Nov 8, 2018, 10:47 PM
I played "work, bitch" on my spotify the entire time I went through my 258 inbox work email after a two day leave of absence. My discover weekly is going to be ruined but I regret nothing.
RL Anger
-
I played "work, bitch" on my spotify the entire time I went through my 258 inbox work email after a two day leave of absence. My discover weekly is going to be ruined but I regret nothing.
-
-
Good news everyone!
While if that's true, it's obviously terrible advice, can we ... can we not link reactionary, racist tabloids here?
Here, a more nuanced reporting of the same event: https://www.thelocal.de/20181031/why-freiburg-has-been-rocked-by-protests-after-shocking-crime
-
Good news everyone!
While if that's true, it's obviously terrible advice, can we ... can we not link reactionary, racist tabloids here?
Here is the exact quote from Spiegel Online: "Der Polizeipräsident von Freiburg im Breisgau, Bernhard Rotzinger... Einen Ratschlag habe ich aber: Macht euch nicht wehrlos mit Alkohol oder Drogen."
"But I have one piece of advice: Do not make yourself defenseless with alcohol or drugs." -
Yet more "don't get raped" rather than "don't rape." Charming.
-
Yet more "don't get raped" rather than "don't rape." Charming.
I guess it is possible the rapists don't know about the "don't rape" thing.
-
-
Yet more "don't get raped" rather than "don't rape." Charming.
You know, I honestly do not understand why this sentiment is problematic.
Do we think that rapists don't know that rape is bad? Or that putting a headline in a newspaper somewhere between 'Hey, it would be super nice if...' and 'Knock it the fuck off...' is gonna somehow deter them from doing so?
But for the people worried about such things, there are certainly steps they can take to make it harder for the would-be predators. Which frankly seems like the more effective route.
If stern rebukes were an effective deterrent we would have been doing that already.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
@derp A few things, really. It's bad because it actually supposes an innate monstrosity in people that is independent of society and upbringing. It assumes a generally stark view of sexual assault as it appears most often in our cultural imagination: a villainous stranger in a dark alley. Far more often, it's someone known to the victim. Sexual assault is about power and, very often, about misogyny. Misogyny is not an inherent aspect of any person. It is taught. Yes, there may always be rape, like there will always be other forms of assault, manslaughter, murder, etc. But it is undeniable that this particular crime thrives in a society that teaches us not to respect the bodily autonomy of women, and then blame the same women when they're assaulted. I think there's a significant failing in how we teach people about consent, and it begins at a young age, telling a girl that a boy is just pushing them because they like them. I for one believe that our culture can take steps to improve this.
Additionally, "don't get raped" really means "make sure he rapes someone else." And it then fuels further guilt to victims with the whispers -- or, let's face it, shouts -- that they should have just done something differently. "Don't get raped" places the responsibility on the victim rather than the perpetrator.
-
Ok, so, I can follow your line of thinking, but I think it has some inherent problems of its own.
"Don't get raped" places the responsibility on the victim rather than the perpetrator.
I agree that this is an issue of responsibility, but I don't see advocating for responsible behavior, no matter what party you are advocating to, as a bad thing. In this case, we would ideally like both parties to behave in a responsible way, but since that clearly isn't happening, why is it problematic to try and advocate for responsible behavior on the part of the people who are more likely to actually follow that advice? Given, you know, the mentality that goes into committing a crime doesn't exactly scream model citizen, and an article in a newspaper is not going to fix that.
From the writing there, it sounds like the ideal article for the other side of this argument would read like, "
Ladies, don't you dare change a thing. Sure, it's a terrible thing, but you aren't responsible for the behavior of others, and nobody should expect you to change behaviors that leave you more vulnerable to predators because girl, it ain't on you. It's on him. You sit tight, we are gonna work on educating the next generation about consent. Don't worry about being proactive because that would just be putting the responsibility on you."
Versus:
"Hey, girl, some shady shit has been going down, and we don't want anything bad to happen to you, so you might wanna watch your back and be careful. Some people can really be monsters."
Which one do you think is gonna be more effective at preventing the actual act?
There comes a certain point where 'how the world should be' stops lining up with 'how the world is' in such a way that it would be irresponsible to ignore, and in this case, we can talk about consent education and trying to get a message out all day long, but your average rapist isn't gonna stop because he read a strongly worded article in the newspaper, whereas informing women of a predator and giving them information on how to protect themselves actually can help prevent rape.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
@derp It's that nothing is going to stop the bad actors from acting badly, and it isn't long before it becomes a case of, 'You got raped? Shouldn't have left the house then, should you?'
-
Are you sure you want to report strange or creepy behavior, you don't want to ruin a good man's life when you dont really know if he meant it like that.
