Friday, September 4, 2009

Men's War Against Women: No Truce in Sight

[street protest image is from here]

A friend of mine was racially and sexually assaulted recently, with aggressive words so contemptuously aimed at her, the only Black woman on a street among white women, I wouldn't even consider printing them here. He chose her to abuse from among the group of women, not known to one another. Later, when she sought support, a "feminist" male friend told her it must have been her "energy" that drew him to her. To that "feminist" male ex-friend: go fuck yourself, you misogynist asshole. He was basing this assessment in part on the fact that the assailant was probably psychotic. (Since when does psychosis give men a sixth sense when it comes to choosing "women appropriate to abuse"?) I find it interesting, to say the least, that even with psychosis, he knew, as a Black man, that he couldn't get away so easily doing exactly the same thing to one of the white women around her.

My brother once sexually assaulted a woman on the street he didn't know, while he was actively psychotic. Male supremacist/rapist behavior is apparently not forgotten, no matter how delusional and deranged a mental state a man is in. (And women are called crazy for calling out oppressive men!)

Another friend of mine, a white woman, has been waiting for years for the prominent man who is known for writing the 1970s hit "You Light Up My Life", who drugged and raped her in a hotel room, to face the charges in court. There were significant delays in that happening, even with several women coming forward, who don't know one another, from different periods of time (over decades), telling more or less exactly the same story of how he drugged and raped them too. This is because we live in a society that thinks the worst human atrocity is putting a rapist in jail if he hasn't been adequately proven to be a rapist, according to fucked up white male supremacist pro-rape laws.

One in three American Indian women will be raped in her lifetime. White men continue to wander onto Reservation land and rape with impunity from the U.S. governmental systems allegedly involved in protecting people on this land from terrorism.

Stories abound of white men abducting and possessing, also raping, white girls. The stories of abducted or threatened girls of color don't make major headlines.

The Curvature, among other feminist blogs and news services, have been reporting on what can only be regarded as a nauseatingly disgusting level of pro-rape misogyny by male-man judges and defense attorneys in U.S. courtrooms. The Abyss2Hope blogger effectively takes on an overtly pro-rape dickhead, with a level of patience I wouldn't be easily be able to find in myself.

What else, precisely, has to happen in this country, so systemically and repeatedly, for us to acknowledge that men are waging a sexually violent and often racist war against women?

To all those asshole men who believe in such a thing as "a war between the sexes" let me just say this: if the playing field were, in fact, level, women and their male allies would have figured out a way to destroy your privileged and protected asses centuries ago. It is only because you have such dominance, status, and positions of superiority over women in so many spheres, in so many ways, that you are getting away with this CRAP.

I welcome men, in ways that are responsible to women's concerns and safety, organising to take out P.R.I.C.K.s by any means necessary.

To any man who is spending more than one hour a week playing online video games or looking at pornography, please take at least that much time out to teach the pro-rape, pro-sexual exploitation men around you that sexually assaulting women ought to be a crime punishable by death, and make them the first cases.
END OF POST.

24 comments:

aladydivine said...

It's interesting, I just posted about the dickhead who deceived women and girls saying he would make them models and actresses, then raping them and fondling them. Said dickhead gets 59 years in jail... I said that isn't enough and said I felt the only true justice for rape crimes is castration chemical/physical. To this a man named David replied to me saying he didn't support anything that couldn't be undone. We went further in the discussion, and you can read it for yourself at my blog if you want, but I feel his concern about "innocent people being punished" was more so about male innocent people not female innocent people. Women/girls who are raped ARE innocent people! Why not protect these innocent people from being punished? Why only the concern about "something irreversible" when it comes to castration mean while "something irreversible" has already taken place in the form of rape?

Men hear about other men being punished for rape and instantly get defensive despite themselves. It’s camaraderie I feel, among men that garners such support, even from self identified pro-women males. I was wondering though what your feelings are re: castration physical/chemical. I’d appreciate it if you read my blog post: http://aladydivine.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php I haven’t posted my response to him yet, but just allowed his comment through. (was holding it in mod as I debated whether or not to post it, have this new no men policy due to friggin ridiculousness going on at my blog from men.)

Christina said...

