Feminist Rape Culture

F

Screen Shot 2013-10-05 at 10.40.24 PMVtswLcG5gQyw1G

Alison Tieman
Follow me
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestmailby feather

About the author

Alison Tieman

<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="3336 http://www.genderratic.com/?p=3336">39 comments</span>

  • Feminists treat men like slaves, and of course, you cannot rape a slave, even if that slave is a young boy.

  • Clicking on the images in the blogpost lead to some unexpected images.. seems to be improper linkage to me.
    One of them a newspaper clipping ‘Sometimes a man is really looking for his lost dog’.

    Can the source for the tumblr Loni B blogpost be revealed?

    PS: How come you dont have a ‘subscribe by email for followup comments’?

  • I saw this one too.

    Such a big wad of hypoagency. And you know, this writer almost certainly considers herself true-blue feminist Ladies’ Auxiliary of the Patriarchy indeed.

    With feminists like these who needs paleos?

  • I wonder if the women mocking a male rape victim feel if they hurt him enough they’ll feel better about their own innate lack of power (which they have, but cede in order to gain shaming power)? Or is it just that they were never told when they were five that torturing their kitten to death was wrong? Or maybe they can’t stand the idea that female sexuality is rejectable (hence the insinuations that such a man is gay – carrying with it the unspoken idea that “gay” means “defective”)?

    Although here it is the idea that being raped is the only alternative to being pathetic and unloveable. Which makes it a clear case of projection on the part of these three charming future cat-farmers.

  • I’m not sure I’ve ever witnessed MRAs acting that hideously towards a female rape victim.

    Trolls, certainly. But self-identified MRAs? Generally the ones of any note are not inclined to be that mean-spirited and unfair.

    Anyway, I’m trying to fix the problem with the link. For whatever reason it’s working fine for me.

  • As it happens, Tamen, the comments below Ally’s article include some pretty horrible attempts to excuse the girl and blame men in general or Chris Brown in particular for what happened. This sort of behaviour really is all too common from some feminists.

    Btw I like your new blog!

  • I’m always a little bit shocked when I see a feminist who genuinelly believes that bullshit definition of sexism being only possible against women. I can understand it more if it was just a debating tool they use to silence people but to actually believe that a definition that 99% of English speakers don’t use nor accept as valid is “the correct one” is just delusional.

    Re: Ally’s blog

    I’ve been questioning the value of posting over at Ally’s blog after a couple of discussions with the usual morons who just ‘weren’t getting it’. Articles such as that one, and the entertaining rape apologism it brings out of feminists, remind me why I bother to keep reading his articles.

  • I personally found that simply ignoring the posturing of certain commenters at Ally’s blog (perhaps with the exception when I am able to provide cites to facts refuting their view – which I do for the benefit of other readers rather than trying to convince them) works for me.Ok, once the patience got the better of me and I wrote a somewhat long comment to carnation explaining why I considered most of his/her comments trolling.

    And yes, some of the commenters at Ally’s blog can’t help but show their true colours – Lucy’s “If a girl under 16 cannot consent to sex, how can she consent to being a rapist?” is one example. I am willing to bet that she has never uttered the gender reversed words in the comment fields of any article/post about a juvenile male rapist under the age of 16.

    Virginia rape laws clearly states that it is rape if the a person have sex with a child under 13 years of age and the perpetrator is more than 3 years older than the victim. A possible rebuttable assumption that children aged between 10 and 12 are not physically capable of the crime is provided by law. This means that by legal definition a 15 year-old girl having sex with an 8 year-old boy is a rapist and is liable to be tried as an adult (the crime is a felony which simply put allows the state to seek to try the 15 year-old as an adult. And even if the 15 year-old were to be tried as a juvenile she could still be committed to detention in a juvenile secure detention facility.

  • Tamen is steadily marginalizing herself over there. Such lopsided female chauvinism is almost comical.

    I like how the first commenter’s white knighting got 1. called that and 2. shot down by just about every commenter after him.

