Another elevator joke for you all:
So Pierce Harlan of the False Rape Society blog gets into an elevator ….
Well, OK, not a joke. In his latest post, Harlan offers a reaction, of sorts, to the whole atheist elevator incident –- by relating an anecdote of a recent elevator experience of his own.
EDITED TO ADD: Harlan has now deleted the post in question. It can still be seen, at least for now, in Google’s cache of the original page, which you can find here. Grab screenshots! Back to the story:
Seems he was riding a hotel elevator with a sweet old lady. Neither one said anything to the other (Harlan apparently hates talking to sweet old ladies) but when he got off the elevator – well, let’s let him explain:
I glanced back at her and saw that … she was immobilized with fear. In fact, she was practically cowering in the corner. Her eyes couldn’t have been wider if I had whipped out my dick and lathered it up with Grey Poupon. Hers was the face of utter, unbridled fear, and she was watching me like the scardest of scared deer. She said not a word but her demeanor practically pleaded, “Please don’t rape me, sir!”
Now, Harlan seems to have what you might call a taste for overstatement. He describes feminists as “screeching banshees” and “extremist loons allied with the sexual grievance industry.” I doubt he could describe a chicken-salad sandwich without resorting to angry hyperbole. (That was a little bit of overstatement on my part.) But let’s just assume that there is at least a kernel of truth here: this woman was creeped out by Harlan.
So what was Harlan’s response to this woman’s obvious discomfort?
[N]o one has more empathy for his fellow human beings than I do. The first thought that came to my mind in response to the obvious fear on the face of this pathetic, sweet looking, older woman — who probably never hurt anyone in her entire life — was fuck you!
Obviously we are supposed to ask just what it was that drove Harlan – the self-described world’s most empathetic man – to say something so seemingly callous? Well, as is usually the case with those we write about here, it all comes back to man-hating ladies and their male allies, with their evil insistence on sexual assault education (sorry, “indoctrination”) and their callous demands to “’take back the night,’ although the night has always been theirs.”(I don’t quite know what that means, but it sure sounds selfish of these women to want a whole extra night just for themselves.)
Ours is, Harlan says, “a culture marked by crass, hysterical fear-mongering about male sexual predation and violence.” (Evidently some guys haven’t gotten the memo on this.)
But all this evil misandry seems to have left poor Mr. Harlan in an uncharitable mood towards, well, almost everyone — though he directs his worst opprobrium at sweet old ladies.
Fuck them all. The paranoia of the woman in the elevator is her problem, not mine. Ironically, the elevator, the hotel itself, the car she rode in and the roads she rode on to get to the hotel were all undoubtedly conceived, designed, and built by men — men she’d fear just as much as me if they were standing in that elevator with her. I felt no guilt or shame or bewilderment over the fact that she fears me because of my birth class. Let her fear me. I can’t change it, and I have too much to do to worry about it.
And maybe, just maybe, it’s good that some people fear us. Maybe we should exult in the power we wield by reason of their paranoia. One thing I know: I will never do anything to alleviate their paranoia. In fact, I’m just fine with it, thank you very much. If someday, my riding the elevator causes some old woman to have a heart attack, that, too, is not my problem. Blame it on a culture that I don’t approve of. Blame on sweet looking, older women who give in to the paranoia.
Truly the world’s most empathetic man.
Harlan goes on to talk briefly about the Rebecca Watson elevator incident. Needless to say, he adds nothing interesting to the discussion.
@Nobinayamu
All men are potential rapists, this is an undeniable fact. The sad part is women keep giving men the benefit of the doubt, and women continually pay the price for their love and trust.
“you write with the stick-up-her-ass pretensions of a Womyn’s Studies major. You ought to try writing like a human being. ”
So Pierce, a women’s studies major is not a human being??? Nooooo, you don’t sound prejudiced against women. Ranting, raving and throwing insults at people is probably not a good way to convince them of your arguments.