This is not only a problem faced in the US but also one that is very prevalent in the UK as well.
Interestingly, in the early 1990s radical feminists had no problem talking about men’s war on women. But today most wouldn’t dare. Thanks to the sexist, racist white male MRAs violence against women is not taken seriously.
MRAs would have you believe that the vast majority of male violence committed against women is not real, but made up by women themselves, either to get back at a man or to get attention.

Not only does it shock me when violence is committed against women, but also the way the female victim and male offender are treated.

The woman after been raped is then made out to either look like a liar or look like she asked to be raped i.e. she brought it on herself.

The man if arrested is then out on bail within the hour. No wonder so many women don’t report abusive husbands or boyfriends, the women know that as soon as the arrested man is out on bail he will come after her and most likely kill her.

The man is often made out to be the real victim and as such is entitled to special rights.

All this should not come as a surprise considering most of the policemen and court judges are white males.

To end the war on women we need to firstly remove these sexist, racist white males from power. (What do you think would have happened if Hitler and his Nazis had stayed in power?)

If we could get all the white male judges etc out of these prominent positions and women especially women of colour in, they could undo all these sexist and racist laws.

Laws would finally protect women and at the same time ensure that men got the appropriate punishment.

As long as white males are running the show, sexism racism and the war on women will continue.

Julian Real said...

Hello ALD,

I will be taking on David's male supremacy here, in addition to what I've posted at your blog.

Here, I will analyse and respond to it in greater detail. You've certainly done most of that work already, however, and I shall probably copy and paste much of what you said to him.

I agree it's a camaraderia, a code of brotherhood, a patriarchal pact, that is so gruesome in its consequences, it is a wonder that men can show ourselves in public and not be stoned. There are, in my mind, two categories of men, and those categories are not "profeminist" and "antifeminist". Rather, they are "men who rape women" and "men who do nothing effective to end men's rape of women". In this way, I see all men as complicit in maintaining a rapist society, a misogynist society where women will continue to be assaulted and slaughtered, across ethnicity, class, and sexuality, with little to no recognition that what is happening is precisely as political and horrific as any other known atrocity.

Julian Real said...

@ALD:

Regarding castration of rapists:

I think it is an insufficient strategy, as men without genitals can still be rapists. I support a more systematically effective approach in stopping individual men from raping and for ending rapism in patriarchal society.

I don't believe castration would be an effective deterrent, as we know most rapists are never identified publicly as such, and a small fraction of those who are identified are appropriately sequestered from spaces where women and girls attempt to live without rape.

But, having said all that, I sincerely wish there were more people who would cut off men's penises if they use them as a weapon against women or girls. And this does allow for men who rape to cut off their own genitals.

But I prefer the death sentence for all men who rape women and girls. Period. And not "rape" as determined in an utterly white male supremacist and classist court system, which of course would disproportionately and grotesquely let white single-time and serial rapists of women and girls go free. I believe the designation of who is a rapist, and what the consequence to him ought to be should be determined by women who experience rape, in any way, whether against their own selves, or the women and girls they know, not by some allegedly impartial group of twelve people, who witness women being re-victimised in courtrooms and hear defense attorneys and judges blame women for what men maliciously do to them.

To all those men who will cry out: what about the boys and men who are raped (by men)?! If you think these rapers' actions are "just as awful" as the defining behavior of men who rape girls and women, or if you think they are even worse, why don't you kill them rather than simply remind us of something we already know: men are capable of raping anyone, including non-human animals, for pleasure and power primarily.

The rape of women and girls by men is a particular strategy in men's war against women, functioning to violate, subordinate, and terrorise a group of people who are seen and treated in many ways as "the inferior sex".

To end an atrocity such as men's rape of female human beings, it is necessary in liberal societies that pretend white and male supremacy do not exist, to identify all the ways men succeed in oppressing women systematically.

When small pox was a functional component in U.S. white men's genocide against American Indians, of course there were those who did and still do care far more about the white men who got small pox.

But to pretend small pox has had the same effect on every group is to be woefully and willfully ignorant about what is really going down. And shame on all those men who seek to invisibilise and minimise the reality--the measurable dimensions and the unquantifiable atrocity--of men's on-going war against women.

And let us not forget that white men's rape of American Indian women is both gynocidal and genocidal.

Julian Real said...

@Christina

Agreed.

I'll respond it two comments below.

