Feb

29

On sexual assault and language

Filed Under feminism, misogyny, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, violence against women and girls, women’s health | 11 Comments

Considering the Heather MacDonald op-ed this week that claimed a woman who does not refer to her experience of having non-consensual sex forced upon her by the proper word has not actually been raped, one might think that there would be some small vindication in this news item. And indeed, it certainly does make MacDonald look like even more of a dumbass than she already does. But instead, it just makes me profoundly sad.

A Tri-State sexual assault and domestic violence agency has gone back to its roots.

The “Rape Crisis and Abuse Center” will once again become known as “Women Helping Women.”

Executive Director Ann MacDonald said they originally changed the name to the “Rape Crisis and Abuse Center” in 2003 in order to include male victims of sexual assault.

However, Macdonald said that some did not feel comfortable with the new name.

“Our decision to go back to ‘Women Helping Women’ doesn’t mean we’re not going to say the word rape because it is a key piece of what we do in terms of crisis intervention and support services for those victims,” MacDonald said. “But it means we’ve got a name that people are saying that they feel comfortable coming too.”

This editorial has more detail:

In 2003, the social service agency Women Helping Women changed its name to Rape Crisis & Abuse Center of Hamilton County. Executive director Ann McDonald noticed a disturbing difference immediately.

Speaking to groups about the organization, McDonald would mention the center’s name and faces would freeze. In one-to-one conversations, people would seem to tense at the name. Initially, even fund-raising took a hit.

“It was the word,” McDonald says. “The word rape scares people.”

Wednesday, the center announced it is returning to the name Women Helping Women, even though it helps male victims of sexual abuse as well, welcomes male volunteers and certainly still considers supporting victims of rape one of its main missions.

Besides clouding the fact that the center also works heavily with victims of domestic violence, the old name created distance - the very thing a victims’ advocacy group can’t afford. “We need people to hear us,” McDonald says.

Critics may say the center should have maintained its name on principle, that refusing to back off the word is one way to shatter the stigma. But in this case, a challenge to semantics isn’t as important as keeping a vital service viable and alive.

I think a lot of us who do any form of anti-rape activism — even if that just means breaking the silence by talking about sexual assault — have come across this phenomenon before, probably more than once. Particularly when you talk about what rape really is. Rape scares people when they think they know what it means — a guy jumping out of the bushes, beating the shit out of a woman, penetrating her vaginally with his penis and then running away. When you explain that this scenario not describe most actual rapes, many if not most rapes do not involve physical violence beyond the rape itself, most victims know their attackers, and most rapists don’t run away, either because they can’t even comprehend that they’ve done something wrong or they’re just so (usually correctly) sure that they won’t get caught . . . then people get really uncomfortable.

Read more

Popularity: 18% [?]

Feb

28

We Don’t Need No (Sex)Education

Filed Under education and schools, religious fanaticism, reproductive justice, sex and sexuality, social conservatives, women’s health | 10 Comments

Here’s a shocker: the teachers who are forced to act as puppets for the “if you lie enough times it will become true” abstinence-only brigade haven’t got the slightest clue what they’re doing. How many of you received this kind of “education” and got precisely that impression?

A sizable minority of sex education teachers does not cover all of the basics, and many lack training to teach sex ed at all, a survey of teachers in one state suggests.

In a study of sex ed teachers at 201 Illinois schools, researchers found that one-third of teachers did not give comprehensive instruction — defined as covering the four basic topics of abstinence, birth control, HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.

In addition, 30 percent said they had no special training in teaching sex education, and these teachers were less likely to teach a comprehensive course.

“For this study, we set the bar for comprehensiveness fairly low relative to what most medical and public health organizations recommend,” lead researcher Dr. Stacy Tessler Lindau said in a statement, “and one out of three programs failed to clear it.”

[. . .]

The study involved 335 sex ed teachers at Illinois middle schools and high schools. Lindau and her colleagues defined “comprehensive sex education” as courses teaching both abstinence and contraception, as well as information on HIV and other STDs.

