Posts by Megan Wegan
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to nzlemming,
Even Lisa Simpson doesn’t mix sportswear and pearls?
Well, to continue Russell’s point:
Personally, I think we should cling to the right to think someone’s else’s dress – male or female – is tacky, tasteless or inappropriate, and perhaps even to say so to our companions
...that shit is just sartorially wrong. But no, that wasn’t the joke I was anticipating.
-
Can I also just say how disappointed I am that there was an entire conversation about 'pearl necklaces" and no one made the obvious comment?
I leave you lot alone for one night.....
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Eh. I calls it as I see it. I guess the only difference is that I _do_ see it.
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to 3410,
If someone wanted to talk about that happening to them, that warning’s not exactly going make them feel terribly comfortable discussing it if they didn’t have the “appropriate” reaction, is it?
There's no such thing as an appropriate reaction for a victim. Everyone is different, and deals with it in different ways. And that's OK. And Emma's tweet might have been strong, but there's absolutely no way a victim would want to share in a forum where people were denying the possibility that it could even have ever happened.
When people minimise the importance of female-on-male rape, (or male-on-male, or female-on female, or what have you - and I don't have figures, but I imaging the prevalence of rape on trans people is high, and extremely unreported) not only is it wrong, it's tremendously erasing of people who already don't have a lot of visibility. And it is immensely, incredibly triggering.
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to Kracklite,
It bears repeating.
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to Emma Hart,
You also appear to be assuming that "erection=consent". Not true. Only consent is consent.
For the record.
sexual activity, in relation to a person, means—
(a) sexual connection with the person; or
(b) the doing on the person of an indecent act that, without the person's consent, would be an indecent assault of the person. -
Also, Deborah linked to this in that Lady Garden thread, but this is a great read. (Give it a chance.)
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to Emma Hart,
About the times you were maybe in a bar and you saw something and thought, That doesn't look good, I wonder if I should do something? About the people you work with that you KNOW have a history of getting overly sleazy with women who are NOT happy about it?
I used to work with a guy who made a number of young women in our workplace very uncomfortable. Suggestive comments, and staring, and just being generally creepy. And because he was never that way with me, I didn't say anything to our boss, because I didn't feel it was my place. But neither could I convince anyone else to. And I've always wondered if I should have said something.
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to giovanni tiso,
My impression is that people are being convinced. At least I know I was.
Faith in humanity: restored.
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to Russell Brown,
I think for me, given some of the discussions I have seen and taken part in this past month, it's not about baiting people, but the feeling it's inevitable that they will turn up.
Sue already linked to the website for this, but it's worth having the video here.
The thing is, we've been having this conversation for years, and we keep being told the same things (it's incumbent on us to be safe, we live in the real world not an ideal one, etc) and I am no longer sure how we convince people.