I am sorry that you and women throughout the UK (as well as the many non-UK women effected by such men) are so grossly impacted by MRAs there. I am coming to realise, from what you say here and from links to news in the UK that you've brought to my attention, that their effectiveness is greater there. This seems to be true both in terms of the lack of stigma they carry and the status and volume of MRAs in the UK.

Here in the U.S., in my experience, they are generally regarded as a joke by most thinking and feeling U.S. people. But it's a joke without humor. (And I am probably in a lot of denial about just how much systemic power and actual status they have here.) If they weren't positioned in so many places of institutional power they'd just be pathetic.

I wish white men would just relinquish these positions of institutional power, but we know that will not happen.

The MRAs are, to say the least, the class-, race- and gender-privileged equivalent of Nazi Holocaust (HaShoah) deniers, but this comparison has serious problems and needs so many qualifications.

MRAs are just as dangerous in their activist bigotry and delusional thinking. Their lies about women and society are just as evil.

Re: the Nazis of the 1930 and 1940s vs. contemporary MRAs. It would be far more appropriate for MRAs to call themselves mascu-nazis and to stop calling anti-patriarchy activist women "femi-nazis".

I don't really like particular groups of terrorists and mass murderers being named after one another, however, as each exists in a particular time and place, forming under specific conditions. This naming of non-Nazi masculinist activist men as like the European Nazis of 1930s-1940s not only neglects to maintain awareness of who those Nazis speficially targeted and destroyed, but also ignores the many ways men as a class of oppressors have far more invisibilised, normalised, naturalised, and established international power over a significantly longer period of time. Contemporary masculinist power, unlike the power of the mid-20th century European Nazis, is not even named by most humans I know--in any language, nor is it seen as a political problem.

Many in the world did or have since recognised Hitler and his cronies as the bigoted genocidalists they were. Certainly those of us who are Jewish did and do.

Julian Real said...

The great problem of patriarchal atrocity is that patriarchal men are not recognised, either by men or by most women, as a cruel force of human devastation and destruction, as a force committing gynocide through various means, including mass starvation, mass rape, female infanticide, and mass murder.

It is difficult to organise effectively, to form an effective Resistance to a group as powerful as men. As you note, masculinists (rapists, pornographers, pimps, and MRAs, among so many other anti-woman groups of men) not only stupidly and ridiculously name women (specifically women who actively oppose rape and men's violence against and subordination of women) "femi-nazis". Even more bizarrely, MRAs promulgate the lie that women are just as oppressive to men as men are to women. It is hard to comprehend the level of reality-denying such men have to do to arrive at such a psychotic conclusion. For one snippet of their insanity, see their presence on this discussion thread.

The status quo would have to realise that gynocide is happening to organise appropriately to transform, dismantle, and destroy the systems and structures of power that protect men's routinely exercised power over women, and men's gendered privileges and entitlements to use and abuse women.

I believe men must take responsibility for actively confronting and opposing the masculinist perpetrators of gynocidal atrocities, and a prerequisite of that confrontation means not being in denial--often willfully and always self-servingly--about what men as a class of sadistic, tyrannical oppressors are doing to women as a class that injures and kills them.

Christina said...

First Part
I think the MRAs in your country (US) are probably just as strong as they are in the UK. The reason why many people don’t seem to realise their strength is because thanks to the internet they are able to operate in stealth mode.



Instead of having big street demonstrations to demonstrate a particular issue that they don’t like, they will use the internet to rally their followers who will then flood the person’s e-mail inbox whom they are targeting with hate mail and create the impression that everyone in America disagrees with this particular persons ideas.



They seem to have done a really great PR job as many people including many feminists are starting to believe that feminism has gone too far and is now causing harm to strait white males.



I saw the links where the MRAs voiced their displeasure about you. I admire a person who gets them all uptight.



However I think you would be wasting your time if you keep engaging with them all the time as I don’t believe you will achieve anything. You should rather spend your time educating other people about their threat and supporting those who take them on.



White male oppression comes in so many different forms. MRAs and fathers rights are only 2 of many examples.

Christina said...