  • I’m always a little bit shocked when I see a feminist who genuinelly believes that bullshit definition of sexism being only possible against women. I can understand it more if it was just a debating tool they use to silence people but to actually believe that a definition that 99% of English speakers don’t use nor accept as valid is “the correct one” is just delusional.

    Compare and contrast: “The Patriarchy”. The best part is that many feminists honestly can’t seem to understand why using a term conversationally defined as “a system run by men” to refer to “a system of oppressive gender roles” might lead to people thinking they’re blaming men.

    This “sexism 2.0” definition is based on a sociological definition of racism (“power+prejudice”) created by Pat Bidol and popularized by Judy Katz. Social Justice folks glommed onto it, stuck “systemic” on the front, and proceeded to stick their fingers in their ears. Since there’s an overlap between anti-racists and feminists, a similar definition was created for sexism, with even less support.

    http://www.wetasphalt.com/content/why-racism-prejudice-power-wrong-way-approach-problems-racism

    However, using those terms is a pretty reliable way to determine whether someone’s subject to reason and objective reality, which can save you from wasting time arguing with them. 🙂

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/hetpat/2013/10/06/magic-trick-chris-brown-and-the-disappearing-child-sex-abuse/#comment-10330

    I’ll admit that it is with a considerable amount of discomfort that I draw moral equivalence.

    I’ve seen some of your previous posts, Carnie. That discomfort, carnation, comes from your reluctance to admit that men’s and women’s problems are ever equivalent. It’s cognitive dissonance, which is why you’re reaching for such a thin cloak as “physically it’s different” to imply that it’d be somehow worse if the genders were reverse.

  • It’s the recent discussion with Jacob that annoyed me more. Possibly because I had an ounce more respect for him (which is now gone). I couldn’t give a shit what carnation says: I often just use him/her as a ‘useful idiot’; I can rely on her to give me an opportunity to expound on an issue.

    I think Ally has been quite clever with his last couple of posts. His last one was about Polanski and how people argue for ‘a nuanced look’ to try and excuse reprehensible behaviour, and obviously feminists are all on board (except for summerblues who for once actually made some good points for once about the facts of the case) then he follows it up with a post which he knows will cause all the feminists to debate all the nuances of whether the girl “really abused” him or not. He’s good at showing them for the hypocrites they are in a very subtle way that they fail to notice. I wonder how long he’ll remain on ftb when they catch on?

  • I have yet to see a feminist state that the crime of murder can only have occurred if the victim is female though they have come close with their universal unquestioning defence of female spousal killers. But then, I’ve got a good 3 to 4 decades left on my ‘consume before’ date so I wouldn’t be surprised to see, during my lifetime, a defence attorney claim that accepting a female’s killing of a male as a murder represented a patriarchal holdover and discrimination against all the “real” victims of male-perpetrator killings. Hopefully, when such a case occurs it will be presided over by one of the sane judges though odds aren’t that good.

    It seems to be the “logical” extension of the belief that males can’t be sexually abused to believe that killing a male is more of a property crime than a murder. When one believes someone has no capacity to suffer they are not human and when someone isn’t fully human one has no capacity to suffer.

  • Adiabat, that’s a good insight. That’s a pretty clear pattern you have idenitified.

    SOB:
    “I have yet to see a feminist state that the crime of murder can only have occurred if the victim is female though they have come close with their universal unquestioning defence of female spousal killers.”

    This is the empathy apartheid we talk about here. Oh, and male utility too:

    “It seems to be the “logical” extension of the belief that males can’t be sexually abused to believe that killing a male is more of a property crime than a murder. “

  • Adiabat:

    I think Ally has been quite clever with his last couple of posts. […] He’s good at showing them for the hypocrites they are in a very subtle way that they fail to notice.

    That’s a very interesting observation. I’m not totally sure it was intended on Ally’s part, however? My impression is that Ally himself doesn’t quite see the hypocrisy but I could be very wrong. I haven’t really gotten involved over there.

    SYABM:

    Compare and contrast: “The Patriarchy”. The best part is that many feminists honestly can’t seem to understand why using a term conversationally defined as “a system run by men” to refer to “a system of oppressive gender roles” might lead to people thinking they’re blaming men.

