Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible Demure Lady Stroll
457 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 11 12 13 14 15 … 19 Newer→ Last
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
There is no WIN
This should be made into a sign and placed above the gates of the Internet, Dante-style.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Mngh, see, I still feel like I can't really talk about this.
Sorry. And fair point about "triggering". I was just trying to give some form to thoughts about language that have been knocking around inside my head.
And now, having freed up disk space and performed sundry maintenance tasks on my computer (nb: not a brain metaphor), I will go and purchase the ingredients I require for a delightful spaghetti bolognaise.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
However. I don't see how noting that something might be "triggering" acts to shut down or limit a conversation.
I guess a whip around of how many people can read my comment that you disemvowelled on account of being triggering would be illuminating. I'm not saying you shouldn't have done it, you reserved the right quite clearly. But the outcome of it on me has been that I've written about 5 quite lengthy posts, mostly things from my experience, that I've simply deleted. That limits anyone being able to benefit from any of it.
But that doesn't mean you shouldn't limit things. Some of what I deleted was simply too personal and the telling felt like betrayal. Other things were potentially triggering on the definition you never gave, but I felt it likely to have meant, after the first disemvowelling.
I guess the point is that rape is so damned divisive and traumatic that it really does need quite careful comment management, and my prediction that clash would not happen without concern trolling and mansplaining should not be taken as meaning I think we needed more of that. You wanted to do something different with this thread, and it seems like it has done something different, a sharing of some experiences, without the tut-tutting, raging, and explosion that happen with any sharings like that which happen on less careful blogs. There was a little, but the person causing it withdrew quickly (was this a shutdown?). A non-judgmental approach was basically exactly what I wanted to bring up in my own experience of dealing with a rape victim. Why did they choose to tell me, and no-one else? I wonder if it's related to a comment I once received by a depressed friend - "You're the least judgmental person I know".
Which is probably news to anyone who has only experienced what I say on the net. My take on that is that the net is one of the few places I can make judgment, a very strong urge, the repression of which has made me feel quite bad over the years. But this thread is not the place for such urges.
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
But that doesn't mean you shouldn't limit things. Some of what I deleted was simply too personal and the telling felt like betrayal. Other things were potentially triggering on the definition you never gave, but I felt it likely to have meant, after the first disemvowelling.
Ben, honestly, I didn't feel good about it, but I KNOW your comment was found emotionally distressing. If you had an email link on your profile, I'd have talked to you about it. I've done it with two other PASers so far. And it's a balance, because while this comment thread has been almost entirely civil and non-threatening, there are still people who find it too distressing to take part in.
I don't think the "not defining triggering" comment is entirely fair, though.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
I don't think the "not defining triggering" comment is entirely fair, though.
In your linked comment you say:
And yes, you can never tell what's going to trigger someone.
Which pretty much means it's got no definition that people can use as a guideline. I mean, lets face it, the entire thread is triggering to the people "who find it too distressing to take part in". The entire state of Texas was triggering for one of the characters in Thelma and Louise.
I can see why you did it, it encouraged caution and consideration. Even if it what I said was totally innocuous it might have had that effect (see paragraph above). It was probably just as well you chose me for such treatment. Part of me actually wants to self-flatter and suggest you unconsciously picked me on account of my thick skin.
Anyway, I'm sorry my statement triggered someone, glad you spared them, don't feel bitter about it, and have overcome my fear of spam enough to finally allow my email address to be seen.
-
I feel like I've benefitted an awful lot from reading this thread. It's extremely refreshing to read an intelligent discussion about rape culture that isn't a flame war (thought I admit, my first reaction on seeing the number of comments was "Oh lawd, 13 pages already? This can't be good..." Colour me pleasantly surprised.)
I've thought about adding my own experiences of sexual assault, too, but on reflection, I'm not sure it adds anything to what others have said (and have said better than I ever could.)