Second part

Here is a link to an article from Sky news you may be interested in reading. It is all about violence breaking out in the UK between extreme right wingers who strongly support white male supremacy and those who don’t. Racism and sexism is a big problem in the UK and as long as white males are running the show you can be sure things will only get worse not better.



http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Race-Riot-Election-Campaign-Warning-After-Far-Right-Demos-In-Luton-And-Birmingham/Article/200909215379270?lpos=Politics_First_Home_Article_Teaser_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15379270_Race_Riot_Election_Campaign_Warning_After_Far_Right_Demos_In_Luton_And_Birmingham

In your response to my comment on your blog, I am not sure about the death penalty for rapists. Is that not perhaps been too nice? Many women and girls have their lives destroyed after been raped and are never able to function properly again.

If a young girl of 11 or 12 is raped by her own father, what kind of future does she have? Granted many girls and women do overcome these horrid experiences and are able to carry on with their lives, but many don’t.

What these girls and women need to see are men been properly punished. Knowing that these men are getting the punishment that they deserve will certainly help a lot of girls and women move forward.

As long as we have white male judges and law makers this will never happen.

I really like your idea that it should be up to women to decide on the appropriate punishment for their oppressors. And this would not only be relevant to rape but all forms of abuse that men commit against women.

Nothing would please me more if Harriet Harman became Prime Minister of the UK. If she does I hope she cleans house by removing all white male politicians from top government jobs and replaces them with women, also I hope she replaces all white male judges with women as well.

White males have been running the UK since the beginning of time and since the beginning of time we have had racism and sexism, it’s time for that to end.

Concerning your ideas about women deciding on the appropriate punishment, she should then create a committee to deal with white men. This committee will consist entirely of black women with their mandate to bring white male oppressors to justice. They would be responsible for deciding on appropriate punishment for men whether it be rape, sexual harassment or any form of sexism or racism.

Basically their objective would be to strip white men of all their power, destroy every sexist and racist white boys club, ensure the law protects women and punishes men and bring white men firmly under their control (white men cannot be trusted and will try to regain their lost power).

For me this would be true justice. Black women (the most oppressed) destroying the power and bringing to justice strait white men (the worst oppressor). A true revolution.

Of course this revolution is just a fantasy of mine and will most likely never come true in my lifetime. But none the less it is something I would like to work towards.

Julian Real said...

Hi Christina,

A few responses. But first, thank you so much for your comments here!

I'm hearing you on the whole MRA matter, both that they are, in fact, differently but powerfully active in the U.S., and that focusing on them alone would be a waste of time.

Next, on rape and punishment. I like where you and I have gone in this. I hope the plan you most recently describe can be implemented.

I have a somewhat visceral response to hearing about rape, due to my past. And, for me, it would have been absolutely great if someone had killed the fucker so I'd know two things:
1. He won't ever be able to assault me again, and
2. He won't be able to assault anyone else.

I know several survivors of child sexual abuse who, especially when young, but also when older, believe the rapist/assaulter being "off the Earth" is the one thing that will allow more peaceful sleep night after night.

But I'm completely in agreement with the newest form of what we've been discussing. All for it.

And, YES, let's hope and pray that Harriet Harman gets elected. What a great day in feminist herstory that would be, and hopefully she could get the white male supremacists out ASAP.

Like you said, most imaginings about racist patriarchies ending is fantasy, but also, like you say, well worth fighting for, to bring into existence a world with WMS. Odds stacked against the oppressed is always one of the realities of oppression. But power when it is so corrupt and violent cannot be sustained forever.

Anonymous said...

Julian Real:

How's it going. I am the same David who posted on ALD's blog, and I am coming to clarify my position here, because a lot of it was behind the scenes and done in email.

I see off the bat that you advocate something that I disagree with and will always disagree with, which is the death penalty. Since the basis of my argument is that it is better to let ten guilty go free than to punish one innocent, I expect you to disagree with me. But I will try anyway.

The US justice system (and in the context of ALD's post, we were talking about the US justice system, I don't know enough about other justice systems to comment) is biased. As you stated, it tends to let white males off unfairly. But it also convicts men of color disproportionately as well. So I'm not sure if it is a pro-male system as much as a pro-white male system. That means that there are plenty of men of color who go to jail for crimes they do not commit, see Troy Davis as a prominent recent example of this. (Just to clarify, I am NOT trying to shift focus away from the fact that the justice system is also slanted against women, but since we are talking about accused rapists, and since that pretty much means accused male rapists, then that is what I have to work with).