    In contrast, in this case I think the individuals in question probably do understand! Again I could be very wrong but I think at least some feminists know it’s insulting/alienating/etc to (some) men.

  • Gringo:

    Tamen is steadily marginalizing herself over there. Such lopsided female chauvinism is almost comical.

    Haha, that actually made me laugh Ginkgo. That is a pretty epic mixup of names there 🙂

  • I’d like to pretend that “Gringo” was an intentional name mix-up payback, but I’ll have to blame Apple’s spellchecker. I guess this makes us unintentionally even Ginkgo. Damn.

  • “Tamen is steadily marginalizing herself over there. Such lopsided female chauvinism is almost comical. ”

    “Tamen, SHE is marginal….”

    “Gringo”! That’s hilarious. You might as well call me “Migra”.

  • @SensitiveThug:

    In contrast, in this case I think the individuals in question probably do understand! Again I could be very wrong but I think at least some feminists know it’s insulting/alienating/etc to (some) men.

    Which is why some of the more radical ones say things like “stop being offended by us blaming you for things you have no more hand in than anyone else and listen to us!”

    And then they say men aren’t listening because they don’t want to check their privilege. I’ve even seen some say things like “men created the dictionary!” when they have no problem using the dictionary definition of other words when convenient. The funny thing is that the general rationale is that the standard definition obscures what the “real” problem is, but if you drill down, it always turns out that the Social Justice Warrior in question has a problem with the conventional definition including things they personally don’t want to consider racism or sexism.

    Empathy apartheid indeed.

  • Sensitive Thug: “That’s a very interesting observation. I’m not totally sure it was intended on Ally’s part, however? My impression is that Ally himself doesn’t quite see the hypocrisy but I could be very wrong. I haven’t really gotten involved over there.”

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t for a second think he’s ‘on our side’. He believes that the ‘men’s rights folks’ and feminists are just as bad as each other, and he thinks of himself as someone who can bring both sides together. No doubt he expected to expose the ‘men’s rights’ commentors as being hypocrites as well. Unfortunately for him the ‘men’s rights’ commentors pretty much stayed consistent across both articles so don’t expect a post revealing what he was trying to do.

    “I’ve seen some of your previous posts, Carnie. That discomfort, carnation, comes from your reluctance to admit that men’s and women’s problems are ever equivalent. It’s cognitive dissonance, which is why you’re reaching for such a thin cloak as “physically it’s different” to imply that it’d be somehow worse if the genders were reverse.”

    It’s not cognitive dissonance, carnation is just being deceitful. He/She (though I’m pretty certain carnation is female*) isn’t experiencing any discomfort, it’s just carny’s way of trying to ‘muddy the waters’ and to deflect any sympathy people may have for men. Carny’s entire ‘schtick’ is to pretend to care about men while arguing against them receiving any support or sympathy from others. That’s why she argues that men’s DV groups should only do things in the ways she wants them to, which she knows are ineffective. If they do anything else then she claims they “don’t deserve to be taken seriously” and so on.

    *Only sad single women make completely unprovoked posts about “how great it is to be single” and how happy they are “going out with friends”. (Men may also be happy to be single but rarely feel the need to convince themselves of that fact by posting random comments to strangers on internet message boards.)

  • SYABM: “but if you drill down, it always turns out that the Social Justice Warrior in question has a problem with the conventional definition including things they personally don’t want to consider racism or sexism.”

    It’s not just definitions; it’s the same with their theory. What I was trying to get the feminist at Ally’s blog to understand, and what started to annoy me, was that the usual definitions of “Rape Culture” as given by feminist include many things which would be classed as “rape culture” but which many people, the feminist included, think is a good thing, and the right thing to do*.

    I wanted to know how he reconciles his approval of these aspects of rape culture with his belief that we must all “fight rape culture”. His answer seems to be that he ignores the problem; he explicitly said that that’s what he does. Yet he still didn’t see this as a flaw with the theory.