They left out a fifth, more controversial topic often recommended by public health experts: giving students information on where to go for sexual health services, condoms and birth control.

Overall, two-thirds of teachers met this more relaxed definition of comprehensive education. In general, the most frequently covered topics were HIV and STDs, which about 96 percent of teachers said they addressed. Eighty-nine percent of teachers covered the topic of abstinence-until-marriage.

Among the least frequently taught subjects were homosexuality, abortion and information on how to use condoms or birth control properly.

[. . .]

When it came to discussing condoms and birth control, teachers who omitted the topic generally did so because it was not in the official curriculum or because of “school or district policy.” About half of teachers also lacked confidence in their ability to teach the topic — rating their ability as anywhere from “average” to “very poor.”

Well Christ, if I was forced to teach a room full of teenagers on a subject they will have dire interest in without any training, the expectation that I’ll going to lie, and a whole bunch of questions I can’t or am not allowed to answer, I wouldn’t feel so confident either.

Read more

Popularity: 20% [?]

Feb

27

A Response to MacDonald, A Lack of Apology

Filed Under education and schools, media, misogyny, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, violence against women and girls | 3 Comments

Today, The LA Times has published a “Blowback” response from Nora, a SAFER blogger and student activist, to the atrocious Sunday op-ed “What Campus Rape Crisis”. I think that she did a good job using the space she had and the language she could while both writing for a mainstream newspaper and representing her organization. So I encourage you to check it out.

There are some points that she missed, namely the illogical and ignorant nature of MacDonald’s argument that if a woman doesn’t define her experience with non-consensual sex as rape, it could not have possibly been rape. This is understandable because there was a hell of a lot of offensive and misleading arguments all in one op-ed. My point here isn’t to criticize Nora — in fact, Amanda managed to pick up on several points that I missed. My point is that this is why it’s important for the paper to print letters on the subject from readers. From reading comments here and on other blogs, I know they got some good ones. But as of this morning, they have yet to appear (though at the moment, letters for 2/27 aren’t up).

Of course, the Times also hasn’t issued any kind of apology — nor do they exactly seem apologetic. Today, on Nora’s op-ed, the discussion at the bottom is framed thusly:

Is the college rape crisis a vast left-wing conspiracy? If not, what should campuses do about it? Discuss today’s Blowback.

Well it’s good to know that they’ve taken the concerns of women, including those from experts on sexual assault, so very seriously. There aren’t any comments there at the time of writing, and I haven’t got the strength to participate in that discussion. If you do, though, I encourage it — particularly if you can get in before the rape apologists start swarming. (A question for MRAs: why such strong desire to disprove rape statistics if your goal isn’t to portray rape survivors as liars, deny their experiences and just generally have the right to rape with impunity? Answer: that is the point, and they’ll even generally admit to the first part.)

If you haven’t yet written a letter, it’s not too late, and I hope you’ll take the time. I just noticed today that they have a form for those who have “concerns about The Times’ journalistic standards and practices (such as story coverage in general).” I sure as hell do, and I hope that you do, too — take a minute to fill it out. The other day, a reader also suggested writing to the paper’s sponsors. Any thoughts?

While I’m on the subject, I’d like to take a moment to highlight the SAFER blog. You may have noticed by now that I’ve been using them as a source a lot, recently, and it’s for a good reason. In addition to being a great and important organization, the people who work on the blog are tremendously good at digging up the stories that would otherwise be buried by the media (particularly, of course, those revolving around sexual violence on campus). I strongly recommend adding them to your blog reader.

Popularity: 17% [?]

Feb

26

If Anti-Choicers Want Women to Know Their Rights, I’ve Got an Offer They Can’t Refuse

Filed Under abortion, anti-choice extremism, assholes, legislation, misogyny, paternalism, patriarchy, pregnancy, religious fanaticism, reproductive justice, slut-shaming, women’s health | 20 Comments

Following in the great misogynist leader South Dakota’s footsteps, anti-choice havens Kansas and Missouri are working on new legislation to restrict abortion, burden providers, condescend to patients, and all around cause more hardship and pain to any woman unfortunate enough to be pregnant and not jumping for joy over it.

