The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive is on! Please consider donating through the PayPal button below. Thanks!
So yesterday I posted about the repulsive, rapey banners that some frat guys hung from the balcony of their frat at Old Dominion University in Virginia. Banners that were so obviously problematic that the school administration immediately suspended the frat to investigate.
Here. as a reminder, are the banners in question:
I also quoted Amanda Marcotte, who noted that, when faced with clear evidence of rape culture like these banners, rape apologists like to
suddenly pretend they are aliens from another planet and only learned human language last week and therefore are incapable of picking up on humor, implication, non-verbal communication and nuanced language. They pretend to ascribe to a form of communication so literal that even the slightest bit of metaphor or implication, to hear them talk, sends them spinning into a state of confusion.
After I put up my post yesterday, several rape culture deniers wandered into my Twitter mentions, as if to prove Marcotte’s point, posting pictures of banners put up by sorority women at the school and demanding to know why I wasn’t attacking these women for their alleged promotion of rape culture as well.
@DavidFutrelle HOW HORRIBL- … wait, what happens if i look to the right? ohhh i see … nice try :^) pic.twitter.com/ViClZV0RBu
— Dragunov (@NkDragunov) August 25, 2015
https://twitter.com/WoolyBumblebee/status/636343927914786817
I suspect most of you are as nonplussed by this as I was. Because these banners don’t actually promote rape culture. And not because the people holding them up are women, not men.
The frat’s banners have a creepy, predatory edge to them. They are addressed not to the incoming freshmen women, but to the fathers of these women. They strongly suggest that any woman who walks through their doors — or is “dropped off” by dad — is going to be shown a “rowdy … good time” whether she’s “ready” for it or not.
They don’t explicitly use the word “rape” but given how completely they erase the agency of the young women in question they might as well just do that.
The rape threat is implicit, not explicit, but it is clear enough that most people seeing these banners can understand in an instant what they “really mean” and what the problem is.
The banners held up by the sorority women are a different thing entirely. They don’t put forth the message: “we are going to do things to you (whether you like it or not).” They are playful, not threatening, and tell prospective dates “we like sex, and if you get with us you might even get to do ‘butt stuff.'”
The first banner only asks that men pull out before they come; no one wants any babies. The second tells men they are “welcome” to use the back door, nudge nudge. Instead of saying “we will do things to you,” they say “you can do things to us.” Presumably in the context of consensual sex.
Just as rape =/= sex, talking about sex =/= talking about rape.
Is it creepy that when new freshmen men arrive on the campus they’re greeted with giant banners aimed at them and laden with sexual innuendo? Maybe, but it’s nowhere near as creepy as banners greeting freshman women (and their mothers) with not-very-subtle threats of rape.
I tried to get this point across to one of my Twitter interlocutors, the antifeminist Youtube gadfly WoolyBumblebee; it didn’t take. Some excerpts of the ensuing “discussion.”
Rape threats, even implicit ones, are rape culture. Mentions of sex aren’t. You’d think this wouldn’t be hard to understand.
Does WoolyBumblebee really not understand that if someone says “you can put it in my butt” they are not threatening to rape you?
It might not be the appropriate thing to bring up at, say, a dinner party. And if you say it repeatedly to someone not interested in sex with you, it would be sexual harassment.
But it wouldn’t be a rape threat.
WoolyBumblebee more or less conceded this point shortly afterwards. And returned to claiming (or pretending) she didn’t see the threat in the banners posted by the frat guys.
Around and around we go!
Or we would have if I hadn’t gotten off the internet to watch an episode of Mr. Robot.
The question I am left with, as I generally am in the wake of “discussions” with those who seem to be incapable of understanding the basics of human language, is this: Are these people really this literal-minded and obtuse, or are they just pretending?
If the former, how exactly do they manage to even work a computer? Did they make bird noises at their laptop or into their phone for weeks on end before someone explained that’s not how Twitter works? Do they understand the difference between filing their nails and filing their taxes?
It’s gotta be an act, right?
This is for the trolls:
“Freshmen daughter drop off” is not talking to the freshmen (woman), it’s talking to her parent(s). So she is not part of the decision making. “Drop mom off too” is not talking to the mom (woman), it’s talking to dad/husband, leaving her out of the decision making. I cannot stress enough how horrible this makes women feel. I am not being addressed in a decision that involves where I am going, or rather where I am being put. My fate is up to this man or that man. I am a belonging. I am luggage to be dropped off.
