Jan

29

Reproductive Coercion is Sexual Violence

Filed Under misogyny, patriarchy, pregnancy, rape and sexual assault, reproductive justice, violence against women and girls | 9 Comments

There is a new study which discusses a horribly prevalent but rarely discussed form of intimate partner violence: reproductive coercion. From a press release by The Family Violence Prevention Fund:

“Pregnancy Coercion, Intimate Partner Violence and Unintended Pregnancy” is the first quantitative examination of the relationship between intimate partner violence, reproductive coercion and unintended pregnancy. It finds that young women and teenage girls often face efforts by male partners to sabotage their birth control or coerce or pressure them to become pregnant – including by damaging condoms and destroying contraceptives. These behaviors, defined as “reproductive coercion,” are often associated with physical or sexual violence. Conducted by researchers at the University of California Davis School of Medicine and the Harvard School of Pubic Health, the study also finds that among women who experienced both reproductive coercion and partner violence, the risk of unintended pregnancy doubled.

From August 2008 to March 2009, researchers worked at five reproductive health clinics in Northern California, querying some 1,300 English- and Spanish-speaking 16- to 29-year-old women who agreed to respond to a survey about their experiences. They were asked about birth-control sabotage, pregnancy coercion and intimate partner violence. Approximately one in five young women said they experienced pregnancy coercion and 15 percent said they experienced birth control sabotage.  Fifty-three percent of respondents said they had experienced physical or sexual violence from an intimate partner.  Thirty-five percent of the women who reported partner violence also reported either pregnancy coercion or birth control sabotage.

For many who have been in abusive relationships, the findings here will come as little surprise. But they are incredibly important, in that they prove the simple fact, for those who still needed proof, that teaching about how to use contraception isn’t always enough to prevent unwanted pregnancy. When a partner is sabotaging one’s birth control — whether it be through secretive tampering or open destruction, threats or outright force — knowing how to use contraception is can mean exceedingly little. Information is nothing without access, and in an abusive relationship that involves reproductive coercion, access has been denied. Awareness and resources about what abuse actually is, how it works, and how to handle it once it has already begun — both for medical professionals who need to screen for it, and those at risk of being victims — are absolutely vital.

But what the study also unintentionally shows is just how ill-equipped our society is to deal with the kind of abuse that does not begin and end with a fist.

Read more

Jan

18

Remembering Dr. King

Filed Under activism, bigotry, class and economics, human rights, race and racism | Leave a Comment

Martin Luther King, Jr. speaks in a church. He leans forward, eyes gleaming with intensity, a finger pointed with conviction out at his audience.

Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Today is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.

We still, I should hope it goes without saying on this particular blog, live in a world fueled by racism, white supremacy, and classism. With a lot of the reporting coming out of Haiti this past week alone, that much has been evident. We live in a world where Dr. King’s words are used and abused by those who like to tell us that race does not matter, and that we should all be “colorblind.” And we live still in a world where much of his work and activism — such as his anti-poverty and anti-war work — is ignored because it’s less simple to twist in a way that supports existing power structures, and where only the parts that make those with power and privilege feel good are typically remembered.

But it’s a much better world than it would have been, had it not been for Dr. King and the many, many other activists like him.

In the spirit of remembering that less publicized and less taught work, instead of posting I Have a Dream or I Have Been to the Mountaintop (two obviously phenomenal speeches), I’m posting the beginning of the less recognized speech Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence, a statement against war and about the interconnectedness of social justice struggles that still remains largely relevant, as well as moving and chilling.

The full text of Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence can be found here.

Also recommended are Jay Smooth’s video Ten OTHER Things Martin Luther King Said, and Renee’s post (already linked above) Dr. King: A Legacy Ignored.

cross-posted from Feministe

Jan

15

Alleged Victim Slut-Shamed, Rape Case Thrown Out

Filed Under Europe, International, assholes, bigotry, courts, misogyny, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, slut-shaming, violence against women and girls | 10 Comments

A particular rape case has been making the rounds lately, for its especially ludicrous and misogynistic outcome. In short, a U.K. woman made allegations of a gang rape by five perpetrators. The case made it to court. And then, the judge ordered the jury to return a not guilty verdict when “evidence” was presented — not by the defense, but the prosecution — showing that the alleged victim had made statements online about her fantasies involving group sex. The revelation that she had had group sex fantasies was, in fact, the entire reason presented for the dismissal of the case. Indeed, agreeing with the prosecutor, the judge remarked that with the admission of these fantasies, “her credibility was shot to pieces.”