Of course, they’re not going phrase it like that. (Would you be so delusional that you’d accuse an anti-choice legislator of intellectual honesty?) No, the Republicans are going to ride in on their white horses to protect women from being coerced and forced into abortions.

The stated aim of the proposed requirements is to ensure that women are not coerced into undergoing abortions. In Kansas, the new restrictions would apply only to abortions after the 22nd week of development, while most of the Missouri proposals would apply to all abortions performed in the state.

In both states, legislation would require doctors to provide the woman with the opportunity to view a sonogram of the embryo or fetus or listen to the heartbeat before performing the surgery. Abortion offices would be required to have a prominent sign stating that no one can force a woman to have an abortion.

In Missouri, two bills would require women seeking abortions to be shown brochures or a video developed by the state Health Department providing a description of the developing embryo or fetus. The materials would include “color photographs or images of the developing unborn child at two-week gestational increments” from conception to full term.

The woman would be given a list of adoption agencies and maternity homes that could assist her in maintaining her pregnancy. She also would be given a statement that she would be eligible for child-support payments if she carried the child to term.

The doctor would have to provide a list of potential medical complications from abortion and discuss theories about whether a fetus can feel pain.

Planned Parenthood, in its weekly newsletter, criticized the bills, calling them a “convoluted checklist of bills (that) demonstrates a lack of understanding of how professional abortion care is provided.” It said the bills’ requirements were burdensome and interfered with a woman’s rights to determine when an abortion is appropriate.

Supporters said the legislation was intended to ensure women are fully informed about the risks and consequences of abortion — something already required, but with less detail, by Missouri law.

Let me just say first of all that I get a lot news from the Kansas City Star about anti-choice activities. And believe me, they are far from perfect. I do, however, think that they have a higher degree of integrity on reproductive rights issues than most newspapers, and they actually tend to do a decent job of clarifying the facts against the rhetoric. Like here: anti-choice legislators claim that they are concerned about women and want them to know the risk, but the fact of the matter is that this is already required.

Read more

Popularity: 24% [?]

Feb

25

LA Times: Women Should Stop Bitching About the Rape that Doesn’t Actually Happen

Filed Under assholes, education and schools, media, misogyny, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, slut-shaming, violence against women and girls | 59 Comments

This is, without a doubt, the most offensive thing that I have read in weeks, if not months. Not because I haven’t read it all before. But because usually when I read long rambling articles about how women aren’t actually raped, the feminists make it all up because the idea of violence apparently makes them feel better, the “rape” problem is really just women being sluts, and our concept of “consensual” is just way too confusing because it requires desire and communication, it’s by some moron on an MRA blog. Yesterday, it was printed in the LA Times. And it was written by a woman.

I’m going to include a trigger warning, not because there are graphic descriptions of sexual assault, but because the comments about women who are raped and the women who want to end rape really are just that unbelievably offensive.

It’s a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center. Day after day, you wait for the casualties to show up from the alleged campus rape epidemic — but no one calls. Could this mean that the crisis is overblown? No. It means, according to campus sexual-assault organizations, that the abuse of coeds is worse than anyone had ever imagined. It means that consultants and counselors need more funding to persuade student rape victims to break the silence of their suffering.

It is a central claim of these organizations that between a fifth and a quarter of all college women will be raped or will be the targets of attempted rape by the end of their college years. Harvard’s Office of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response uses the 20% to 25% statistic. Websites at New York University, Syracuse University, Penn State and the University of Virginia, among many other places, use the figures as well.

And who will be the assailants of these women? Not terrifying strangers who will grab them in dark alleys, but the guys sitting next to them in class or at the cafeteria.

If the one-in-four statistic is correct, campus rape represents a crime wave of unprecedented proportions. No felony, much less one as serious as rape, has a victimization rate remotely approaching 20% or 25%, even over many years. The 2006 violent crime rate in Detroit, one of the most violent cities in the U.S., was 2,400 murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults per 100,000 inhabitants — a rate of 2.4%.