    * It’s easy to come up with examples: just think of something which would reduce the prevalence of rape but you disagree we need to stop. I used the examples of society’s refusal to castrate rapists and the reluctance to pay for lighting in all dark alleyways in the country through taxation. (I know they’re silly examples but any theory should at the very least be able to exclude the silly examples from its definitions).

  • John, I saw that and it fits with so much of what we have been saying here for a long time. That has the potential to be quite the gane-changer in the general discussion.

    I have been wondering for some time how a lot of the modern form of the tradtional female role is narcissistic, and that perfectly healthy girls are enculturated into this and behave like that just to get along.

  • SYABM, have you ever spent much time around a four-year-old? That is the mentlaity you are describing. They can’t see thier own inconsistencies and those don’t matter to them; their whole aim is to beat down any resistance. Capitulation is the only accpetable end state for them.

    That’s alright in a four-year-old, they have a right to be immature. the problem is that our culture has a youth fetish. This kind of debate behavior is celebrated as “passionate” and “authentic to your real feelings.” It is celebrated so much that when you don’t celebrate it, when you call someone out on it, they truly don’t see the problem with what they are doing. they think you’re the one who doesn’t know what the rules are.

    This youth fetish is a general problem right across the cultural and political spectrum. It is the behavior true believers on the religious right and in the Tea Party show. Neither TP types nor feminists like to see themselves compared to each other because the parallels are too uncomfortable.

  • In the feminist utopia, there are actually no women: there are men, who are responsible for their actions… and then there are children, who are not.

  • @Adiabat

    I wanted to know how he reconciles his approval of these aspects of rape culture with his belief that we must all “fight rape culture”. His answer seems to be that he ignores the problem; he explicitly said that that’s what he does. Yet he still didn’t see this as a flaw with the theory.

    Which reminds me of the time someone at AMPToons said that feminism having trouble addressing male rape victims wasn’t a flaw but a feature. And he was a male victim himself. In fact at some point Archy or Tamen or one of those brave souls used the CDC study to point out that male rape is much more prevalent than he thought and he went “That’s derailing. Also, nuh-uh.”

    If only there was only one male (pro-)feminist rape victim who actively tried to ignore male victims. I once asked one why he was willing to erase male victims like he had been erased. He never answered, IIRC.

    @Ginkgo;

    SYABM, have you ever spent much time around a four-year-old? That is the mentlaity you are describing. They can’t see thier own inconsistencies and those don’t matter to them; their whole aim is to beat down any resistance. Capitulation is the only accpetable end state for them.

    My niece was perfectly capable of seeing inconsistencies in her own arguments when she was three. And so is the other little girl my mum babysits. I’m pretty sure they’re both more intellectually consistent than, say, Big Red, or David Futrelle.

    What a world, what a world.

    That’s alright in a four-year-old, they have a right to be immature. the problem is that our culture has a youth fetish. This kind of debate behavior is celebrated as “passionate” and “authentic to your real feelings.” It is celebrated so much that when you don’t celebrate it, when you call someone out on it, they truly don’t see the problem with what they are doing. they think you’re the one who doesn’t know what the rules are.

    Unless you’re a man talking about men’s rights, at which point you become a dangerous, overly emotional brute who’s a threat to women in some nonspecific way. Possibly involving the word “creepy”.

    I’ve met far too many feminists and others who think that “he who yells loudest wins”.

  • There’s a follow up on Jez about the Chris Brown thing. It’s not bad, but of course there’s no mention of *their* shitty article on the subject

  • debaser, I saw that. It’s really significant. It’s a very big deal to see this appear in so influential a publication.

  • The CNN article uses the 1 in 71 stat for male rape victims, and quotes the correlating definition that doesn’t even cover the anecdote they use for the headline!

  • @Ginkgo:

    Nice, nice article by a feminist on Chris Brown, and a very interesting pattern in the comments, with all the excusers (rape apologists) being male and all the feminists calling them out for rape apology.

    http://oliviaacole.wordpress.com/2013/10/08/chris-brown-and-a-nation-of-raped-boys/

    Well, except for the obligatory attempts to shoehorn this into “the Patriarchy” despite the fact that it contradicts the concept on a fundamental level. And not really mentioning that female rape victims are generally better treated than male on a social and institutional level. Or how feminism itself predominantly genders rape.