Many have written about this case by now, ranging from the F-Word, to Penny Red, to Pandora Blake (Note: images on this site may be NSFW). These are all great posts that each touch on several important points — I particularly like Pandora’s concise statement that “Desire is not consent. Consent is consent.” — and I highly recommend that you go check them all out, right now, if you have not already. Especially since I’m going to avoid repeating those points very much here.

Because with all of the astute analysis I’ve seen, one thing I’m not seeing discussed a lot is the nature of the fantasy itself. I’m very, very glad, on the one hand, to see that a fantasy of group sex is not being treated as some sort of abnormal, shameful thing for a woman to fantasize about, and that women are not being treated as immoral for having sexual fantasies at all and particularly immoral for having a fantasy that involves multiple partners. This is very important, and good on everyone for it.

But I also think it’s important to acknowledge the cultural context in which the decision was made. And that cultural context is one of a world in which group sex is seen as being among the most debasing things that a woman could think about, let alone do. In a misogynistic world where sex is seen as inherently degrading to a woman’s sense of integrity, sex with multiple partners at the same time is seen to leave her with no integrity left at all.

And so while I’m willing to be entirely proven wrong, and while I put absolutely nothing past the courts at this point, I think it’s a lot less likely — possible, but less likely — that we’d be seeing this case exist if the woman had fantasized about “vanilla” intercourse with a single partner, and then was raped by a single man. I think this case is less about whether or not a woman has a right to refuse consent to something she has previously expressed interest in — though it certainly is about that as well, and this is an ongoing source of horrific rape trial outcomes — but more about whether or not a “slut” has a right to ever say no to anything. The victim in this case has been officially portrayed, by way of her fantasy and cultural attitude towards it, as a “slut.” And the answer to the question by the prosecutor and judge alike is “no, a slut does not have that right.”

Again, in our society some women are more vulnerable than others to both sexual assault and rape apologism. And though virtually any woman can be made to be seen as unrapeable, some women start out closer to that status already. Among the many factors that can make a woman unrapeable in the eyes of our society, including race, gender identity, and disability, is the willingness to behave sexually. “Sexual” women are automatically seen as less rapeable than “chaste” women — “bad girls” more unrapeable than “good” ones. And women who behave sexually in ways that are less culturally approved are more unrapeable still.

This inevitably influenced the decision here. Judges and prosecutors are not magically immune from thinking nasty things about “sluts” when most of the general public does the same, nor are they immune from thinking that a fantasy about group sex makes a woman a dirty, dirty slut when this misogynistic notion is culturally ingrained.

The very official reason behind this decision seems to be “she openly fantasized about doing it, and thus she likely consented when the opportunity was presented to her” — and that assumption is a problem of proportions so enormous it’s impossible to overstate. But the prejudice behind that reason is “look what as slut she is, thinking about group sex with several men — how could a slut like that have possibly said no?” And that? That is an epically huge problem, too.

Jan

14

Swedish Court Decides Sexual Assault is Not a Crime

Filed Under Europe, International, bigotry, courts, misogyny, patriarchy, rape and sexual assault, sexual exploitation and harassment, violence against women and girls | 13 Comments

Trigger Warning for descriptions of sexual assault, apologism, and victim-blaming

At a New Year’s party in Sweden, a 17-year-old girl laid down to sleep on a sofa. The 49-year-old father of the boy hosting the party proceeded to lift up her skirt while she was unconscious and photograph her genitals. He then, in some unspecified manner, spread the photo to other people.

The victim pressed charges, once she learned of what had been done to her. Then, the court dismissed the charges — not because they found that there was insufficient evidence, or because the victim changed her mind about pursuing the case, but because they said that lifting an unconscious person’s skirt without her consent and photographing her genitals, also without her consent, is not against the law.

A court in Halmstad on the southwest coast of Sweden has dismissed charges against a man who reportedly took a photo of a 17-year-old girl’s genitals while she was sleeping. The court said that the incident was was not a punishable offense.

…

Citing several other cases, the Halmstad district court said that the man had not committed a crime. There is no general prohibition against photographing people without their consent. The same applies to people who are asleep.

The fact that other people have seen the photograph, as claimed by the prosecutor in this case, doesn’t make the incident a punishable offense either, according to the court.