Such a crime wave — in which millions of young women would graduate having suffered the most terrifying assault, short of murder, that a woman can experience — would require nothing less than a state of emergency. Admissions policies, which if the numbers are true are allowing in tens of thousands of vicious criminals, would require a complete revision, perhaps banning male students entirely. The nation’s nearly 10 million female undergraduates would need to take the most stringent safety precautions.

None of this crisis response occurs, of course — because the crisis doesn’t exist.

Yeah, that’s an interesting thought, Heather Mac Donald. But here’s the thing: in reality, the crisis response doesn’t occur because self-loathing, misogynist assholes like yourself are so loudly denying that the crisis exists, and that’s what most people want to hear. Hell, it’s what I would like to hear, too — if it were true.

Read more

Popularity: 42% [?]

Feb

23

Why ask men to stop raping when women can barricade themselves in their homes?

Filed Under assholes, education and schools, misogyny, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, sexism, slut-shaming, violence against women and girls | 21 Comments

I know that this is old “news.” It has to have been around for decades. I know that I’ve ranted about it before. And I know that it might even be a mistake to give this kind of bullshit anymore attention than it already has, but I’ll be damned if this article in a college newspaper about how women who drink are more likely to be raped doesn’t make flames shoot out my eyeballs.

Young women who increase alcohol consumption are at a higher risk of being sexually assaulted, a new study shows.

About 900 women, mostly 18 years of age, participated in the study, conducted by researchers at the State University of New York, Buffalo. Researchers say that female students are more vulnerable to victimization if they increase their drinking. Female first-years are particularly at risk for physical assault, especially if they are new drinkers or have a previous history of victimization or psychological problems.

According to Health Services statistics, freshmen and sophomores make up about three quarters of alcohol-related Emergency Medical Services calls to Health Services. High levels of drinking among first-year students can be partly attributed to “anxiety over the transition into college,” said Director of Health Education Frances Mantak. “For some people, alcohol use is a way to feel more comfortable socially,” Mantak added. Students with previous history of victimization often abuse substances because they struggle with other problems, Mantak said. “They drink because they haven’t found other positive mechanisms for managing (their problems).”

Can someone please explain to me how freshman and sophomore anxiety and “alcohol-related Emergency Medical Services calls,” of which I’m sure only a small percent are about sexual assault, has to do with anything? What, women should find another way to relax? Taking up yoga stops rape now? Or hey, maybe we shouldn’t just bar women from drinking — how about we refuse their right to go to school all together, because the risk of stress is just way too high?

While that’s a very bitter joke, what is the difference between saying that women shouldn’t attend college because a large number of sexual assault victims are university students and that women shouldn’t drink because a large number of sexual assault victims are intoxicated? Other than the ramifications of not attending college being larger than the ramifications of abstaining from alcohol, I sure as hell can’t tell the suggestions apart. For fuck’s sake, if they want to relate the study back to the school in particular, how about they do something responsible like looking at campus rape statistics and what the school is doing do prevent sexual assault?

But wait, Mantak does have something to say about the study and about rape:

Read more

Popularity: 50% [?]

Feb

22

South Dakota Brings Back That Woman-Hating Feeling

Filed Under abortion, anti-choice extremism, legislation, misogyny, paternalism, politics, pregnancy, reproductive justice, slut-shaming, social conservatives, women’s health | 1 Comment

A new anti-choice bill has just been passed in South Dakota and is now awaiting the inevitable signature of the state’s anti-choice governor. It will require OB/GYNs who perform abortions (not “abortion doctors,” as the article calls them) to ask their patients if they would like to view the ultrasound images of their fetus prior to an abortion. No, they won’t force her to look at the ultrasound, but the legislators behind the bill are pretty damn upfront about their goal.

Doctors already do sonograms to determine the stage of pregnancy and protect themselves from malpractice lawsuits, said Rep. Roger Hunt, R-Brandon. Women who get abortions pay for those sonograms and should be asked if they want to see them, he said.