With such glaring deficiencies in the justice system, I do not think it is EVER okay for them to have the ability to inflict any type of irreversible sentence. This includes death (which is why I am sure you disagree), and it includes physical castration. ALD did also suggest chemical castration, which I learned was effective, however reversible. Therefore, I shifted my position on the matter to include that as an appropriate punishment.

Here is what I don't understand. Of course the physical/psychological consequences of rape are irreversible. What PRE-emptive measures do you suggest to stop this? Even your suggestion of the death penalty is an after the fact measure. I suggested self-defense classes for women be put into middle/high school curriculum. ALD responded and agreed, but also added that I was not focusing on male responsibilities and that classes that taught them why rape/violence against women is bad would be good as well. I conceded that, and agreed.

My goal is to protect the innocent. Innocent men from a punishment that cannot be reversed in light of new information, innocent women from rape/other types of abuse. I am not sure how this is only about protecting innocent men, maybe you could clarify? If you would propose a PRE-emptive measure against rape/abuse, I'll listen.

Also, I am having trouble understanding why your death penalty idea is NOT a pro-white male idea, if only because it is very likely that those who will be put to death will be overwhelmingly POC males. I am of the impression that you are a white male, so maybe you think your proposed idea will not affect you, because you will not rape/abuse a woman. But a POC male cannot afford the same type of thinking, as they are falsely accused of crimes all the time.

Julian Real said...

Hi David,

Part one of my reply:

I find much of what you say and how you say it on ALD's blog to be male supremacist, and I plan to copy and paste what you have said there, here, and to analyse it. You may respond to what I post here about your words/actions.

Regarding what you just wrote above:
What I call for was unclear in some respects, and also confusing, to me and probably to others as well. So, I will attempt to clarify where I stand on these issues being discussed. I believe our criminal justice system is deeply white supremacist, as well as male supremacist and classist. So in this we agree. I believe men and women of color are disproportionately wrongly incarcerated, and we know that whites tend to get lighter sentences than do people of color who commit the same or lesser crimes.

I want to clarify something I said, because it isn't what I really want to say about this matter of what to do about rapists: I'm not supportive of a death penalty that is located inside a white male supremacist criminal justice system designed to oppress and also imprison women and men color, while allowing white men to go freely about our oppressive, racist, misogynistic business.

I am supportive of rapists being harmed and killed. I support people taking out rapists by any means necessary, as I stated. I believe if a woman kills a man who has battered or raped or pimped her, even if she does so years after he has harmed/abused/exploited her, she should not be arrested for this or face any charges of any kind.

So, now that that's cleared up, I'll move on to other stuff you write about:

What PRE-emptive measures do you suggest to stop this? [...] I suggested self-defense classes for women be put into middle/high school curriculum. ALD responded and agreed, but also added that I was not focusing on male responsibilities and that classes that taught them why rape/violence against women is bad would be good as well. I conceded that, and agreed.

My goal is to protect the innocent. Innocent men from a punishment that cannot be reversed in light of new information, innocent women from rape/other types of abuse. I am not sure how this is only about protecting innocent men, maybe you could clarify? If you would propose a PRE-emptive measure against rape/abuse, I'll listen.


It remains to be seen whether you will listen. You don't appear to listen very closely to what ALD says. There is much she has observed and described about your male supremacist behavior that you do not appear to attend to.

Like ALD, I find much of what you clearly "going to bat" for men at the expense of women. I see you defending male supremacist privileges and entitlements, and acting them out on her blog.

What pre-emptive measures do I suggest?

Julian Real said...

Part 2 of my reply:

1. Teaching boys from an early age not to harass and physically violate girls, or women. Making sexual harassment in school systems an offense that is taken as seriously as possession of guns and drugs is in many (if not all) schools. This includes sexual harassment of boys against girls of any sexual orientation or appearance, including the degrees to which she does and does not adhere to pornographic, male supremacist beauty standards. This means if boys harass girls by calling them "h*s" or "wh*res" or "sl*ts", or the b word or the c word, because they think she looks like women are made to look in pornography, it should be acceptable for girls to respond and retaliate in any way they wish without any punishments from anyone. It should be acceptable for boys who are known to have raped or harassed a girl to be scorned and ridiculed to whatever degree a girl or girls feel is necessary and appropriate to stop him from ever doing it again. The same should hold true for boys who harass girls as anything that means "ugly" and "too masculine". Also the same should hold true for boys who harass other boys deemed "not masculine enough" or "too feminine".

