Link

From my blog: tenderhooligan.wordpress.com.

If you haven’t read this piece already, you should now: Gang-rape woman arrested during trial, following overdose.

The linked piece concerns a woman who was gang-raped by three men and who had to stand in front of them in court and identify them. She was later arrested for not turning up to court again. Unsurprisingly, she self-harmed because she couldn’t cope with what was happening to her. The three accused men have since been acquitted. After the victim’s arrest, Mr Justice Carney said: ‘If she has to spend a long time in prison herself waiting for a re-trial that’s her fault.’ Yes, really. A spokesperson for the Rape Crises Centre (Ellen O’Malley) criticised the trial process, ‘As making the complainants “feel they are the ones on trial and not the accused”.’ O’Malley went on to say, ‘This system in our opinion is very imbalanced and needs radical reform. As a result Ireland has one of the highest attrition rates for rape and sexual assault cases in Europe.’

But it’s not on its own. The clear up rates for rape and sexual assault cases in England and Wales are equally low. The attrition to which O’Malley refers starts right after the attack takes place when women are too frightened to report it, for reasons that should be obvious to anyone. If they do report it, it may not be recorded and pursued by the police as a offence that can be tried. And that’s before anything even. reaches a courthouse where the horrific tales of victim-blaming, brutal cross-examination, and even threats from the crowd and blatant intimidation, are numerous. O’Malley is right when she says that rape victims too often feel that they are the people on trial. Clear-up rates for rape cases in England and Wales hover around the 5% mark. That means that there is only a 5% chance of a rapist being convicted for his crime.

Anyone who has been on the feminist blogosphere this week has heard about uniLad. This is a site that is run by male students (“affectionately” known as “LADs”) and seems to be something of a “tip” site for getting laid. Except it’s not. Observe this little beauty:

‘If the girl you’ve taken for a drink… won’t “spread for your head”, think about this mathematical statistic: 85% of rape cases go unreported. That seems to be fairly good odds.’

Read more (link to source). 

Text

SlutWalk: reactions, responses and comments

Post from my blog (tenderhooligan/ wordpress)

I have yet to go through and read most of these but, for your information, here is a list of several reactions to and comments upon the recent “SlutWalks”, which have taken place in various locations (originally in Toronto). For those of you who don’t know, SlutWalk came about as a response to a police officer in Toronto saying that women who don’t want to be raped should not dress like “sluts”. I know! One wonders how anything is ever going to change in the face of such victim-blaming.

Anyway, here is a list of pieces (some for, some against) about SlutWalk, diligently compiled by feministfrequency (thank you!).

If you’ve been following the feminist blog-o-sphere there has been a lot of talk about “SlutWalk”. SlutWalk has become a mini-movement that was originally conceived in Toronto in response to a police officer who claimed that women should stop dressing like “sluts” to avoid assault. The folks in Toronto were rightfully upset, as the police officer’s comment is an unfortunate example of the victim blaming that assault survivors are subjected to on a regular basis. Out of the controversy, Heather Jarvis and Sonya JF Barnett co-founded SlutWalk, a Toronto based march to end “slut-shaming” and victim blaming. This has spawned numerous follow-up marches that are happening globally in cities such as Vancouver, Boston, London, San Francisco, Melbourne and Los Angeles etc.

Because of the controversial nature of the name, SlutWalk has gotten quite a lot of press, there have been many debates, interviews, articles etc.  While the conversations have ranged from useful dialogue to outright horrible much of the framing of the conversation has been shaped by the supporters of SlutWalk (such asHeather Jarvis and Jaclyn Friedman, co-editor of Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power & a World Without Rape). It seems that Gail Dines (author ofPornland: How Porn has Hijacked our Sexuality) has been one of the only feminists repeatedly invited on TV and radio shows to serve as the counterpoint.

I have been quite vocal in my little internet space about my strong dislike forSlutWalk, for the name and for the unstrategic organizing which sadly, seems to ignores the systemic and institutional issues of rape culture, victim blaming and well, radical feminism.  It is easy to be swept up in the excitement and momentum of SlutWalk and not take a critical look at what the message really is that’s coming out of these marches.  After listening to a series of interviews and reading a handful of articles, I began feeling alienated within feminism because as Meghan Murphy points out, “… embracing the word slut sounds, to me, a lot like we’ve all drank the systematic kool-aid.”  Luckily, through Facebook and Twitter I found several feminists and allies who do not support SlutWalk for a variety of reasons.  I want to highlight some of the counterpoints and some of the voices that are not being amplified.

Read More

Link

Post from my blog (tenderhooligan/ wordpress).