Now obviously these stupid signs are not a demand I have to submit to or pay any attention to. I can come and go as I please. The language is a problem because of its IMPLICATIONS. Not literal danger.
“Freshmen son drop off” or “leave your baby boys here” “leave dad too” is more comparable but it doesn’t strike the same aggressive tone because we all know men collectively are not afraid of violence from women. Have I spelled it out or is the message still “harmless fun”?
@sevenofmine
So, suppose they re-phrased to: “Hey Dads, We can’t wait to have lots of Affirmatively Consensual Sex with your Daughters !!” ???
Still addressed to dads, but with the consent of the women explicitly referenced. A little better? Much?
Which yeah, Andrea Dworkin might have been a fuck in a billion horrible ways (especially with regards to trans people and those with disabilities) and have become the go-to MRA boogeyman, but she was 100% right about how misogynist culture views rape as a form of sex.
And yeah, seconding Film Runner on the Youtube series. They want to maintain the illusion of ignorance that a rapist is some scary poor brown man in the bushes or an alley somewhere who attacks the virginal white sex prize so some white man can have a big hero moment and receive his reward sex token rather than themselves or their buddies or their family members.
And they are angry that feminists are making it more and more impossible to do that by talking openly and honestly about what rape culture is and calling out what they thought were totally subtle insinuations as obvious bullshit. And that’s bringing them closer and closer to a realization that something they or someone they care about did might have been bad, like super bad and that therefore by the black-and-white thinking, they are a bad person. And bad people are the people they joke about being subhuman trash who deserve to be raped and murdered in prison and they and their friends certainly aren’t that, so the feminist needs to be shut up and laughed out of the room before that kind of treasonous talk catches on.
Which yeah, binary thinking might be the worst thing in the world for all this shit. Too many people get locked into bad or good without being aware that we do bad and good things all the time and are complicit in often bad systems simply by virtue of being born in our diseased culture. And they fail to rise above that or do anything to change things or to grow.
@ Ibis
If we’re being generous the specific reference to “‘Megan does butt stuff” and the implication therefore that the others don’t, suggests that they acknowledge that women can draw the line wherever *they* are comfortable; which presumably would include not wanting sex *at all*.
I know what you mean though.
It seems to me the rapers and apologists WANT sex to be demeaning, and lives “ruined”. The same people pretending rape culture doesn’t exist will also say the rape victim is damaged forever and their life ruined. Because women are less to them after sex or sexualization. They must be sexy at the same time, though. Then they are “doing it right” by not getting raped and “safe” in marriage. Bad things only happen to bad people and only bad people do bad things. Never them and theirs. Anything not to think or listen to what they don’t want to hear. Only self confirmation.
maghavan
I’m gonna go with “no, it’s not any better”. Addressing it to dads sort of gives the lie to the claim of caring about the women’s consent. If anything, it reads like mockery of the very idea of affirmative consent.
makingfitzcarraldo-
Yup.
Which is why the people who put on horse blinders with regards to the frat and rapists in society often also are the same people trading revenge porn and think that “slut” and “whore” are the ultimate in insults against women.
To their mind, being sexual as a woman is bad because they are trying to be “like men” instead of knowing their place. And rape is just a handy tool for reminding women and men who don’t get with the program what their place is.
@ makingafilmaboutdraggingaboat
Well isn’t that the whole point about rape? It’s all about power and subjugation, not sex.
Sometime I think that even if women were daft enough to enthusiastically consent to sex with such jerks they’d be horrified. The idea that a woman might have sexual agency and enjoy sex goes totally against their ideas that men should dominate, their will should prevail and women are there to be humiliated.
Late to the party (and apologies for the Wall ‘o TextTM), and most of Vetarnias’ points have been eloquently addressed by others, but I think there are a few minor(-ish) points that also need to be examined.
[emphasis mine]
Your assumption that Jessica Valenti in particular – and the implication that all people who protest against rape culture, in general – is more interested in “blaring” than in actually working to change the culture needs some evidence to back it up. Because here’s the thing: if you’re trying to fight against actual culturally-accepted injustices, railing against things that aren’t actually examples of that particular injustice is extremely counterproductive.
So are you implying that Jessica Valenti is stupid and/or ignorant, or are you implying that she’s just out for publicity rather than actually working for change? Because you’re certainly not implying that she’s a rational person speaking out against a legitimate injustice, because such a person would easily recognize that false reports about rape make the task of fighting against rape culture a lot more difficult.
