Posts by Dylan Reeve
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Isabel Hitchings,
You know what would make me feel safer and less likely to think of the men around me as possible rapists? If I could be sure that the men around me acknowledged their potential to rape and therefore took steps to mitigate against it.
That's the problem. I don't think I have a "potential to rape" - I don't think most men do. In saying that all men have that potential to do so I think we're telling those that do that they are somehow beholden to a natural instinct. I think it normalises their behaviour.
In the context of established relationships there are of course other issues around implied, inferred and assumed consent, but at that point I really do think it becomes the responsibility of both parties to be a clear as possible as early as possible if things are misinterpreted.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Megan Wegan,
We are at risk.
Take a moment to let that sink in. This isn’t a thing we’re imagining. I’ve been assaulted twice in my life, and I consider myself lucky that neither of them were worse. Countless of my friends have been assaulted, some in horrific ways, and the fact that any of them can leave the house is astounding to me. Never mind the constant reminders that, as Jackie describes in her lovely post, being outside is dangerous.
I'm not denying that. I totally understand the objective and subjective fear.
Teaching people about consent – because that’s what we’re talking about, no matter how much it feels to you like you’re being called a mean name – is the ONLY thing that will fix that. The point is that it doesn’t matter if we call them rapists. they don’t think they are, because women’s bodies (and some men’s) are a thing to which they are entitled.
It's not necessarily what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the message, implied and explicit, that men (the group) are a danger to women. That every individual man should be considered a possible rapist until proven otherwise.
I get that it's a feeling that some people personally can't help but hold, but at the same time it's also an idea that gets expressed outwardly to the world also. It seems to set an expectation.
To six percent of men. That might not seem like a lot, but I have 114 male-identifying friends on facebook. I’m pretty bad at maths, but that means I potentially know seven men who might hurt me, right?
Maybe it does. But should the response be to then assume that all 114 are potential attackers?
I think we should work toward the common understanding within society that sexual assault okay is not normal, not okay, not excusable. We should make it clear that victims are not culpable in their own assault. We should establish that expectation.
But I think a message that equates to "men, don't rape" is somehow implicitly endorsing the idea that not raping is not the normal condition, that it requires some level of conditioning or restraint. It doesn't.
I think if we can eliminate the victim blaming (and attacker excuse making) then we're a long way closer to "fixed". Then we also need to look at how we educate people about respect for others - it's not rape-specific, it's a broad concept that rational human beings can adapt to all situations.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Jackie Clark,
I don’t agree with you. People who are violent will be violent, and need no justification. Ever. And, besides, it’s not about “all men are capable of rape”, it’s about addressing what motivates rape. Power and entitlement.
You don't think that hearing a message that, in a way boils down to "we expect men to rape" emboldens those who do and normalises things for them? Doesn't it feed that entitlement?
Obviously it's difficult to change personal feelings and responses, but that is a message that is broadcast too.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Jackie Clark,
I wonder, Dylan, if you understand what rape actually is. It would be surprising if you did. Even the Oxford Dictionary hasn’t got it quite right. http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/rape?q=rape
Most of our rape culture is around not understanding the term. Rape is nonconsenusal sex. Simple.Yes I definitely understand that.
In reading all your words, I sense that you come from a bit of a liberal bubble. That when you see the word rapist you have a certain image in your mind. Of a man, a very bad man with nefarious things on his mind. Most men I know have this image in their heads. Rape is a violent, and terrible, act. Not me. Not us. That’s rape culture.
It's a single word that describes a broad range of behavior and situations. When we discuss it it's easiest to focus on the obvious bogey man aspect of it, but that doesn't mean the same concepts don't apply at all levels.
I wrote a really long spiel, but then, I thought, I can’t be fucked explaining rape culture again. And besides, others are more eloquent. So I wrote a blog post, especially for you, and men like you. I hope you read it. Rapists aren’t bogey men. They’re, mostly, just men. But we have a culture of entitlement around sex. No-one teaches young girls that all men are capable of rape, or sexual violence. We learn that all for ourselves, through our experiences.
I will read your post soon.
My argument boils down to the idea that the message that all men are capable of rape seems, to me, a message that specific men who are capable of rape will hear and find justification in. I think it reinforces the thoughts, feelings and actions by saying that they are "normal" in a way.
-
Look, it's late and I need to sleep, but I've tried really hard to express my feelings and thoughts on this as best as I can. If I've failed to do so then that's on me I guess.
I've written far more words on this topic in these comments than I'd ever really intended to but these are thoughts that I've had many times when I see discussions like this, so it just happened that I chose to share them this time.
I really really really want to be clear on this. I've no interest in defending or excusing sexual assault in any way. I absolutely understand that for many people this issue is unimaginably difficult. The few times the issue has touched my life are indelibly etched into my memory. It's not okay - we all agree on that.
But I think the culture that's at play it perhaps more complex than it seems, which is what I've been trying to express.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Sue,
REALLY?
risk reduction and feelings?REALLY?
why is this even a conversation? and i’m really sorry you were made feel a threat to women.
