shooting4myownhand:

[TW: Rape]

This post is in response to the article Nikki Haley Calls Battered And Raped Women ‘Distractions,’ Vetoes Legislation. I think Haley is a despicable human being and should be called out for degrading domestic violence and sexual assault victims. Her stance is dangerous because it will make it harder for anyone who has been victimized to seek resources after their assault. It only shames people for being assaulted and tells them they do not matter. That is fucking dangerous. It is not only dangerous to the victims themselves but also their kids and families. Haley needs to go fuck herself and remove her head from her ass. However, responding with rape threats is NOT the fucking answer. It is never okay to make rape threats, I do not care how despicable the person is. Jesus fucking Christ.

(Source: lipsredasroses)

jemimaaslana:

sugaredvenom:

name-redacted:

afterthecurtain:

feministblackboard:

By saying “that guy,” you trivialize rape. By saying “that guy,” You show how afaid you are of the word. Rapist.

That guy in which you refer is a rapist. Don’t be a rapist. Every time you slap another one of these ad campaigns against a wall or billboard you help those who view it not connect the dots between non consent and rape.

When I hear the term “that guy” I think of the idiot who mooches off of his friends. I think of the idiot who goes through my fridge and eats half a weeks worth of my TV dinners. I think of the idiot who takes four beers out of my fridge. I think of the idiot who overstays his welcome. When I hear rapist I think of someone who rapes.

By saying ”that guy,” I think of someone who overstays his welcome and mooches. Which, in return comes very close if not hitting a dehumanizing element.


 The idea that ”that guy” is mooching off of a girl too drunk to give her consent. A guy who has overstayed his welcome. This is not the case. He is raping her. He is committing a crime. Againt law, against humanity.

Please do everyone a favor. Be bold and strongly type “Don’t be a rapist.”

Bloody hell. The posters say “sexual assault”, too. There is not one mention of rape on those posters. You know, those posters campaigning against rape.

So what, some campaigns are finally getting the idea that we shouldn’t be teaching people (largely women) how not to get raped - we should be teaching people (largely men) not to rape. And yet they’re left the word ‘rape’ off of the poster… what, so as not to hurt mens feelings? To get the message across to them gently? “C’mon, man, don’t be that guy! It’s not cool, bro!”

Sorry, this is not a strong enough message. Why is it okay to regularly scare and shame women in anti-rape campaigns, but when we are talking to the actual potential culprits and not the potential victims, we have to let them off lightly?

I … disagree.

I think it’s kind of easy for us, as in those within the SJ community, to sit around and pick holes in this campaign, because there are holes in this campaign. They’re obvious, and they’re the exact holes the others have mentioned.

But this campaign isn’t directed at us, it’s directed at the average Joe.

Women know what rape is, they’ve been told about it their whole life. Many have unfortunately experienced it, or at least known someone close to them who has. Men, on the other hand, don’t. To men, a rapist is a big scary super villain in a mask who jumps out of a bush and throws a waifish, purer than the driven snow blonde into the back of a van.

Rapists are not real people to men.

That Guy, however, is. Everybody knows That Guy and, as ridiculous as it sounds, to many men That Guy is literally the worst thing you can be. Rule Number One of the Bro Code - page 1 line 1, written in black and white for all to see - is Don’t Be That Guy.

You can mock the idea of a Bro Code all you like, but I know a lot of guys who live by it. I also know a lot of guys who have no qualms about getting a girl drunk, who won’t even leave for a club until 11, because what’s the point in going to a club full of sober women?

You probably wouldn’t be surprised a how often these three groups overlap.

The word rape isn’t used because the word rape doesn’t work. We’ve been using it for centuries and it hasn’t changed a thing. We used the word rape for the allegations against Strauss-Kahn and look how far that got us. I saw far too many articles about how his arrest has left “the IMF in crises” or speculating on “who will fill the power vacuum?” for my, or anyones, liking.

I realise this may seem as a somewhat patronising change of tack, but drink driving is something which also ruins lives. But making it illegal didn’t stop anyone doing it. Just saying “this is wrong, you can’t do it” won’t stop people doing anything. How many people do you know who take drugs?

But as soon as drink driving was added to the list of Dick Moves, drink driving became a really big no-no. Look at the backlash around Ryan Dunns death. I don’t know a single person who thinks he’s anything but an asshole, even the ones who were upset about his death will admit that. I didn’t see Roger Ebert coming up with any pithy tweets about Julian Assange, and I follow a lot of people who would reblog a pithy tweet by Roger Ebert about Julian Assange.

Sure, it may seem trivialising to reduce rape to a Dick Move - because it is - but it’s something that will work. This campaign is not aimed at us, this campaign is aimed at the kind of people who think it’s ok to have sex with someone when they’re too drunk to consent. We’re not even at 101 levels with the people the ad is aimed at, we’re in kindergarten. We can get into deep and meaningful discussions all we want, but the people this ad is based at aren’t the ones we’ll be talking to.

I’m not going to totally ignore this one, Don’t Be That Guy is a shitty anti-rape slogan, but it’s also possibly going to be an effective one. And that’s what matters, right? If it helps stop rape, then it’s good, right?

Yeah, I actually agree with you. I wanted to add some not-as-in-depth or long commentary before reblogging it, but I forgot because I’m exhausted.

And I just want to add that I think it’s fine to say sexual assault instead of rape. Rape in included in the larger group of violations we call sexual assault. And considering how narrow the law’s definition of rape sometimes is, using sexual assault as the descriptor actually covers far more of those situations. Just a thought.

Other than that, I’ll just tip my figurative hat to the insightful commentary.

reblogged for interesting commentary

-Maacah

(Source: feminist-blackboard)