One thing that I would like to add, and I hope it's not too tangental or trivial, is the way in which rape is portrayed in literature. This ties into something Emma mentioned upthread about the way rape is perceived. Often "rape" is portrayed in a specific way-particularly in fantasy* literature, it's generally brutally violent, committed by a stranger or near-stranger, leaves the victim emotionally traumatised but physically unharmed, and is always clear-cut as rape. As a learning tool, the books we read growing up have a significant impact on how we percieve issues like rape, so managing to change how writers write about rape in a fictional context is one small step towards dismantling some of the culture that allows rape to happen so frequently.
* - I mention fantasy literature because it's something of a trope use the kind of rape mentioned above as shorthand/lazy writing for "the worst possible thing that could happen to a character without killing her". It's incredibly, distressingly common in fantasy fiction, and very few fantasy writers manage to avoid writing about sexual assault in a less trite fashion.
-
Megan Wegan, in reply to
If it helps, I was one of them, and I know of two others. I saw it before the diesmvowelling, and I burst into tears. At my desk. At work. For Reasons, I have pretty big issues with what you said (though I hasten to add that I have never assaulted anyone). It wasn't "triggering" in the strictest sense, but I was pretty upset.
That's the thing about these kinds of conversations, you can never tell whether something you might say might trigger someone. Which is why the mods have to work really hard to stop it, if you want this to be a safe space. And why people should chose their words really carefully.
-
This has got to be my third or fourth attempt to add something meaningful to this thread - the rest have been abandoned for various reasons. But what I'm taking from it is that 1, experiences of sexual assault are very very common (and inflicted on people far far too young), and 2, they're hardly ever talked about in front of ignorant arses like the chaps in the Dim Post thread because of the degree to which they just don't get it and it hurts to be reminded of that.
I hope there are one or two formerly entitled arses reading here now who are too intimidated to post themselves, but might have absorbed the message that the whole drunk girl out late in heels and a short skirt cliche isn't a representative picture of sexual assault and that perhaps they should stop talking as if it was.
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
thought I admit, my first reaction on seeing the number of comments was "Oh lawd, 13 pages already? This can't be good..." Colour me pleasantly surprised.
Heh, I think I actually said at the Welly Great Blend that if one of my threads got over 300 comments, someone had been an arsehole. So pleased to be proved wrong.
-
Arriving late to a discussion can be frustrating.
Has anyone else linked to this?
Not a humourous subject but I still laughed a lot.Humans are supposed to able to make rational choices, we are not 'animals' (ok pedants, we are but you know what I mean).
I'm sure I could train my dog not to chase fluffy running things, but it is in her nature to chase, shake and crunch.
I wouldn't rely on her to make a sensible decision about whether the next door cat is ok to chase or not.When someone is violent and says "I couldn't help myself" that the victim "asked for it". They are saying "I am an animal, I can't stop my 'natural' behaviour"
I say animals don't vote, they can't stand for parliament, they don't drive, or teach, or wear clothes, etc... Humans are different from other animals, we can think about what we do and make decisions based on reasoning. (Sometimes we take medication to help.)Of course given our inability to not screw up this planet I am wondering just how far advanced we are.
-
An addendum from an asexual:
would-be rapists do not see a person – they see a target. Something to be used.
I look wholly female – big breasts, wide hips, an obviously female face.
I have no female sexual urges – or responses- whatsoever.
I’ve been targetted twice, by would-be getyerlegover-shites.
Because I actually have few qualms about eye-gouging or whacking such losers over the head with a rock (and I’m fairly bulky), neither attempt succeeded.
Point being; just looking female – and not necessarily acting/dressing like a female- is enough to trigger/anger or suggest to certain males that rape is a good idea. Teach her what she's missing. Teach her that she is wrong. Teach her that MaleY idea of female sexuality is the only right&proper one.We all need to acknowledge that our human ancestry (not necessarily cultural acceptance -tho’ that can most emphatically enable) predisposes males to rape. The submission posture in Pan trog. does precisely that – for males. (P.trog males are directly turned on by female genital swellings but that is a whole different ball game…)Check out other primates if you wish to verify my statement. (Orangs, for instance, do not court or honeymoon (other apes do) – they just bluntly rape.)