Ok, yes, I possibly have been on the Interbets all week. Here’s some of what’s been happening:

• It’s quite unbelievable, still, that France passed the “Ban on the Burka” law last week, but it did. Needless to add, there was outrage. The irony of telling women that they’re not allowed to wear what a patriarchal culture tells them to wear is not lost on Sarkozy, I’m sure, even if he is brainless. You cannot beat oppression with oppression. (Though we shouldn’t fool ourselves that Sarkozy et al were thinking of the women at all here. No, this is thinly veiled - pun intended - Islamophobia at its best.) And as if it’s not offensive enough as it is, the Guardian reported that refusing to comply with the ban will result in a fine or a condition to have lessons in “French citizenship”. Arrange the following words in a sentence: off, fuck. Within hours of the ban coming into force, women were being arrested for continuing to wear the veil. Well, you would wouldn’t you! There are several excellent blog posts around the Interweb which discuss this issue in much more detail than I do here: thefword, delilah-mj, msmagazine, and lattelabour for starters.

Budget 2011 leaves women out in the cold (fawcettsociety). The 2011 budget spells trouble for women in Britain. There’s been talk for a some time now of how the vast array of cuts introduced by the coalition government will affect women, and the picture is now becomnig clearer. First, a piece from the Guardian reveals that job losses have affected women the most and, second, a report produced in partnership with the Fawcett Society (‘The Impact on Women of the Budget 2011’) highlights the following issues. It is not looking good.

- The current economic strategy looks set to undermine gender equality in the labour market: if current trends continue, more women than men in the UK will be unemployed, for the first time since records began. - The bonfire of regulations will remove the protections that women and men with caring responsibilities need in order to be able to work. - The increase in the Personal Tax Allowance threshold will not touch the most vulnerable, and among those who will benefit, men will gain £140 million more than women. - Without action to tackle entrenched gender inequality within the apprenticeship sector, where women earn on average 21 per cent less than men, the Government’s flagship expansion in apprenticeships and training opportunities will not improve the employment opportunities young women face and do nothing for older women. - The businesses set to benefit most from new tax breaks and other incentives are typically owned and invested in by men while schemes to support women in business are scrapped.

• The Ivory Coast standoff ends, but the nightmare for women continues (msmagazine). Most mornings when I wake up, I’m inclined to be rather discontent with my lot for a few minutes before I come to (I’m tired, it’s cold, I have too much to do; that sort of thing). Reading about the women in the Ivory Coast reminds me that I don’t even know I’m born. Though the conflict in the Ivory Coast has come to an end now, women and girls there are still being persecuted (kidnapped, beaten up and raped) daily. They’ve been through all of this before in 2004 and they’re going through it all again. And we don’t know the half of it.

Pender [a gender-based violence Technical Advisor for IRC] conveyed reports from women of gang rapes, rapes of entire families and sexual slavery, as women and girls are “taken as wives” for weeks at a time. “These women have experienced things that we cannot even imagine–and many for the second time,” said Pender. The collective memory of rape and violence from the last Ivorian war, in 2004, is still fresh. In fact, the recollection of “what happened last time,” and the threat of new violence has driven many girls and women to flee.

• Finally, Americans seem to [want to] forget slavery (prospect). When a research centre asked why the American Civil War took place, a frightening number of respondents answered that they thought it was about the rights of states. The reason for the war is disputed, of course, but even I (a European) know that slavery was as central a reason as any other.

That so many young Americans believe a revisionist account of the Civil War is, if anything, another sign of our collective refusal to deal with our difficult past. Slaves built the White House and fueled Wall Street, but we want nothing more than to forget slavery and the central role it played in our nation’s history.

Couple this finding with the recent revisionist adaption of Huckleberry Finn (to remove the n-word) and one wonders if America wants to forget all about its sordid past altogether. I hope not.

Link

Life after Haiti’s earthquake has been especially difficult and dangerous for displaced women and girls. In addition to the ongoing crises of homelessness and cholera, a chronic emergency of sexual violence prevails in the settlements where hundreds of thousands still live, well over a year after the disaster.

Groups of Haitian women have been struggling to defend themselves, banding together to prevent assaults and now taking their case to a wider world. At a hearing March 25 in Washington before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, a grass-roots group, Kofaviv, joined other human-rights advocates in pressing for an end to what they called a rape epidemic. The police, they said, rarely patrol inside unlighted camps or investigate attacks. Victims live in constant fear and shame while attackers go unpunished.

Their evidence, compiled in a wrenching petition delivered to the commission last fall, led the commission to demand urgent action by Haiti to protect its women and girls. The Haitian government, beset by political and other crises, has failed to do its job. But others, including the United Nations, the United States and other international donors and aid agencies, can and must do more.

Text

Rape is not a compliment

petitefeministe:

Rape is not a compliment

TRIGGER WARNING: RAPE

As the bafflingly tenacious power of religion proves, humans like stories that help them make sense of the world, even if the stories themselves make not a jot of sense. The belief that life is part of a divine plan in which one’s fate will be what one deserves will always hold more allure than the idea that life is just a series of random incidents with no guarantee of a happy ending, no matter how good a person you are.

