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?
@ Paradoxy
Speaking of dictionary definitions and the OED, I meant to recommend this book to you earlier. You seem to enjoy the macabre so it might be right up your street. It is a great book.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Surgeon-Crowthorne-Madness-Dictionary/dp/0140271287
@Alan: Oooooh~
I do love me some macabre! Thanks for the reccomendation. I’ll put it on my list of “books to buy when I have money”. ^__^;;
To take a brief break from the troll, latest Hugo development:
Because my candidate did not win, I will sue. SUEEEEEEEEE.
http://www.jimchines.com/2015/08/a-possible-unifying-event-re-the-hugos/
Do not call me an American. I am a Californian.
Do not call me a Californian. I am a Sacramenterian.
Then I am afraid you understand nothing of the reality of belonging to a cultural and linguistic minority in a country that routinely ignores or detests you.
@vetarnias
I read a lot of unedited writing from various authors whose main language is not English. You make none of their odd mistakes. Congratulations!
Ooh, now none of the authors that I’ve read whose main language is not English are defensive about their writing. They understand that they make mistakes and are happy to receive direction.
Someone made an interesting point on another blog:
You don’t get to tell us not to be offended by a threatening poster and try to gaslight us about rape culture being in our heads and expect any sensitivity from us and tell us we don’t know what it’s like to be in a despised demographic.
@ Paradoxy
It could almost be another bingo thing.
Other things that make me suspicious are not just when suddenly people announce they are in fact black lesbians is the use of language. I know many people will identify as “of colour” etc. but sometimes the terminology is just a little *too* pat; like someone has called central casting and asked for “social justice warrior” if that makes sense.
Another variation I’ve spotted is for trolls to use language that might lead one to think they’re actually a woman etc. but without explicitly stating it. People will accommodate this in their responses but eventually the troll will announce “Oh, I am a man. I never said otherwise”
This kind of troll crops up a LOT in feminist spaces that I’ve seen. Hell, we had one like this the other day on the Male Feminist thread where the troll claimed to suddenly be a black woman of color and then tried to use that as a shield after we called them out for being shitty.
And that’s one of the key hints to me that someone might not be who they say they are: They think they are above reproach simply for existing in a marginalized group, and that’s from a shitty straw-feminist argument that anti-feminists level at feminists: “You think this person is above reproach because they’re [insert marginalized group here]!”.
Granted, this could just be someone who is extremely naive, but I usually only see it from trolls.
Shit, wasn’t that the exact wording Had To Be Said used?
If you’re all that doubtful of who I am, why not just look me up? I’ve been using the same handle for years.
I love how that BE BISMARCK @einsteinbeyond asshole responds on your twitter by saying he doesn’t believe in it or has seen any proof. Basically proving your point on these little shits. Ahh, misogyny. Hate it or hate it.
SFHC, it’s damn near a direct quote. There was an unbearable smugness of being that accompanied it, too; I think he was pleased that he got one over on anyone.
Vet, no one’s doubting that you’re from Quebec. Try to keep up.
I think Vetarnias is making a pretty good argument for deliberately obtuse.
… *grins* Ooh, is it my birthday? I love a good game of Troll Google. Let’s see if I can get the double blockquotes to work properly.
Ahahaha you’re an idiot.
I hate it when people complain about men being falsely accused. I’m not saying being falsely accused is ok but men have a WAY higher chance of being raped than being falsely accused. When you constantly talk about false accusations not only female victims but male victims as well will have a difficulty time coming forward because they think no one will believe them.
Oh. Huh. We have a troll. Lovely.
@PI
Same reason that the troll on the male feminist post got really annoyed at me for suggesting they read the comments policy. I think it’s a troll thing.
@ Fruitloopsie
Here’s some stuff I looked up trigger warning just in case.
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/04/male_rape_in_america_a_new_study_reveals_that_men_are_sexually_assaulted.html
https://rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims
http://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/
And brain bleach
http://stuffpoint.com/dogs/image/108948/very-cute-picture/
Argh! The blockquote gods are angry.
I blame SFHC for trying to double blockquote. Does Hubris mean nothing to you!!!!
Then I’ll gladly be an idiot if I can prevent the likes of you from throwing your weight around.
Presumably, you’re fine with getting people fired from companies because it’ll keep pressure on people to behave?
Let me refine my argument: Either it’s the government which limits free speech, or it’s shriekfucks like you. I’ll take the government.
What weight? What powers do you imagine the WHTM commentariat has?
Alan Robertshaw
“Argh! The blockquote gods are angry.”
Quick! You must post pics of kitties to please the gods if it doesn’t work then look on the bright side it cheers me up.