Asking women if they would like to see sonograms may cause more of them to change their minds about abortions, Hunt added.

“All that this does is require that doctor performing the abortion to fully inform the woman of all of the same medical information that that abortion doctor has access to,” he said.

“All we’re doing is wanting to make sure that the woman who is making a decision about her unborn child is fully informed,” Hunt said.

Aw, thanks Captain Paternalism! Aren’t we ladies lucky to have nice daddy legislators looking out for us?

Read more

Popularity: 21% [?]

Feb

22

Female Golfer Sues Club for Discrimination

Filed Under assholes, discrimination, gender, misogyny, patriarchy, sexism | 6 Comments

A woman has sued her municipal golf course for refusing her right to play in a tournament because she is a woman.

Elaine Joyce, a champion amateur golfer, and her father were looking forward to a weekend tournament last May at the respected public course on Cape Cod where they hold full memberships. But their names were not listed when officials posted the tee times for the event at the Dennis Pines course.

The Masters U.S. Open British Open P.G.A. Championship Joyce’s father, Pat, received a call from the club’s head pro, Russell Champoux, who said the tournament was not open to women. It did not matter that Joyce would play from the men’s tees. Or that she had won more than 20 club championships over the years. Or that she had captured the title in 2001 at an event for the state’s top female club champions.

Joyce complained to the town, but over the next several months, Robert Canevazzi, the Dennis town administrator, did not budge. When Joyce filed a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination in July, the club said its actions were not discriminatory. In a letter, Canevazzi told Joyce that the club would begin scheduling men’s and women’s fields in all tournaments in 2008, giving women more weekend play. The club’s lawyer, Kristin Tyler Harris, reiterated the position. But women would not be permitted to play in men’s tournaments.

On Friday, Joyce, 43, filed a federal lawsuit in United States District Court in Boston to challenge the town and the golf officials. Her case confronts the tradition of men’s tournaments on morning weekends, events that are woven into the fabric of golf life at private and public courses.

The 25-page federal complaint says that by denying Joyce the same “full citizenship status” as men at a public golf course is as unlawful as operating a men’s-only bar or a whites-only drinking fountain. Joyce is “entitled to the equal opportunity to aspire, to achieve and to participate based upon her individual talents and capacities regardless of her gender,” her lawyer, Laura R. Studen, said.

Good for her. As detailed in the article, this isn’t the first case of discrimination that Joyce has suffered as a woman trying to play competitively. A decade ago, a neighboring town apparently tried to disallow her the right to play with the men on weekends — and when the town administration required them to accept her, she faced some really ugly, misogynist reactions:

After the town acted in that case, it took 18 months for her to be admitted as a member. Joyce said some members of the group were appalled and let her know it. One said he would play only if she played naked. Others walked off the course when paired with her. Some refused to speak to her during rounds.

Way to be adults, jackasses. One would think that common decency would bar them from playing if unable to grant their fellow golfers the most basic kind of respect, but apparently having a penis really is the most important requirement for membership.

Now, of course, Joyce is well within her rights to sue. And whatever her ultimate reason for doing so, I think that she is correct and I wish her well. I can, however, make a highly educated guess as to the exact straw that broke this camel’s back. At least, if it was me, and I was wavering on whether or not to litigate, I know that my decision would have been made right here:

Although Elaine Joyce is a member, Champoux, the head pro, did not inform her of the decision to bar her from playing. Instead, he called her father.

Oh yeah, they did. Even though she is a member, even though she was scheduled to play in a tournament with her father, even though the reason for disallowing their right to play was based on her, they couldn’t even extend the courtesy of giving her a fucking phone call. They called her dad.

If these guys are really so damn stupid, arrogant and disrespectful to add that kind of insult to the injury, I say they deserve to be taken for every dime they’re worth.

Popularity: 19% [?]

Feb

21

Ithaca Responds to College Rape Policies

Filed Under assholes, education and schools, misogyny, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, violence against women and girls | 2 Comments

Via the SAFER blog, there is an update of sorts on the Ithaca College rape case, where the school determined that a Resident Adviser had raped another student, but let him keep his job anyway — even while admitting that an RA caught using drugs would be terminated.