And here you are, trying to use actions that are entirely consistent with a rational person speaking out against a legitimate injustice as your proof that she isn’t. That would be a neat trick if you could pull it off, but I’m not going to let that one slide by unnoticed.
Well, the actual answer to your rhetorical question is that the moral-conservative position against rape doesn’t have a hell of a lot to do with consent, given that a woman’s sexual history, sartorial choices, use of legal mind-altering substances, and choice of travel routes can – and have – all been used as a means of blaming a rape victim for her own rape.
But that’s not the point I want to address.
I find it hilarious that you bring up the Fatty Arbuckle case as a castigation against feminism, especially second-wave feminism. You are obviously so deeply ignorant of feminism, history, and the Fatty Arbuckle case itself that you’ve actually gone beyond the realm of “not even wrong” into “complete unintentional self-mockery.” Well done, xir.
[slow clap]
[And before you start whinging about how I’m not providing any evidence to back up my claims, why don’t you do a little research on both second-wave feminism and the Fatty Arbuckle case. Here’s a hint: it’s a bit like asking why the Borgias just allowed Gaius Marius to declare himself Emperor of Rome.]
[emphasis mine]
Except for the fact that actual lynch mobs kill people. Where are all those trees bearing the strange fruit of rape culture opponents’ wrath? Because I can easily point you to evidence and statistics documenting the victims of actual lynch mobs.
Remember what I said above about how railing against something that isn’t actually an example of the injustice you’re trying to fight is counterproductive? This kind of shit is in a similar vein. Your statement may not be a Godwin, but that’s only for lack of Nazis.
Oh, and in regards to
By all means, show me a prominent, credible feminist who is calling for anything but legal action against Cosby (not sure who “Allen” is referring to, though, so I’m leaving him(?) out of this).
Completely ignoring the “it’s worse there, so don’t talk about how bad it is here” bullshit that others have already called out, I want to address that “why aren’t you going over there to fight it, huh?” bit. I know others have touched on it, but this is so egregiously stupid that it bears repeating.
All of the Islamic jihadis that I’ve heard about use the claim that “Christians and Western countries are waging a crusade against Islam, and that all righteous muslims must join us in our glorious fight against the infidels” as a recruitment tool. If your enemy says “the Americans kill puppies to make Hot Pockets, so join our fight against this evil empire,” it seems really fucking stupid to look at your fellow Americans and say “we need to kill some puppies to make Hot Pockets. That’ll show ‘em.”
But maybe that’s just me.
…although given the quality of your other “arguments,” I suspect not.
@Alan
My interpretation of that particular statement was not as sanguine as yours. It’s not Megan herself saying what she’s into. It’s others speaking for Megan. She has not (necessarily) consented. So where does that leave her? Humiliated by her “sisters” or pressured to go along with the joke? What might happen at the next party when some guy who saw that sign as a permit gets Megan alone?
@Alan
Yup.
In fact, there’s a long tradition among rape denialists of being shocked and appalled at the fact that a woman they were planning on having sex with was interested and prepared for sexual encounters.
Ross Douthat is a particularly infamous incarnation of that, but it’s no less popular among other right-wing and MRA style communities.
See also when Gamergate jumped on the fact that Zoe Quinn used to do nude modeling as somehow complete mitigation and justification for their unending harassment and rape threats.
It’s a very up is down world where consensual sex is bad, but rape is good, because by dehumanizing a woman with your penis you prove your manliness and craftiness.
@ Ibis
Yet more evidence that feminists are in a conspiracy with Google to get more clicks! 😉
Do see your point there though. Yeah, wonder if Megan actually knows what’s been written.
There’s also a danger here. If there ever is a rape involving a member of that sorority then the defence will; have a field day with those banners. “Isn’t it true miss that you *love* anal sex?” etc.
One of the differences people have pointed out between the fraternity and sorority banners is that the women are “inviting”. Trouble is, it’s not a huge leap in a jury’s mind to go from ‘inviting’ to ‘asking for it’ (in every sense of the phrase).
It’s a tricky subject, especially for a man to talk about. I have no problem with women being joyously sexual beings and I don’t want to suggest “silly girls should think about the possible consequences”. If I say “I think such banners are perhaps unwise whilst rape culture is so prevalent; especially on campuses” am I falling into victim blaming? I would hope not but I could see how it could be interpreted that way.