2. Outside of school, I support every community having an anti-oppression education program that, in part, focuses on how boys oppress and harm girls and women, and how men oppress and harm girls and women. I support people shouting down any man who says something sexist/racist/heterosexist. I support the creation and maintenance of spaces such that they become hostile environments to and for male rapists, batterers, exploiters, and other male supremacist jerks. I support men calling out other men EVERY TIME a man says something sexist, racist, heterosexist, misogynistic, or otherwise male supremacist.

3. I support women using any means necessary to defend herself against a male attacker. I believe that any line of defense used against him to protect her or other women or girls should not be illegal or criminalised.

4. I support making procuring, purchasing, renting, and prostituting women and girls, by men, to be actionable, criminal, and also a civil and human rights violation, punishable by any means women who are so harmed decide is appropriate. I think prostitution should not be a crime for any woman or girl working as a prostitute.

5. I believe men should organise locally and regionally to teach each other how to call out other men effectively, with "effectively" being defined and determined by women, not by men.

(there will be a part 3)

Julian Real said...

Part 3 (of 3) of my reply:

6. I think any male rapist or batterer or pimp or procurer of women or girls should be able to be legally killed. I see this measure also as pre-emptive, if it helps stop other men from mistreating women similarly.

7. I support militant actions taken by women against men to end rape and the male supremacist systems and behaviors that make it an on-going crisis, as long as those actions don't directly harm women and girls.

8. I believe rape and other expressions of male supremacist power against women and girls happens primarily because men allow it to happen, apologise for one another, defend one another, make excuses, lie, protect one another, and betray women in countless ways. Therefore, I believe that any man who knows of someone being a male rapist, batterer, procurer of women, pimp, pornographer, or trafficker, but does not organise to end that man's male supremacist behavior, that that too should be understood as allowing and endorsing rape, battery, and other forms of harm, violation, and exploitation of women by men. And that too should be punishable as women so harmed deem appropriate.

9. I believe every woman should know, if she wishes to, how to use a firearm, and how to shoot rapists, batterers, traffickers, pimps, and procurers of women and girls in the genitals and chest and head so that they may never harm another woman or girl ever again.

10. I believe you, David, should stop arguing with women about what's allegedly wrong with their thinking and start and not stop arguing with male supremacist men about how their behavior harms women and girls.

To bring the first part of this response into the last part, I think the sexist and male supremacist discursive tactics you employ, consciously or not, are despicable and reprehensible. I believe it is your responsibility, not any woman's, to figure out how to recognise them and end them NOW.

Christina said...

A lot is been discussed here about the pros and cons of the death penalty for rapists. But what about implementing proper laws to protect women and girls before the abuse gets out of hand?

Take domestic violence as an example. Why do so many women and girls take so long to admit that they are been abused by a father, step father, husband, boyfriend etc.

I think one of the reasons is fear. Fear as to what the abuser will to them if they do report their abuser. If this is the case then clearly the law is failing the victim.

Once of my concerns is the easy in which abusers are able to get bail once they have been arrested. Most victims of abuse know this.
So out of fear the victim will not report her abuser because she knows he will just get out on bail and come right back and most likely kill her out of anger.

The other problem I have is with all these women’s shelters. While I certainly don’t deny that they serve a very good purpose, especially as they take in a huge amount of abused women, my concern is why must the women who are been abused be forced to flee their own homes when they have done nothing wrong. If the abuser was unable to get out on bail there would be absolutely no reason for her to have to flee her own home.

Let’s see this in an ideal situation.

A young girl witness’s her father hit her mother. She dials a telephone number that she learnt all about at school. Within minutes the authorities have the abusive husband removed.
The abuser will be locked-up at a special prison designed for abusers. As the law will forbid any form of bail, he will stay in this prison until his day in court.

This will ensure he is unable to get out and take revenge against his family and they will not have to leave the house.

The purpose of women’s shelters would then be aimed more at assisting the women and their families in the event that the victims were totally reliant on their abuser for finance, which often is the case as this is one of the means men keep women under control.