Student newspaper The Ithacan, which original broke the story, has published quite a few letters to the editor on the subject, and some are worth taking a look at. Though I was profoundly disappointed to see this rape apologist letter, I do have to give the editors credit for publishing eleven letters and letting only a single “what about the menz” one through.

First up, Ithaca faculty and staff members wrote a letter voicing their support for rape survivors and their concern over current school policy. Good for them — I’m glad to see that there are indeed some responsible individuals working for the university. A snippet:

We voice our concerns on behalf of those who have experienced sexual assault and rape as well as those who feel a sense of outrage in response to the article. To that end, we ask our administration to respond swiftly to the issues raised. Our students and colleagues have the right to a safe and secure campus environment where rape is not tolerated and where there is no confusion as to its seriousness. We stand in solidarity with the IC Feminists, SAFER and resident assistants in seeking changes supportive of those who have endured the pain and suffering of rape and ask that efforts be undertaken across campus to address this issue in the near future.

Next, there is a letter from a former Resident Adviser who was actually fired for smoking marijuana on school property. Nope, the suggestion that an RA would be fired for pot use was not hypothetical. He has some interesting things to say — namely that while he accepts the fact that he fucked up, broke the rules and lost his job for a decent reason, unlike a rapist, he was posing absolutely no danger to the student body:

But what is ResLife thinking? Do they have the audacity to believe that they’re somehow above the law? Again I make no excuses for my behavior; it was illegal, but isn’t rape? I had one week to pack and find a place to live at the tail end of the semester. I guess I posed such a threat that unless I left pronto I was going to get everyone high.

And lastly, the most important letter of all. Bonnie Solt Prunty from Residential Life responds:

Although I cannot speak to the specifics of the incident from last year due to federal laws that require the confidentiality of student records, I do want to clarify statements made in The Ithacan article. When asked about actions that could result in immediate termination of an RA, I intentionally used the example of a drug-related violation in order to avoid any confusion with the specific case at hand. In no way was I trying to infer that Residential Life takes drug violations more seriously than sexual assault. This is absolutely not the case.

Of course, she doesn’t explain why the hell we should believe her. If they don’t take drug violations more seriously than sexual assault, the student body deserves an explanation for why the fuck someone smoking pot would be fired and someone who admitted to rape was not. She doesn’t have to discuss the specifics to do that, she only has to explain how it would, in any possible scenario, be considered acceptable. And though she intends to “review [the] standards and make changes where necessary,” she doesn’t voice support for a zero tolerance policy, or imply that the school will work it’s absolute hardest to ensure that nothing like this will ever happen again. Because that would require admitting that what they did was wrong.

The victim deserves more. Every student who lived under that RA deserves more, as do the students who were never told about the rapist in their midst, because he knew his victim and was therefore deemed to not be a threat. (Aside: what the fuck do we deem rapists who know their victim to be less of a threat? They’re the ones who are less likely to go to jail, who make up the utterly huge majority of rapists, betray the trust of their friends, girlfriends, acquaintances, wives and families. They are the ones who terrify me the most.)

Bonnie Solt Prunty is the director of Offices of Residential Life and Judicial Affairs. This was and is her responsibility. Maybe she can’t admit wrongdoing due to liability issues. It’s highly plausible. But I’m wholly unconvinced that she even deserves to still have a job there. And regardless of that, the fact remains that women deserve better.

Popularity: 18% [?]

Feb

20

My Daughter Has a Hand Mirror, and Other Signs that the Sky is Falling

Filed Under assholes, books, education and schools, misogyny, patriarchy, religious fanaticism, sex and sexuality, sexism, social conservatives, women’s health | 22 Comments







Be Very Afraid: the root of all sexual deviancy is laying next to your bathroom sink.
Be Very Afraid: the root of all sexual deviancy is laying next to your bathroom sink.