Long time lurker here, coming out of the shadows with a message for Mongo, Gerry, Vetarnias, rv, and any other denialists/apologists.
*clears throat*
Shut.
The fuck.
Up.
… That is all.
Maybe you can’t fight physically, but there are other ways you could help the war effort.
I was just reading a story the other day that made a case that Internet Trolls are our first line of defense in the war against ISIS. ISIS has been doing heavy on-line recruiting efforts, and that’s made them vulnerable. A dedicated troll can set up dozens of sock-puppet accounts saying e.g., “I’m a 16-year-old girl and I want to be a Jihad Bride, I just need money for a plane ticket and maybe some snacks at the airport. My parents are already suspicious so don’t try to contact me directly.” The only limit is your imagination.
Can I ask why you’re wasting your time trolling us, when you could be trolling ISIS instead? I bet it’s because you’re an ISIS supporter yourself, and also you hate all forms of architecture. Shame on you!
@ Chaos Engineer
Oh my!! I’ve been trying desperately to think of a dissertation subject for an M.Litt I’m meant to be doing in Terrorism Studies. I wonder if they’d let me do that. You know, how some people tease forward free fraudsters? Or if I’m trying to be more academic, like that lad who befriended all the serial killers by writing to them in prison pretending to be a fan.
reading all of this I’d lean towards deliberately obtuse with a big side of aggrieved entitlement as in ‘I don’t want to have to think for a moment how what I do or say affects another human being and I’ll get angry and defensive if asked to do so.”
@Tessa
Good point.
@Moggy
OMG! I fucking love Katharina Fritsch’s Elefant! She’s probably secretly a super samurai, since no one else could catch one of the legendary ninja warriors of the mythical Jade Elephants clan.
Katharina Fritsch?
Okay, that joke was so bad that I’m just going to go cry in a corner.
@FreddyMurray
Well said. Also, welcome! Help yourself to a Welcome Package!
https://artistryforfeminismandkittens.wordpress.com/the-official-man-boobz-complimentary-welcome-package/
“[And before you start whinging about how I’m not providing any evidence to back up my claims, why don’t you do a little research on both second-wave feminism and the Fatty Arbuckle case. Here’s a hint: it’s a bit like asking why the Borgias just allowed Gaius Marius to declare himself Emperor of Rome.]”
And I’d argue that you’re dead to sarcasm. But no, better to tar someone who disagrees with you with a charge of ignorance that second-wave feminism came a few decades after the incident in question. (Uh, also, just in case that’s unintentional, Gaius Marius never was Emperor.)
“Except for the fact that actual lynch mobs kill people. Where are all those trees bearing the strange fruit of rape culture opponents’ wrath?”
No, to go for their lives would just be too crude, nowadays. What they do nowadays is go after their reputations and livelihoods. Get them fired (while ironically complaining about the pervasive influence of capitalism over people’s lives). Disparage their professional skills (like the dentist who killed that lion). And if someone killed themselves over the endless accusations of rape, I wouldn’t be surprised if some people were cheering at the news.
“not sure who “Allen” is referring to”
You know, the dweeb with glasses who can’t stop making films starring himself to show how neurotic he is. Ms. Valenti, writing at The Nation, went into all the prerequisite “we know” to demonstrate that he was statistically guilty.
“If your enemy says “the Americans kill puppies to make Hot Pockets, so join our fight against this evil empire,” it seems really fucking stupid to look at your fellow Americans and say “we need to kill some puppies to make Hot Pockets. That’ll show ‘em.””
Because what you’re mostly concerned about, when facing a rabble enacting, as religious tenets, rape and slavery and wanton destruction of buildings whose crime it was to predate Islam by a few centuries if not millennia, is the blemish it would make on your PR campaign if you launched a military operation against them?
They are nothing less than a threat to Civilization, capital C, and you’re stuck with pangs of guilt because you bought wholesale Dubya’s fibs about WMDs a decade ago? Yeah, that was a mistake then, and this is the situation now. If you let them consolidate their power, they will be a geopolitical threat before long. This isn’t Iran. Iran knows the stakes of the nuclear-level geopolitical game. The Islamic State doesn’t care, and that’s what makes it dangerous; it is as rogue a state as it’s likely to become.