Oh, my, oh, my, someone actually brought up Potiphar’s wife. That’s what people do when they want to “prove” that false rape claims are not a problem. Again, proving my point.
Here, ladies, another scholarly law review article for you:http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2004/12/2_false_rape_st.html
And check this out, too: http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/
Futrelle, you are running a radical feminist shithole here. This is about as extreme as they come — so far out of the mainstream it’s scary. I need to go take a shower and promise myself never to come here again.
Until I start my other blog, David, take care!
Your pal, Pierce
Did Pierce just imply he thought Pecunium was a woman? o_O
xD
(also apparently we’re radfems now o_O THE MOST EXTREME OUT THERE XD )
oh naive little Pierce.. xD there’s some scary radfems out there xD
NWO, are you equating sexual arousal with sexual assault?
First, “citation omitted” is very common in legal writing — as here, the prof. I cited was quoting, with approval, another source. You need to see the actual law review article.
Yes, yes I know. Because scholars expect anyone relying on their research to understand the principles of good scholarship. Yes, I’m aware you can get through law school without learning basic academic rigor, but if you’re going to cite scholarship you need to get better at these things.
Good researchers check an omitted source when they’re relying on a quote with an internal citation. Especially when the part of the quotation they’re relying on is itself quote. Lazy researchers just assume a contextless quote supports them and get caught with their pants down when someone else does their due diligence for them. You’re a lazy researcher.
What field you do practice, Harlan? Because you seem awfully eager to flaunt a general knowledge of the law without showing any particular depth in any of them.
Harlan: First, “citation omitted” is very common in legal writing — as here, the prof. I cited was quoting, with approval, another source. You need to see the actual law review article.
Did you read my post? The one where I linked to the article?
Now, about, “citation omitted”. It refers, in legal articles, to leaving out the internal referents, and attached footnootes. It’s a convention of that style of academic writing. In other disciplines (those which tend to MLA inline citation) the work is cited once, in toto, and then subsequently referred to in part (e.g Gould, pp15-16) to point to the work. If single author is referenced in more than one work, the year of publication will be appended.
But, even that’s not the convention online. Online the, general (there being no style guide) is to refer to the title, ideally with a link (as I did). Including the, “citation omitted” shows a lack of actual attention. Mere cut and paste from another source, without considering the further context: i.e. intellectual laziness.
Since I went and read the article, the idea that you are either intellectually lazy, or actively mendacious arises. If the prof you cited was approvingly claiming false rape accusations are a large problem (which is what you do) based on that truncated quotation, he is being dishonest. You are misinformed, deluded, or colluding in his dishonesty.
This isn’t going anywhere because you aren’t reading what we say. Is a false accusation of rape a bad thing? Yes. Is is common? No.
Should it be prosecuted? Yes.
Is it equal in scope to actual rape? No.
Your point, such as you have one, is that false rape accusations are a plague.
So, since you are being full of righteous indignation: what is your definition of a false rape claim.
And what is your definition of a valid one.
That way we can all be on the same page.
Wait, “Pierce” is a lawyer who also designs hotels? Why am I not surprised.
Also: a blog is not a law review, and a blog entry isn’t a law review article.
@ Harlan: Okay, the Potiphar’s wife passage was from “The Legacy of the Prompt Complaint Requirement, Corroboration Requirement, and Cautionary Instructions on Campus Sexual Assault” by Michelle Anderson. Let’s see what CrimProf blog thinks is a better source:
Several interesting articles on sexual assault. The first is by CrimProf Michelle J. Anderson of Villanova, one of the legal academy’s most perceptive and prolific scholars in this area. Her latest work The Legacy of the Prompt Complaint Requirement, Corroboration Requirement, and Cautionary Instructions on Campus Sexual Assault proposes a number of reforms to make institututional discipline more efficient. (CrimProf blogged an expose of UVa’s system). One startling point in the paper was that no reliable statistics exist on the frequency of false rape claims: “As a scientific matter, the frequency of false rape complaints to police or other legal authorities remains unknown.” (See pages 33-35). Professor Anderson’s conclusion is noteworthy in light of the often repeated claim of advocates that this information is known definitively: “false accusations account for only 2% of all reported sexual assaults. This is no higher than false reports for other crimes.” Although the article asserts that “no study has ever been published which sets forth an evidentiary basis for the ‘two percent false rape complaint’ thesis,” even universities repeat this statistic, and it shows up in such important venues as the legislative history of VAWA. Pub. L. 102-199, S. Rep. 102-197 n.48 (Oct. 29, 1991).