Anyway, a most valuable thread, and everyone’s contribution/s most appreciated.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
someone had been an arsehole
I can try if you like - I've been told I'm quite good at it :P.
So I kind of feel that with the ideas and experiences shared so far we should have something happening. Yes Demure Lady Perambulation is happening but my cynical side says that won't convince anyone to change policy. This is an election year, surely this is a year we could get a political party interested in standing for something that might work to either reduce the incidence and/or help the victims.
This of course is the side of me that always wants to "fix" things rather than just understand and maybe that isn't appropriate right now.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
we are not ‘animals’
And that is the determinist side of the debate which I knew was a possible path for my thoughts. But I think (and I use the term think to indicate I don't know) that if you are aware of propensities that are genetic then it becomes possible to change behaviour to prevent that propensity from doing harm.
If violence is "natural" then a non- violent society must work very hard to sustain that and must accept that non-violence is easier for some than for others and adjust accordingly.
It is not about excusing rapists, far from it. For me it is about recognising that some people need more than a 45 minute class in sex-ed to actually "get it". It is still all about the perpetrator.
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
The slutwalk FAQ contains some specific aims:
What we would like to see in the short term is a change in law say that there is NEVER any merit in bringing up a victim's sexual history, as it is NEVER a mitigating factor in sexual assault [currently, defence lawyers have to 'prove its merit' in order to bring up, or interrogate a victim about, a victim's sexual history]. We would like to see journalism standards state that when talking about sexual assault, they should refer to the details of the assault as 'the alleged assault' or 'the alleged rape', NOT 'the victim had sex with' or 'engaged in sexual acts with' the perpetrator, as the latter phrasing is heavily slanted towards the assumption of active consent. And we need to see more compassion and delicacy in the way victims are treated when first reporting their attack—no more interrogations where the victim is accused of lying/being drunk/changing their mind after the fact.
Changing a culture, however, is about understanding, I think, rather than legislation. The most important thing to do would be to change the way ordinary people think about sexual assault.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
I will go and purchase the ingredients I require for a delightful spaghetti bolognaise.
I hope you're intending to purchase the right consonants and vowels.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I hope you’re intending to purchase the right consonants and vowels.
I knew that would happen. It is how it has always been spelled in my head ...
-
So how about this, I know there are Green party folks who read here, how about you draft a change in the law that does precisely what is above. If you do that and make it part of your platform I'll change my party vote to Green (even though you oppose the science that is my livelihood).
Because sometimes you need to change the law in order to change the culture.
As for understanding ... grief I'm so far from really understanding rape and the suffering that it causes that I can barely know how much I don't understand ... but some of the stories here are helping with that.
-
Gee, in reply to
In very simple terms Megan’s observation of signs in Samoa that say “rape is wrong” feels like the right approach to me.
- See, I think that's too simple an approach for New Zealand culture. People know rape is wrong, because that's the thing that happens to women in dark alleys and is done by strangers with knives or guns. No one I know would ever rape anyone.
Maybe it's both at the same time? A column in
Stuff today (__may be triggering__) kind of illustrates this....The rape charges on Strauss-Kahn aren't the focus of this column, yet it seems to read like this therapist-writer is calling sexual predators and attempted rapists "men behaving badly", as a consequence of "not retaining close relationships". The implied excuse/victim-blaming surely wasn't the author's intention.... but it's still there. But as a qualified family/marriage therapist, he'd have to have been educated regarding the realities of rape, in all it's many forms, wouldn't he? (At least, I really hope he would've been.)
Changing a culture, however, is about understanding, I think, rather than legislation. The most important thing to do would be to change the way ordinary people think about sexual assault.
This discussion has made me re-evaluate everything that I say and that is said around me in terms of "am I standing by and allowing this set of myths to perpetuate"? Reading the column from the Dom Post with this discussion in mind has really forced me to think more about how "ordinary people think about sexual assault"... I guess I'm trying to say thank you to all of you for the earnest discussion.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
I knew that would happen. It is how it has always been spelled in my head ...
To be fair, it's mostly how people spell it in English. I just refuse to accept that a French word is being used to adjectivise an Italian city.
