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?
I’m sure he thought that dumbass transphobic “Joke” was some amazing gotcha, but it just tells me he knows as much about neurobiology* as he does about… Well… Everything else.
*Actual biology, trolly. Not whatever biotroofs that word makes you want to vomit up.
“But to people who’d gladly have Trump as president, and want him more the worse he gets.”
We’re already very much aware of the backlash against “political correctness”, which is really a backlash against the loss Het, or white, or male privilege. Marginalized groups have always had to deal with the “political correctness” of avoiding threatening those that are more dominate than us lest we be fired or cast out in the street or whatever. Now that things are starting to even out, privileged groups are starting to have to consider others feelings as well, and oh boo hoo hoo, they bitch that it sucks.
The backlash doesn’t matter to us, because the only alternative is to sit back and allow ourselves to be oppressed. I actually hope Trump wins the primaries, or better yet runs as a 3rd party, because while most the country thinks he’s a joke, he’s popular enough to sink the Republican Party.
You have a fair point that PRIVATE political opinions, votes, etc. should not be a basis for work discrimination. Keep in mind that posting something on social media, or making a public donation, is not private.
Lastly, boring troll is boring. I vote that we refuse to discuss anything other than WTF was up with L’ananas from Telefrancais with him. 🙂
@Pandapool
Quebec is culturally and linguistically French, so a good portion of the people living there don’t identify with the majority culture.
2.
And glad I refreshed, or andiexist woulda ninja’d me.
@Mewens
I’ve seen it go from 1 to 1 before. 😛
3
Rapey assertion.
Honestly, I have nothing more to say to our dear troll. He’s going off now on a self-martyrdom whinge, and I want nothing to do with that.
“Oh, we oppressed cishet white males are the VICTIMS of you with lesser privileges (except you have the same privileges as white cishet dudes, obviously)! You’re all conning us into feeling sorry for you, you shrieking harpies of Political Correctness!”
3.
@PI
Alas, we are back to
1
2
I’m going to take a bit different tack than usual here… So, if someone legally changed their name from “Samuel” to “William”, maybe their name is really still “Samuel”? Regardless of what one thinks of gender issues, referring to someone by a name they don’t like and no longer use is the height of disrespect and rudeness.
Of course, maybe you live in a reality where it’s fine to diss people for not conforming to your expectations. In that case, medical technology is proceeding at a rapid pace. It’s now possible to “print” functioning organs from made from a patient’s own stem cells. What happens if, at some point in the future, transwomen get functioning uteri and ovaries? How about changing their genes from XY to XX, assuming they’re not already among the rare few whose genetics don’t match their physical development? Hell, as long as we’re looking far ahead, what about subtly altering their bone structure? Are you still going to go with that “birth is destiny” line of thinking then?
3!
4
5
I would, yes. The danger of all this technology being used for disgusting purposes is too high to ignore. Not that I like the rigidity of the Catholic position on such matters, but at least it’s consistent.
So, giving a donation to a registered political party is enough grounds for getting fired from a job? Any job?
@andiexist
IDK how I feel about that. It’s like when certain people who live in certain places in the States say they aren’t apart of the United States.
6–oh, shit, refreshed the main page and was just a bit too slow.
“So, giving a donation to a registered political party is enough grounds for getting fired from a job? Any job?”
Yeah, well what if you’re working as an advisor for Trump, and you’re donating funds to Biden on the side? Well what then? LOL corner, gotcha, lol.
Basically, if you’re donating funds in a public manner, and the company thinks that you’re damaging their image in some way, sure, they should be able to fire you. I hate to break it to you, but long ago I learned not to discuss things like rape culture (or religion!) at work. It would be a whole different matter if these things were done in private, and the company had to spy to find out. That’s why private voting is a right in the US, because there’s always been social consequences to having an unpopular opinion.
@Pandapool
Ours mostly seem to think that whatever they’re trying to do will return everyone to the True Republican Way™ when women and minorities Knew Their Place. I think Quebec has a lot more reason than they do, since Quebec actually is part of a different cultural group, rather than just acting like they *aren’t* just taking various nasty bits of the dominant culture to their illogical extreme. : P
Tl;dr it’s complicated and I’m not the best one to explain it, given that I’m just politics-interested and don’t actually live there.
7
6
Aw, fuck.
Drat.
1
TIL that donating to a political party is the same equivalence as rape.
@andiexist
I can see that, but on the other hand, I feel that kinda mentality can breed hatred and superiority, ya know? Oh, we’re not like the rest of Canada, we’re French and so Canadian stuff doesn’t apply. Meanwhile they’re still as horrible and racist against American Natives and shit as the rest of Canada, ya know, except it’s in French and likely even more xenophobic because they don’t consider other Canadians to be like themselves even though they live in the same country.
We don’t need to divide shit on cultural lines.
Also, back to 1.
Outside of Canada people are usually unaware that Quebec has a history of wanting to annex from Canada. However, there isn’t a majority of support for it in Quebec so. . .
People weren’t deliberately laughing at your inability to be free from Canada, they just thought you were being overly specific about where you live. Although I suspect your rage was more of a “gotcha! you guys are just as racist as the people you complain about!” than actual offence. . .
Aside from that I really have nothing to add, this troll is pretty awful and doing whatever they can to deflect from any reasonable discussion of rape culture all while trying to make feminists out to be the problem. Whatever, dude.
Lurker here, I just wanted to chime in on the point that Dodom made about Quebec because I’m also Canadian and I’ve never heard that claim before. Personally I’m not sure how a Francophone province that kept its nationality and language and culture after the British took control, in a country where French is the second national language and where French cultural events like Festival du Voyageur are celebrated in other provinces counts as “your national identity is invalid”. (I realize my examples could easily be taken as tokenism but both Dodom and Vetarnias seem to be heavily implying Quebecois are an oppressed minority rather than just a minority and that doesn’t seem the case to me.)
@Panda
There’s a fairly large secessionist movement in Quebec that wants to leave Canada because of it’s French history…which fair enough, they never lost that identity and if that’s what they want then they do have in my opinion a solid ground for their argument. But some of them, like Vetarnias here can be pretty obnoxious in general and I wouldn’t be surprised if they are getting hostile responses because of his crap and assuming it’s because of his nationality instead. (The First Nations imo have a much stronger claim to independence because, y’know, the whole country only exists because of the treaties signed with the British explicitly recognizing signing Nations as such)
Ah, so there’s only certain people who want to annex from Canada. I wonder if they’re similar to our dear Vetarnias?
Back to 1.