-
Do we think that rapists don't know that rape is bad? Or that putting a headline in a newspaper somewhere between 'Hey, it would be super nice if...' and 'Knock it the fuck off...' is gonna somehow deter them from doing so?
I mean, there's not an insignificant percentage of dudes that think that unless someone is holding a screaming person down by knife point, it doesn't count. We aren't exactly that far away from a congressman talking about 'legitimate rape'. There's a whole lot of people that think a drunk person flirting with them and seeming to be okay with something at first isn't raping them, and I mean, it just is.
So yeah, actually. A lot of rapists don't know rape is bad.
some fucking idiot who people only like because he's good at taking credit for the work of everyone under him, just like every other fucking L&L headwiz.
-
@apos Yeah, I'm reminded of this article from a couple years ago.
-
@apos Sure they do. Straight men understand consent very well when they're, say, being hit on by a gay man. They also understand stopping in the middle of sex, when you decide to put a finger up their bum. They just don't care.
-
Alright, well... cool then? I mean, by all means, stop trying to help educate women on how to protect themselves from predatory behavior because it puts too much onus on them to take responsibility for their own safety. Let me know how that works out, I guess?
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
Alright, well... cool then? I mean, by all means, stop trying to help educate women on how to protect themselves from predatory behavior because it puts too much onus on them to take responsibility for their own safety. Let me know how that works out, I guess?
I mean I guess if your take away from Matthew Shepard was 'don't take rides from strangers'.
-
@derp When I described predatory and disturbing stalking behavior that happened to me at my business you told me that I should not rush to judgment as to his intent and that I should worry that I might ruin a good man with my fears.
That is what "educating women about how to protect themselves" often devolves into.
-
This post is deleted! -
I am referencing this post, made to me after I described a man who I had not seen or had contact with since I was 15 years old (was now 40) showing up at my place of business to "look for me" after I had told him over email i was not interested in taking him as a client. He later showed up at my political org's public meeting, hovered in the back near me while not disclosing himself and then introduced himself to me after the meeting was over. I was granted an anti-harassment order by the court less than 3 weeks after the public meeting incident.
So derp, let me tell you what happens when women "take responsibility" for their own safety. First, many times, the people who are not right in the head brush aside words of "I'm not interested" and keep on keeping on.
And then there are also assholes who tell women to "adult more" and that they shouldn't risk hurting a man with a misunderstanding about what his intent was. That his side of the story should be just as important.
Note that you said this to me days after this incident occured when I was still freaked out.
Ask any woman who has had to report a man's problematic behavior. Or who feels unsafe. They are many times going to get a reaction like yours. Oh, dear, won't you think of his side of the story too? Maybe your emotions made you not see clearly!
It's this kind of shit why many women react so strongly to being told "take responsibility for yourself!" Bevause we do, and are also expected to take responsibility for HIM too.
Did he show up specifically to find you?
Yes, actually. I had where I worked on Facebook. He went to Facebook, saw that, and showed up. Specifically to find me.
@Kanye-Qwest said:
If a guy randomly tried to book you to show off a Kirby vacuum at his apartment and then, when you canceled, showed up and only THEN admitted he'd been in love with you and your perfect white skin since high school and stalked you and tried to trick you into meeting him without admitting the prior acquaintance first, THEN your reaction to him showing up would be relevant.
Yes, well, forgive me if my first reaction to your statement isn't 'oh, of course, it's so obvious now! How did I not see Kanye's point all along', given your rather pronounced tendency to take anything that's even a bit off and turn it into something extremely inflammatory. At the end of the day, as much as I sympathize with @Mietze's point, it's still only one side of the story, and is skewed by her perception of events as somewhat creepy/off. (NOTE: I am -not- calling Mietze a liar, or saying she is wrong -- just that it is only one side of the story, there, and there exists a -possibility- that the intentions are more innocent than they may appear. I fully understand her hesitation in this matter.)
Sure, it's a bit suspicious, but as has been noted elsewhere, it's not necessarily serial-killer level suspicious, either. As has been noted, lots of people are trained to believe that this is a fairly straightforward gesture from many media sources. Rather than sending an e-mail to a person who might be a complete stranger, the other person set up a meeting with a person in a place that the person being met has a great deal of control -- their place of work, which is in theory a public place where they are surrounded by other people, rather than asking to, say, meet in a restaurant or something, or worse, a bar. Misguided, sure, but not necessarily sinister.
There are people to this day that I think of from high school and occasionally look up. But I also work in a university town that's fairly small for what it is, so it's not exactly hard to find someone, especially if they're still around. It's as easy as asking a friend about them.
So, as noted, while Mietze is perfectly justified in her suspicion and actions, there is potentially another side of the story, here. One in which the man is not The Devil. And I was merely trying to make the point that, sometimes, people can show up and want to get in touch with no moustache-twirling involved.