…
here were many, many more stories about actual sex crimes, and these anecdotes hardly show that false claims are common. The stories also may suggest that law enforcement successfully identifies most false claims
Oh, come the fuck on. You’re not even trying, are you?
sigh, I missed this:
Pecunium, all due respect, a little friendly advice: you write with the stick-up-her-ass pretensions of a Womyn’s Studies major. You ought to try writing like a human being. And try to understand that your world view is one not shared in the real world, or even in other departments at your college.
My college? Dude… I’m not in college. I’m a retired army interrogator. I’ve been a machinist, a studio projectionist, an ER security guard (in hospitals with psych-wards, where we had to leave our batons outside when we went it), a catered, and worked in pizzarias. I’ve seen a fair bit of “the real world”.
I’ve read the law, and I really like science, so I read papers, and popular articles.
And… I’m a man. Straight, white, cis, man.
I’ve got about an hour commute ahead of me, but I’m fascinated to see how Harlan spins this one.
ps: Pecunium- if you enjoy reading law papers, the Anderson piece looks excellent. I’ve never seen it before and I think that’s what I’m reading tonight.
And Harlan, with all due respect, a little friendly advice, my dear boy: Read the posts you reply to, so you can spot things like internal evidence for having read the papers cited (and note that the actual work is linked to), and take advantage of things like the hotlinks to people’s blogs, so things like, “in other departments in your college” don’t make you look sillier than your actual arguments.
Good luck with the suit, remember what is said about attorneys and clients.
Sharcluse: I have to pack… a move of 3,000 miles is imminent, and I’m procrastinating.
Hey, I’m back. Cat is petted, work is (well, somewhat) done, and I’ve eaten. So what’d I miss?
Oh, my. And well, well. It appears that there is some disagreement about who invented the elevator! Elisha Otis (a white man with a large beard) invented a steam-powered freight elevator in the mid-1800’s. But Alexander Miles -An AFRICAN-AMERICAN inventor- who also had a large beard, oddly enough, invented the automatic doors that made elevators more safe and convenient. And y’know, except for elevators in very old buildings, every single passenger elevator uses automatic doors these days.
So… Mr. Harlan, what’s your take on that? Should no woman fear men (of any color) with large beards, in elevators? Or should they not fear African-American men, in elevators? Before or after the automatic doors close? This is a conundrum, all right. I await your reply with Grey Poupon-baited breath.
And please don’t insult my intelligence by complaining about “baited” vs. “bated”. I know that. It’s a play on words, genius
NWOslave, you seem to hold several false beliefs about your adopted philosophy, false beliefs that you no doubt acquired during your years as an MRA. It is not a common feminist belief that women can do anything and everything that they want. That is however a common mischaracterization of feminism among MRAs, so I can see how you were mistaken, having so recently abandoned that belief system.
You might want to spend some time reading and listening to feminists, now that you do not view them as the enemy, you will likely learn a great deal about feminism. Then you can make an informed decision weather or not to identify as one.
Now, I want to be clear, I am glad to welcome you to feminism, but the posts you have made since your conversion belie a seriously flawed understanding of feminism.
Boo, NWO! Boring! Go back to describing your outfit!