-
I've been thinking about what's so wrong about comparing rape prevention with theft prevention (not walking home alone is like locking your car, etc.)
1) The "stranger danger" myths about rape have been well debunked upthread. You're much more likely to be raped by someone you know and trust, so staying off the street and locking your doors doesn't keep you safe. There's that difference.
2) There's also the rather nasty implication that women, or our sexuality, is a kind of "property".
But I don't think those are the most important problems with the analogy. What I think is , is this:
3) Theft is a crime against property, which causes distress indirectly, whereas rape is a kind of torture directly inflicted on another human being. It may or may not involve violence, but it's always torture for the victim.
I understand that many convicted rapists don't believe they are guilty, because they sincerely believe the victim was consenting. They have had a pleasurable experience without realising the terrible harm they were inflicting.
How a person can reach adulthood without the skills to determine when they are inflicting torture on another person beggars belief, but it does seem to happen.
I'm sure there are some rapists who mean to cause harm, but for all the others, who don't seem to have the foggiest notion of what consent is or how to recognise it, who believe that dressing a certain way or acting a certain way implies consent to anyone for anything...what do we do with these people?
At the very least, I think the concept of consent needs to be an important part of sex education in schools.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
The most important thing to do would be to change the way ordinary people think about sexual assault.
FWIW, I think most people's ideas about sex form during puberty. That includes rapists. Not sure how that helps, but I think changing adult thinking is pretty damned hard. So:
some people need more than a 45 minute class in sex-ed to actually "get it". It is still all about the perpetrator.
Perhaps not, but it's a very worthwhile thing for schoolchildren to become informed about. Curiously, I do remember that we had a class (5th form I think) that was about rape. A science class, I think. It was a hard subject to discuss even then, though. Would you want to be triggering any victims in the class? It was even more full of uncomfortable silences than the regular sex-education. It didn't help that most of what we heard about the sexual encounters of our friends were the girls who were mostly shagging older guys, and the guys who were mostly shagging younger girls. Everything about that speaks of power imbalance, and statutory rape is all over it.
-
Isabel Hitchings, in reply to
At the very least, I think the concept of consent needs to be an important part of sex education in schools.
And earlier than that (though not neccessarliy in a sexual context) . Today I explained the concept of active consent to a group of five and six year olds who were playing a game with wooden swords. I'd like to think that the leap from only play-fighting with people who are happy with the game to only sleeping with people who want to isn't too huge.
-
Jackie Clark, in reply to
Oh Isabel, you made my day. That is exactly right. I do it all the time with our kids - and teaching boys, in particular, to recognise how someone feels just by looking at them. When nonverbal communication is so important, as it is in Pacific Island cultures in general, I find talking about, and teaching, mood recognition, and recognition of what someone wants or needs just by reading body language very successful.
-
bmk, in reply to
It didn’t help that most of what we heard about the sexual encounters of our friends were the girls who were mostly shagging older guys, and the guys who were mostly shagging younger girls. Everything about that speaks of power imbalance, and statutory rape is all over it.
Yes it does but this is where things get really blurry. Say you have a 16 year old male with a 15 year old female who want to have sex with each other, is this wrong? And if you say it is then with the genders reversed is it still wrong?
Things get very blurry around the consent age – ideally I think it should be a bit lower. One of my friends nearly got prosecuted. He was 16 and had been in a relationship for 6 months with his 15 year old girl-friend. Her parents when they found out they were having sex demanded the police charge my friend. The police didn’t want to charge the boy and eventually talked the girl's parents out of it. But the distress all this caused to the boy, girl and the boy’s parents was enormous.
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
Say you have a 16 year old male with a 15 year old female who want to have sex with each other, is this wrong? And if you say it is then with the genders reversed is it still wrong?
Yeah... the reason I was going out with guys older than myself at high school was, I think, down to the maturity difference. But there was no power imbalance. And the under-age sex I had certainly wasn't rape, in any way. The first Love Of My LIfe was a scrape under three years older than I, and I was ready for sex well before he was.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.