    Two steps forward, one step back?

    The article linked tries to shoehorn it into “rape culture” despite, again, feminism predominantly describing the concept in terms of M>F rape. In fact, it specifically claims that rape culture is about misogyny; if Brown was a women, she’d be more likely to describe what happened to her as an assault. This is true. How they get “sexism against women” out of that baffles me.

    And don’t try and move the goalposts to claim that rape culture is really about everyone’s rapes when it’s manifestly been used almost exclusively to refer to M>F rape. If fifty other people use the term in a way that excludes non-M>F victims, and you’re claiming that it includes them, no one will believe you.

    /rant

    @Paul: No mention of their previous article. No apology. No mention of how the website itself and feminism in general have contributed to the problem in the past. And they’ve been called out by readers then too.

    (Ironically, Jeff Fecke at AMPToons called them outthen erased male victims in the comments to that same article. And he’s a victim himself, IIRC.)

  • @Paul:
    The only mention I’ve seen of their own horrible article was a small editors note at the bottom of said horrible article where the “Let’s try it again.” is an link to the new article.

    Editor’s note: Jezebel failed to properly approach and address this topic, and we apologize for the oversight. Let’s try it again. -jc

  • SYABM:

    And don’t try and move the goalposts to claim that rape culture is really about everyone’s rapes

    I find it useful to use the definition of rape culture and apply it to all rape, all victims and all perpetrators because that can highlight how some feminist’s views on rape is very much supporting rape culture as defined. One example is when Soraya Chemaly writes that “only men can stop rape” – which is a textbook example of erasing a non-trivial number of rape victims. Feminists who state that vastly more women than men are victims – forgetting that negligibly is an antonym of vastly – and who appear to be completely uninterested in researching/hearing about exactly who many men are victims.

  • And even in Jezebel’s second attempt they can’t help but indulge in rape apology for the female perpetrator.

    “I didn’t want to believe it was true, that an 8-year-old boy who in no way, shape, or form can consent to sex was abused by a girl who was older, but also herself maybe too young to consent to sex, likely perpetuating something awful that had happened to her. ”

    I won’t link to it. It doesn’t deserve to be read and they don’t deserve the ad revenue for writing it, but I will give credit to the person who said it, Erin Gloria Ryan.

  • “likely perpetuating something awful that had happened to her.”

    This keeps popping up from feminists discussing the case.

    Don’t they realise that it is a complete fabrication on their part? With the information available there is no reason to assume that anything ever happened to her that “caused her to do it”.

  • We do not know from the information Chris Brown gave in the Guardian interview whether the 14-15 year-old girl who had sex with him when he was 8 had experienced something awful had happened to her which she perpetuated by raping Chris Brown. It may be and it may not be – we don’t know.

    I note the assumption Erin Gloria Ryan* did and I am willing to bet that there is next to no admissions like that about young male sex offenders in any articles on Jezebel or nearly anywhere else.

    These women and girls are all victims of circumstances and not by their own choice and they aren’t responsible for their actions. Now, how can these people point at others and say “misogynist”?

    Apparently Erin Gloria Ryan has come a long way since she thought it funny to crack jokes at the expense of male victims of female statutory rapists: http://imgur.com/a/5d3Px
    Good for her.

  • Adiabat,

    ““likely perpetuating something awful that had happened to her.”
    This keeps popping up from feminists discussing the case”

    The Designated Victim piece of hypoagency is what keeps driving this shit. A woman shoots her sleeping husband in the back with a shotgun? Well, he must have done something awful to drive her to that, something lijke asking her to wear high heels. A woman drives her three kids into the Hudson River? Well, what did the father do wrong that mnight accoutn for that? How did he fail her?

    The whole thing is disgusting.

By Alison Tieman

Events

Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssyoutubeby feather

Support Hannah Wallen’s HBR Talk

Categories

Archives

Tags