Huh, so Harlan just stopped posting after it became clear he was talking out of his ass. Quelle surprise
Harlan, if you’re still checking this blog, seething in impotent rage (as is apparently your wont), could you answer a few questions for me:
1. Again, what is your area of practice?
2. Why do you post links to thinks you haven’t read and don’t understand?
3. If you’re such a lazy researcher, why should we take anything you say seriously?
Pecunium, I will be moving 300 miles in the near future. I can rent a moving van and drive the distance in six hours. I tremble at the thought of moving 3000 miles.
Johnny Pez: Happily, most of my things are in storage. I did a 400 mile move about a year ago. For lots of reasons (some having to do with the army) I have a lot of stuff which is coming out of storage for the first time in more than a decade when I get to New Jersey.
Then I can catalogue my books, set up my kitchen, etc.
But yes, I tremble.
Sharcluse: I’ll be it’s not libel.
XD
New Jersey, eh? I’ll be moving to eastern Pennsylvania.
MANBOOBZ MEETUP!
I’ll be it’s not libel.
Lol. I’m guessing something dry and boring like transactions or tax.
It can’t be crim. It was really funny when he started trying to swing his JDick around, because he either was counting on nobody knowing enough to contradict him or honestly believed he understood what he was talking about, but his definitions were beneath elementary. It read like someone who slacked up all semester and tried to make up for it by cramming a pre-prepared outline the night before his exam.
Marc: Elsewhere you complain about selective quotation. Sadly you can’t even manage that when you misrepresent a position.
Oh no, you again.
You did no such thing. One case doesn’t prove that, “men in general have nothing to fear”. It shows that in one case (out of how many?) a false accusation led to a miscarriage of justice.
This, If you make the claim “men in general have nothing to fear about false allegations” a single anecdote (or better: counterexample) is enough to disprove this claim. is not true.
Wrong, as usual, remember what he really said: “the reason that black men in our society are disproportionately blamed for sexual assaults is because they are a less privileged, disadvantaged group compared to men in general… Men in general, on the other hand, are more privileged and advantaged in our society than women. It is therefore nonsense to imagine that men in general are in danger of being falsely accused of sexual assault.”
Very wishy washy of course… so don’t complain about the interpretation of that…
Did he say “Yes, false allegation happen sometimes but in general they are rare”? No, of course not!
What he meant was something roughly like “Though black men and some other groups of men are not privileged, men in general are. So the chance that someone falsely accuses a man (who’s not from one of those discriminated groups) of rape is low because even genuine rape victims know the courts would probably not believe them and only convict him if there’s extremely strong evidence. So few women would try something as futile as a false rape accusation against a privileged white man.”
So one good counterexample (just remind you: there are many, many more, anyway) where a man cannot even defend himself against baseless, self-contradictory accusations, everybody is biased against him (the court that fist found him guilty was composed of three judges and two lay judges — if two of the five voted not guilty that would have meant a not-guilty verdict.) and his guilt is confirmed even by the highest court in Germany, should be enough to seriously challenge the idea that privileged men are favored by the courts.
It’s like when you say “XY is a good hospital” and I present a case where a patient suffered from an easily diagnosable and curable disorder, went to this hospital but then was treated very poorly by ten different doctors and ultimately died.
Of course, mistakes will always happen. But one mistake of this magnitude would cast serious doubts on the claim “XY is a good hospital”.
In general /= never Example, In general people who play craps lose to the house. Pointing out that someone won a lot of money in Vegas playing craps doesn’t invalidate it. Vegas, in fact, boasts of all the people who have made a big win. It’s how they get other people to come in and gabmle, because, in general people who come to Vegas lose.
No, very bad example, because the OP actually named the exceptions to the general rule. It’s more like:
Nitpicker: “The Platypus and the Echidna are mammals and lay eggs. But in general mammals don’t lay eggs.”
Me: “But what about this animal we lately discovered, it breastfeeds it’s youngs, lays eggs and is not a Platypus or an Echidna?”
Nitpicker: “So what? I only said in general! In general mammals don’t lay eggs, not never. What’s your problem?”
Marc: But put the prevalence issue aside: […]
Not at all. What […]
________________________
Please, at least try to learn how to quote…