“The Islamic State argument is precisely why we have a different definition of rape: you seem to think that rape is a stranger forcing women by gunpoint in a dark alley or in a “savage land” (because, let’s be honest, this argument is incredibly racist). White frat boys making disgusting jokes about women as property to be raped are not excused by pointing at other areas of the world, of which you have heard one thing through the media and basically know nothing, and saying that those primitive assholes are much worse.”
And now, the old inevitable part where I’m accused of racism. Didn’t Rupert Murdoch say back in the day (and of course we all are beholden to Rupert Murdoch for anything we think, right?) when he was promoting that silly Biblical film of his that Egyptians were whites? Well, if Egyptians qualify, why not the entire Middle East? Not that I care: You brought the word “primitive” into it; I didn’t.
Oh yeah, and I’m not even American. Don’t judge me by those standards.
Oops, sorry for getting your username wrong, Moggie.
Vetarnias – blimey, that was a load of jumbly rant. Concise and clear points are always better!
This is the second person in two days to compare Bush’s false pretense for war to caring about consent and fighting rape culture. Is this the new rape apologist talking point?
@300baud:
So, an MRA version of Morton’s Demon?
Okay, I seem to have somehow missed Vetarnias’s comment right between my two comments. Not that it matters, though. Seconding Ellesar: What the hell are you on about, Vetarnias? Your rant is a mess.
Okay, this I got:
*Deep sigh*
Being fired =/= being lynched. Your life is not over if you’re fired. Being (rightfully) socially shunned for being a rapist or for other crime =/= being persecuted and murdered for the “crime” of belonging to a marginalized group. If you’re acting like an asshole, you should not expect being treated like anything else but. What the hell kind of overtly melodramatic upside down fantasy land are you living in, where people treating others like shit are the innocent victims?
And it wouldn’t be ironic if anti-capitalists were fine with someone continuing in a position of monetary power despite them showing exactly what kind of a person power and privilege makes them? Disagreeing with capitalism =/= letting people high in the capitalist hierarchy get away with assholish behavior. On the contrary, I think capitalism exists for the prime reason of forcing decent people to be nice to and continue to interact with assholes. In a more equal system, assholes would have to learn to get along with decent people, not the other way around.
I love how you just assume that the accusations are baseless, despite them being, as you said, endless, significantly reducing the probability that they’re false. If you believe Cosby to be innocent and that all the women coming forth are lying, why do you think that is? It’s rather telling that you side with the poor, poor rapists every chance you get.
BTW, for some reason, I doubt a rapist would resort to suicide very easily. It’s something in a rapist’s mindset, where others exist for them to dominate. I could be wrong, though.
Probably just as well as you’ve argued your other points. I’m not worried.
Try four decades.
Since second-wave feminism is a political movement, even if some people who later became second-wave feminists were alive and out of diapers then, they weren’t second wave feminists. Not even “precocious” ones.
I’m not “tarring you with an accusation of ignorance,” I’m pointing out instances of your ignorance. And given the ignorance you’ve displayed so far, I’m unsurprised you can’t tell the difference.
And Fatty Arbuckle was never convicted of rape in a court of law, which is why I chose Gaius Marius for that analogy.
I’m sure every last one of them would much rather have been strung up by the neck while still alive, castrated, doused in gasoline, and set on fire.
Yeah, I’m dead to sarcasm, all right.
And you’re dead to reason, empathy, and perspective.
And incidentally, all those “moral-conservative” folks you were talking about regarding Fatty Arbuckle? They engaged in exactly the behavior you’re describing here: going for his livelihood. So the whole Fatty Arbuckle thing is a huge own-goal on your part, as far as your argument goes.
Which is why that whole bit of your rant is freaking hilarious.
Ah, Woody Allen; thank you. He really did completely slip my mind.
I’ll gladly expand my request to include any instances of prominent feminists calling for illegal retaliation against him as well as Cosby.
No. But you probably shouldn’t give your enemies a free PR boost, because that would be really fucking stupid.
Which was my point.
Which you obviously didn’t get.
Which is unsurprising, given scope of the ignorance you’ve displayed so far.
Besides, I’m not arguing that military intervention with ISIS is a bad, I’m arguing that civilian intervention – you know, the kind you explicitly called for – was a bad idea.
You really don’t get this whole “reading” thing, do you?
Not to mention the related “typing” thing. Seriously, what a gigantic mess that post is. It’s so obtusely worded. I commend those of you who’ve actually managed to articulate coherent replies to it!