What we’re looking at here is a legal system which has absolutely no respect for women’s bodily autonomy — a legal system that says “so long as she’s there, you can do whatever you want with her.”

Read more

Jan

8

One Million

Filed Under blogging, personal and self-promotion | 12 Comments

one millionI’m proud and honored to announce that this past Sunday, January 3rd, The Curvature hit its 1,000,000th visitor since its humble beginnings two and a half years ago.

So, I wanted to take this moment to thank all of the readers, commenters, people who send in tips, and especially all of the other feminist-type bloggers who have provided such great support and community over the years. You’re all amazing.

I’m also aware that I’ve been blogging an awful lot less these past few months than in the past. Rest assured, I’m working on changing that. This dusty old blog theme is also in desperate need of replacement, so in the next few months, you can hope to see a new design, and hey, even maybe a new logo, coming your way. Who knows, maybe you’ll even get a guest-post or two.

Thanks again, and here’s to hoping for a million more.

Jan

7

Iowa “Pro-Family” Group Protests Governor’s Support for the Transgender Day of Remembrance

Filed Under LGBTQ, assholes, bigotry, human rights, trans, transphobia and trans misogyny, violence against women and girls | 2 Comments

Trigger Warning for transphobia

In Iowa, a so-called “pro-family” group of hate-mongers have put out a statement admonishing the Governor for doing the absolute bare minimum in terms of acknowledging the state’s transgender residents, by signing a declaration recognizing the Transgender Day of Remembrance last November. Governor Culver was so lackluster about proclaiming it wrong to murder people even if they are trans, that he didn’t even put out a statement about the declaration. But that hasn’t stopped the Iowa Family Policy Center ACTION from protesting his stance, anyway:

A pro-family policy group today is taking issue with a proclamation Gov. Chet Culver signed that declared a “transgender day of remembrance” in Iowa last year.

The Iowa Family Policy Center ACTION released a copy of the proclamation that Culver signed last Nov. 20 which the Pleasant Hill-based group acquired from the governor’s office through a Freedom of Information Act request.

The organization’s president, Chuck Hurley, said he views the proclamation as an attempt by Culver to use the power of the governor’s office “to promote sexual confusion and deviant behavior.”

Hurley said the action follows Culver’s failure to keep his 2006 campaign promise to defend marriage as only between one man and one woman.

…

“Iowans know that Gov. Culver does not share their values,” the Iowa Family Policy Council ACTION leader said. “As if the governor’s unwillingness to exercise the influence of his office in the defense of marriage wasn’t evidence enough, we now know that he is spending his time creating special days celebrating sexual disorientation. The question that Iowans ought to be asking is why Gov. Culver wasn’t proud enough of his work to make his actions public?”

This is beyond appalling. Usually, I wouldn’t want to give publicity to this type of hate being propagated by a smaller scale group. But what it openly reveals, in this case, is astounding enough to make me see it as worth mention. It comes as little surprise that they refuse to acknowledge the gender identities of trans people, and instead portray them all as cis gay folks. And it comes as little surprise that they would somehow try to tie the “issue” of Culver’s small show of support for the TDOR back into their opposition to marriage equality.

But that they would take support for this day, the Transgender Day of Remembrance — a solemn and emotional day of mourning for the trans community, a day in which the violence committed against that community on such a wide scale is finally given just a tiny bit of mainstream attention, a day in which those who are so regularly forgotten are in fact remembered — and attack it is despicable. That they would connect it to what they call “deviant behavior” is even more so.

Because what it suggests, rather blatantly, is that they view the very act of trans people being alive as deviant. They view the suggestion of a world in which trans people are not under constant threatened and actual physical assault as an attack on their belief system. To say that the governor’s decision to sign this declaration goes against their values is to say in fact that their values involve trans people being dead.

The fact that they feel this way doesn’t shock me. The fact that they’d so casually admit it does, however, come as something of a surprise. Even the organizations most dedicated to vitriolic hatred of LGBT people will profess to believe that the people whose rights they so vehemently fight deserve life and safety. It’s not that they want people dead, they will claim, so much as they want them invisible. This statement here belies that common assertion. Here, they let us know that they believe folks who don’t fit into their rigid gender and sex norms not only don’t deserve to have their safety defended by the government in even the most passive, hidden, and symbolic ways, but also don’t even deserve to have their lives mourned once they have been taken.