I know that this is way too easy. But all the same, when I ran across this “opinion piece” in the RH Reality Check news aggregator, I laughed so hard that I nearly sprayed orange juice across the computer screen. It just screams satire, and yet is absolutely, frighteningly serious. From Robert H. Knight, Sex Education Veers the Wrong Way:

What is it with “advice” experts? Are they all drinking the decades-old Kool-Aid from sex researcher Alfred C. Kinsey?

A case in point: In her “Family Almanac” column in the Feb. 15 Washington Post, Marguerite Kelly advises a mother to steer her curious 11-year-old boy away from the Internet and toward the kiddie sex book, “It’s Perfectly Normal.”

An illustrated, over-sized hardback by Robie H. Harris, “It’s Perfectly Normal” has sold more than 1 million copies. It’s full of colorful drawings of nude people, sexual activities including masturbation by both sexes, and even a girl leaning over and holding a mirror between her legs, so she and the reader can examine her nether regions.

If you felt violated just reading this description, imagine how kids feel when looking at the pictures. The book title sums up the author’s agenda, which is to promote all varieties of sex as “perfectly normal.”

That’s right: “even a girl leaning over and holding a mirror between her legs.” I can’t get over the hilarious and telling nature of the fact that among those who think the worst possible human action anyone could commit is to experience any form of pleasure without asking God pretty please first and promising to think of Him the whole time, a girl having a peek at her vulva is the most outlandish offense in a book all about sex. Not the dirty, sinful nudity. Or the shockingly anti-Biblical depictions of sexual activities by presumably unmarried people, including spilling one’s seed. The worst part is a girl foolishly thinking that she has a right to know what her genitals look like. Crazy liberals, don’t they know that God put a girl’s “down there” down there for a reason??? It wasn’t to sell hand mirrors, that’s for sure!

Read more

Popularity: 41% [?]

Feb

19

Reasons to Take the Bus

Filed Under Africa, Australia, Europe, International, misogyny, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, sex work, violence against women and girls | 3 Comments

A man in London has just been arrested on charges of drugging and raping women he picked up in his taxi cab. Though there are countless published stories about the case, the information is exceedingly limited in all of them. Here is the gist:

Up to 35 women may have been drugged and raped by a London taxi driver, police said on Monday.

Thirty women have come forward after a man was arrested last Friday in southeast London on suspicion of rape.

Police were initially investigating five attacks in which victims were picked up in a black cab near Oxford Street, King’s Road or London Bridge.

The suspect is accused of attacking his passengers after offering them spiked glasses of champagne which he said were to help him celebrate a lottery win.

The most recent reported attack took place on February 5 after a 33-year-old woman was picked up near London Bridge Station.

“Every case is being linked,” a Scotland Yard spokesman said.

Knowing full well that the Mirror is about as far from a reputable news source as you can get (don’t worry, the facts are the same in every story), I chose to use their article particularly because of the confounding nature of the first sentence. “Up to 35 women.” Well, 35 women in total have come forward. And instead of reaching what I would deem to be the logical conclusion — that if 35 have already come forward, just think of how many others there are — the Mirror has apparently determined that when 35 women come forward with rape allegations, that’s the definitive total, and at least a few have to be liars.

It’s funny, because it seems to be a theme recently. No, not just calling rape victims liars, since that’s pretty much a theme of living in the world as a woman. I’m talking about women being raped in cabs — and then having it implied that they are liars or to blame for the assaults.

Read more

Popularity: 23% [?]

Feb

19

Trigger Warning: Man Admits to Raping Victim’s Body, Denies Murder

Filed Under Europe, International, courts gone crazy, misogyny, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, violence against women and girls | 8 Comments

Again, I’m issuing a trigger warning as strongly as I can. I’ve written about a hell of a lot of disturbing, disgusting cases of rape and gender violence. And this easily ranks among the most repulsive.

. . .

A man is in court for the 2005 rape and murder of a young model. I just discovered the case this morning, and reading through the back stories has me just about physically ill. His defense? That yes, he raped her corpse, but that doesn’t mean he killed her.

Read more

Popularity: 20% [?]

Next Page →