Try growing up being taught how to protect yourself from being attacked. Try seeing how that feels. That it’s normal that you walk with the keys in your hand a certain way. that you don’t go to X place just in case, that you walk with your head down just in case, that you do EVERYTHING possible to reduce risk and yet you still get assaulted
I am not arguing that the status quo is reasonable or right or fair or that it should remain.
I am saying all these issues come from the same fear and feed into the same bullshit idea that rape is somehow a male animal impulse.
I honestly don't see how telling women to dress differently is any better or worse than telling them to suspect every man they see. They both seem to stem from the same idea that men are animals with little control over the sexual urges. I think they both send the same messages to the men in question. They validate the perceptions of those men.
Really I'm trying to be as up front and reasonable as possible here. I can't be more clear about this - no one should be sexually assaulted. It's not excusable, it's not okay and it shouldn't be accepted.
My issue here is about the messaging to men, women and society. I honestly think that "she was asking for it" and "all men are potential rapists" are sending exactly the same signals whatever way they're presented.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Megan Wegan,
1. Your feelings “as a man” are more important than teaching people what rape is, and how to prevent it.
No, I don't think I said that. We should find ways to have these discussions, but stigmatizing half the population in the eyes of everyone doesn't seem productive basically.
If I tell my kids that my only expectation of them is that they'll behave badly then I can hardly be surprised that they do. If we say that we expect men to sexually assault women (and that's a message that isn't uncommon, although varies in subtlety) then I think we're probably making things worse.
2. Because of the way society preaches to women that it is our responsibility to prevent ourselves being attacked, we should not leave the house if we don’t feel safe. And that our not feeling safe is “unreasonable”?
Don't think I said that either.
But I do think that the argument that woman should "stay out of trouble" such as made by Bob Jones and, arguably, society at large is pretty much the same as the argument that women should view all men as a potential threat. I think both have the same basis in risk avoidance and both perpetuate an unhealthy view of the issue.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Megan Wegan,
We seem to be arguing at cross purposes, because _of course_ it’s more subtle than “hey dudes, don’t rape.” It also requires a societal change to not treat women as property and a whole bunch of other things.
It may be more subtle than that, but it can easily be interpreted as that. I mean we're here talking about the idea that women have to view all men, until proven otherwise, as potential rapists... That's not an uncommon sentiment, and it's a message that guys receive.
Whether you mean it or not (and I'm reasonably sure you don't) it's hard for me not to see that idea and interpret it as "it's assumed that I, being a male, am a rapist" - obviously I'm not, and I know that, but if I were I'd hear that message and things "...which means that my actions are normal".
The point we’re trying to make is that women already get the message that all men are potentially rapists, and it’s up to us to figure out how to prevent it.It’s not up to us. It’s up to you guys.
Women get that message, and so do men.
Because yes. People who rape do take their cues from you.
Like I say, I think those cues are just as much from this implied expectation that "men are rapists" - women hear it, and so do mean. People who rape hear it and believe it - in normalizes the behaviour.
Surely it would be better if everyone, men and women, made it really clear that it's abnormal, that it's a broken behaviour.
Every rape joke people laugh at. Every short skirt comment. Because more than one woman who comments here can tell you that those situations aren’t clear.
Ultimately our communications both reflect and shape our behaviour. Jokes about rape (usually) aren't a justification or endorsement, they are a reflection. We laugh about things that are upsetting and distasteful, humour is a coping mechanism. To declare it absolutely unreasonable to make or laugh at a given topic actually removes a way of addressing and confronting these issues - there can be meaning and learning in humour.
But I suspect that's a whole other tangent.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Danielle,
OK, that is not, in fact, what anyone has said, or what any of these campaigns say.
As a guy, it's a message I feel like I receive at times from these types of campaigns.
I actually got yelled at, as a random passer by, at an "anti rape" protest in the Auckland CBD many years ago. I was distinctly made to feel that I, personally, was a threat to women.
Whether that's the intention or not is certainly debatable, but I definitely think that's how campaigns focused in this way can be interpreted.
The “potential” for women is not that we think you all could, or do; it’s that until we know you really well, we *don’t know that you won’t*, so assuming any given one of you won’t is a bit dangerous for us.
I understand that fear and the risk involved (real and perceived), but is it reasonable to assume, on an individual level, that every new guy you meet is a potential rapist? If it's reasonable to take that kind of precaution (mental or physical) then isn't it similarly reasonable to simply not go anywhere that seems risky (out at night for example)? They seem like similar risk reduction ideas, only one gets directed at individuals.
-
Hard News: Rape and unreason, in reply to Megan Wegan,
I truly don’t understand this. Is it really that hard, when you’re getting busy, to check in and make sure everyone is happy?
Yes. In some ways it is. Simply sitting up and saying "would you like to have sex?" is often not practical or reasonable.
Absolutely you should be acutely aware of signals one way or the other, but there legitimately is a grey area in there and both parties have a responsibility to be aware of that and communicate clearly if it seems that signals are being missed.