you? I’m sure you wouldn’t blame them for behavior which you excuse in yourself, so I must be missing some aspect of the context. Note: I’m not saying “poor boys” ““ you are right to blame them. I’m just asking ““ shouldn’t *everyone* share the shame of what they allowed to happen that night, if they didn’t try to stop it?
Re-reading what you wrote, perhaps you are not blaming the boys’ failure to intervene, but rather you are angry that- in your speculation - the male bystanders may have not “considered” what happened, after the fact, as you have done. If this is the case, how did you endeavor to find out what the male bystanders thought? When you asked them, are you confident they would have shared their feelings with you?
But now I’m just speculating as I struggle to understand, and I don’t want to put words in your mouth. What did you mean?
This comment was written by Robin.Report this comment to the moderators
July 11th, 2005 at 8:35 am
Thomas
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.I cut and pasted your e-mail so I’m not sure what the problem is. Try to e-mail me at the address I use for my blog, I don’t mind posting that one.
http://www.cassandrasays@yahoo.com
Report this comment to the moderators
July 11th, 2005 at 8:46 am
Or I could be a non-dunce and post that without the www, like in the form of an actual e-mail address. Ack, I’m sleepy.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.cassandrasays@yahoo.com