This inability of humankind to bear very much reality explains how one clearly ridiculous story still has a purchase on the public imagination: that rape has something to do with desirability.

The terrible story of Delroy Grant, the serial sex attacker who was given life imprisonment last week after terrorising at least 203 elderly people, offered much jaw-dropping horror for newspapers to chew over: the police blunders that let Grant continue his attacks; the unimaginable trauma he inflicted on his victims; the fact that many of them died before Grant was brought to justice. But these facts weren’t enough for some papers and they focused on something else, something that seemed to confirm to them Grant’s depravity at least as much as his actions: that he chose to rape the elderly. London’s Evening Standard, for one, felt that this was so extraordinary that it merited its own little article in the middle of its double-spread report of the case, expressing “bafflement” at a “family man’s sexual attraction to the elderly”.

Now, one might think that Grant’s victims had suffered enough without the British press gasping that it’s a marvel anyone would want to have sex with them, even a rapist, and especially a seemingly normal “family man”. But this response is borne out of the still all-too prevalent belief – sometimes subconscious, sometimes less so – that sexual attacks are the expression of untrammelled desire and, ergo, the victim in some way has to be desirable, which brings us back to ye olde hoary chestnut of the victim being in some way at fault.

One doesn’t need to look too far for examples of this attitude. In fact, one could look to New Delhi where, according to a survey conducted last year, almost a third of women have been physically harassed by men. This, according to Ranjana Kumari, a leading women’s rights advocate, speaking to the New York Times, is because of the “tension between the people who are traditional in their mindset and the city that is changing rapidly”. Confirming Kumari’s diagnosis, the mother of one man recently accused of gang-raping a young woman told the same newspaper, “If these girls will roam around like this, then the boys will make mistakes.”

The New York Times itself fell into this trap earlier this month when reporting the story about 18 men who were charged with gang-raping an 11-year-old girl in an abandoned trailer home. The little girl, the paper noted, “dressed older than her age, wearing makeup and fashions more appropriate to a woman in her 20s. She would hang out with teenage boys at a playground …” HANGING OUT with boys?! Well, the little slut was asking for it.

It’s easy to dismiss this mentality as being limited to those whose view of women tends to the prehistoric end of the gender-relations spectrum. I did, until a few weeks ago when I had what I would describe as a minor stalker issue – minor, although by the third day, the increasingly weird hourly texts and late-night doorbell ringing really had begun to lose their charm.

I told as many people as possible about it, particularly people who see me most days, just to be safe. I told them the full story of how I’d met this person, his phone number and how many times he had emailed to tell me he’d made another painting of my face. Everyone was very sympathetic, but five times out of 10, their first question was, “So did you sleep with him?” Now, I could take it as a compliment that 50% of the seemingly sensible people who know me think that my sexual skills are such that I could cause a man to become mentally ill. But this would require extra-strength blinkers to stop me from seeing the obvious truth that this non-compliment contains within the hard nugget of misogyny – namely, that women who are sexually harassed have brought it on themselves, either through their looks or behaviour.

It seems extraordinary in a week when another woman, Eman al-Obeidi, told journalists in Libya that she had been raped and beaten by members of Gaddafi’s militia that one needs to say that sexual attacks have nothing to do with desire, but are about the abuse of power, sadism and mental illness. They have nothing to do with the looks of the victim, contrary to what Hollywood movies suggest, in which rape victims are always attractive and usually blond. (Al-Obeidi told journalists, before Gaddafi’s forces dragged her away screaming, that she had been raped by 15 men “and they defecated and urinated on me”. I’m guessing she did not feel flattered.)

This is why Delroy Grant’s targeting of the elderly was, while shockingly cruel, not perverted in the way some papers seemed to think: old people are vulnerable, therefore irresistible to someone who gets off on torturing the helpless. Rape and sexual harassment are not compliments doled out only to the beautiful and alluring. They are an extreme form of bullying, and they can, tragically, happen to anyone.

Link

woodlandcreature:

A Libyan woman burst into the hotel housing the foreign press in Tripoli on Saturday morning in an attempt to tell journalists that she had been raped and beaten by members of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s militia. After struggling for nearly an hour to resist removal by Colonel Qaddafi’s security forces,she was dragged away from the hotel screaming….

A wild scuffle began as journalists tried to interview, photograph and protect her. Several journalists were punched, kicked and knocked down by the security forces, working in tandem with people who until then had appeared to be hotel staff members. Security officials destroyed a CNN video camera and seized a device that a Financial Times reporter had used to record her testimony….

