Posts by Danielle
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Isabel Hitchings,
The threat of rape is (almost) as much a tool of control as the act itself.
This is absolutely true (and we can thank the second wave for the feminist theory about this very issue).
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
It feels a little like the paranoia surrounding child abduction where parents, constantly told about the dangers and risk of abduction, become unreasonably over protective and suspicious.
Except that sexual assault is way, WAY more common than child abduction.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
It’s alarming that 7% of people responding to that survey admit to those things, but it’s still “only” 7%.
The majority of that 7% repeated their behaviour, so they hurt a wider circle of people than the percentage figure might imply.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
Perhaps what I’m saying is that I think “she was asking for it in that skirt” and “guys, don’t rape people” are the same message. Both imply that men, naturally somehow, are predisposed to that.
I couldn't disagree more with that interpretation. The former has all the essentialist futility you're talking about; the latter is all about education and culture change. It's as if you're arguing that Russell shouldn't have been part of the "It's Not OK" campaign because it implies that everyone in families beats each other up all the time. The point is that if you're not beating up or raping people, these education campaigns ARE NOT ABOUT YOU.
-
We are ALREADY CONDITIONED TO THINK THAT. I’m sorry for shouting, but the lady-paranoia you think might happen if there are anti-rape campaigns aimed at dudes? It’s already here. And the reason it’s already here is that we spend a considerable amount of our lives making sure we aren’t doing “the wrong thing” because the animalistic penis-brains just can’t help themselves. (Which is of course bollocks. But that's how the culture currently works.)
-
1. Here's the distinction. It's not that we positively think that you *are*; it's just that sometimes, *we don't know that you're not*. (There is a good article on this called Schrodinger's Rapist which may be instructive.)
2. As Lilith says, anti-rape campaigns aimed at men aren't about hurting your non-rapist feelings: they exist because *some men don't actually know what rape is* or consider themselves rapists. (See some US research: guys will self-report doing rapey things as long as you don't attach the actual word rape to the question. )
-
Hard News: On Telly, Telly Off, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
I wasn't responding to your post, actually, more Slarty's.
-
Hard News: On Telly, Telly Off, in reply to kiwicmc,
Those vintage rabbit ears are awesome! Alas nothing on trademe....
I love them and can't bear to part with them (like my pink-painted 50s fan heater, which is loud, slightly whiffy and probably a fire hazard in every possible way, so I never use it, but... pink! With rounded edges! And little bakelite feet!). Also, the last time I plugged them in to something relevant they actually worked. Perhaps in our post-apocalyptic hellscape when we've lost all digital capability there will be some analogue broadcast TV and they'll come in handy.
On another note, I have... problems... with "I, personally, never watch broadcast TV and therefore it has no value and should DIAF" arguments. Elitism makes me twitchy.
-
I... given that the phrase has a fair amount of currency (I have seen it used more than you, obviously), and may actually cross into mainstream use in future because language evolves, I'm not going to presume to speak for those who might benefit from it.
-
The thing about the phrase "trigger warning" is that you don't have to be a "fan" of it to recognise that it's useful for a lot of people. Even if they aren't, y'know, you. I personally don't have any need for the phrase but I can see why other people would.