A woman on the staff shouted: “Why are you doing this? You are a traitor!” and briefly put a coat over Ms. Obeidy’s head.

So scary and depressing. The journalists over in Libya right now are doing extremely important work and they’re incredibly brave for putting their own lives in danger to tell people’s stories.

I also can’t believe a woman would consider another woman a “traitor” for telling people she had been raped. What happens when they attack her, or her sister, or her mother next?

This is the most frightening and upsetting story I have heard in a long time. Re. your question woodlandcreature: fear, indoctrination, misguided loyalty? All could leader to lead to the woman shouting as she did.

Link

Simmons believes that history provides some of the answers. “We have a legacy of black men being painted as rapists. From the murder of Emmett Till and the Scottsboro trials, black men have been unjustly lynched or jailed for doing something as innocent as winking at a white woman,” she explains.” And so to counter all of this, we feel that we have to prove the myth wrong by saying ‘No, black men don’t rape,’ but sometimes they do, and because we want to protect them, we choose to say nothing and blame the woman.”

So if we reject the stereotypes about black men being brutal black bucks who want to savagely rape white women, it means that we accept the jezebel stereotypes about black women. “Black women [have been seen] as oversexed and promiscuous, [which] makes many people extremely insensitive to black female victims,” says Imani Perry, an associate professor of African-American studies at Princeton University.

And while, in 2011, African Americans no longer worry about public lynchings, we are consumed with fear about the prison industrial complex and an unfair American legal system. In the minds of some black folks, speaking out about rape means handing over our men to the oppressive “system.” Therefore we make a conscious (or unconscious) decision to sacrifice women’s well-being for the freedom of men.

Emphasis added. A take I had not considered. Non-white female victims of rape “take” the victim-blaming in order to dispel the myths that black men rape. I am not sure what to think of this right now.

(Source: mixmasterjeff)

Link

Rape culture is the collection of beliefs and behaviors that enable rape.

With very few exceptions, rape is not a random act of violence. Hitting someone with a spaghetti squash while dressed as Eddie Munster is a random act of violence. Forcing someone culturally considered different and lesser to engage in an act culturally considered taboo and mystical and ego-defining is an extremely specific act of violence. Rapists are not “just evil people,” they’re people being evil in a way that rape culture encourages, enables, and tolerates.

(Rape is biological? Bullshit. Pissing is biological. Pissing in a toilet while wanting privacy and cleaning yourself with paper is cultural. Sex and aggression may be innate, but the ways we express them are as culturally defined as rock’n’roll.)

The effects of rape culture include rape. They also include other forms of violence, such as many murders and assaults, and other forms of sexual exploitation, such as forced prostitution and exploitative porn. They include completely nonviolent forms of sexism and homophobia. They include plain old bad sex and relationships. None of these things would go away if rape culture was eliminated, but they’d be much less common and much more clearly recognized as wrong when they did occur. Rape wouldn’t be gone forever, but it would no longer be an integrated part of our world.

I’ll get into detail about what the beliefs and behaviors of rape culture are in the next post. But I think the most fundamental ones are:
1. “There are two clearly defined and opposite genders.”
2. “Women are the other one.”
3. “Sex and the sexual body are taboo.”
4. “Sex and love are magical and mysterious.”
5.”The sex you have defines your entire self.”
6. “Sex is an object, not an activity.”
7. “A person’s sexuality can be separated from their self.”

Link

When we’re talking about race or religion or politics it is often said we need to speak carefully. These are difficult topics where we need to be vigilant not only in what we say but how we express ourselves. That same care, I would suggest, has to be extended to how we write about violence and sexual violence in particular.

In the Times article, the phrase “sexual assault” is used, as is the phrase “the girl had been forced to have sex with several men.” The word “rape” is only used twice and not really in connection with the victim. That is not the careful use of language. Language, in this instance, and far more often than makes sense, is used to buffer our sensibilities from the brutality of rape, from the extraordinary nature of such a crime. Feminist scholars have long called for a rereading of rape. Higgins and Silver note that “the act of rereading rape involves more than listening to silences; it requires restoring rape to the literal, to the body: restoring, that is, the violence—the physical, sexual violation.” I would suggest we need to find new ways, whether in fiction or creative nonfiction or journalism, for not only rereading rape but rewriting rape as well, ways of rewriting that restore the actual violence to these crimes and that make it impossible for men to be excused for committing atrocities and that make it impossible for articles like McKinley’s to be written, to be published, to be considered acceptable.

—Roxane Gay

I talk about this a lot, particularly with my students. Where rape is described as “having sex” in the media or the criminal justice system because all of those agencies seem to be terrified to call rape rape. It is disingenuous and minimising to describe the act of rape as “sex” because it is not. In very basic terms, one is a violent, non-consensual act and the other is not. Language matters.

(Source: citysleep)

Web Analytics