The other problem with the law I have is, why the victims must often have to face their abuser in court. Have they not already gone through enough trauma?
I also believe these abusers should be tried only by female judges and an all female jury. This guarantees a conviction, as too many abusers get of either entirely on some technicality or get an extremely light sentence.

So in our ideal situation, when the young girl made the phone call and her abusive father was removed she would know that this was the end of her and her mother’s problems.

The father would be locked up until his court date so he could not come back to harm his family even more and when the court date did arrive he would not get off on a technicality or receive a soft sentence neither would she or her mother have to face him in court.

Julian Real said...

I seriously wish that, should Harriet Harman become Prime Minister, that she appoints you in a high position to oversee and regulate laws governing social justice issues, including, of course, how best to deal with rape and battery.

Thanks for showing how your suggestion could/would work to make things better/safer/freer for women.

Julian Real said...

RESPONSE 1 OF 2 FROM DAVID.
I still don't think you understand where I am coming from, as most of the conversation was hidden from plain view. You propose those ten ideas and are talking to me like I would be shocked and mortified if they were put into action?

I thought I listened pretty well. The only point of contention I had was that me arguing to defend men who did not rape was not me putting them over innocent women (I felt that was a result of me only referring to men, which was a result of the points I addressed leading me to only responding to points about men). I also suggested a way to protect innocent women, through self defense classes. Like I said to her in email, I think she would find in a different context/if the discussion evolved differently my arguments would sound different. It is just that I felt she had demonstrated a deep understanding of the issue, so I was arguing finer points, like what type of punishment should be given to an innocent man, not whether I believed most men accused of rape were innocent.

I'll try and break down my position very clearly.

I am fine with a rapist getting what is coming to them. I am not fine with a tainted justice system deciding who is a rapist. That's all. You seem to believe that I doubt most men accused of rape are guilty of that. I don't, at all. I am saying that not all (though it is likely closer to all) who are accused did commit rape. I don't want those people to suffer. I believe that there is always a way that protects the innocent. That includes ALL the innocent, including males like her father who did not rape. I can understand how you could see this as me focusing on males, but like I said, in the context of the discussion no one was talking about irreversibly harming innocent women (through punishment, like I said I know rape is irreversible harm), so my statements did not address that. As the rest of my post will hopefully show, I am not against protecting innocent women.

If you believe that I am saying, a few innocent men are worth more than many innocent women, I am trying to tell you I would not. Just because I did not suggest many pre-emptive measures, does not mean I am against them. I was asking you because I did not know, not because I did not think anything more should be done.

Julian Real said...

RESPONSE 2 of 2 FROM DAVID:
That being said, I'll go through them.

1) I have no problem with this, and if you need some background about me I can tell you I have never done one of those things.
(I add personal bits of information for context, since internet anonymity is not a good way to reveal who one is)

2) Great idea. No arguments.

3) Okay, hear me out. I AGREE. This is different than a tainted justice system deciding, the woman KNOWS that the man has attempted to rape her and whatever he gets coming to him, hopefully something bad, I am fine with. Whatever she has to do, she does it, no judgment from me, because I don’t/won’t know what it is like to be in that situation.

4) Agreed, never have, never will. Agreed, in an oppressive system, I don't blame the woman who works as a prostitute, because they are the victim in that situation.

5)I am not saying it is a bad idea, but unless there are measures taken early in childhood, I don't know if men would actually do it. But if there is some way to implement it, by all means. I’m not against the idea.

6) During the incident, I agree. But like I said, I don't believe in capital punishment. I don't think any court should be able to determine if one lives or dies.

7) Okay. I am not really sure what you are saying here, because militant actions is pretty vague, but okay.

8) I have not given your belief a lot of thought, so maybe you are right. I will say this though, if you are talking about me in generalized terms, then you've got it wrong. Straight up. I never defended a rapist, or rape. I defended a hypothetical person who did not rape. Period.

9) Okay, like I said, self-defense. So I agree.

10) Did I ever say "you were wrong?" to ALD. No really, I am asking you. I put out what I believed, asked her what she believed, fully admitted that my life experiences influenced my thinking on philosophical issues, and attempted to clear up anything I thought she might have taken as me calling her points "wrong". I enjoy her blog, for reasons I do not need to explain to you, and I respect who she is from the information made available through her blog (that’s all I have to go off of). I don’t think I was disrespectful to her in my tone, though I could see an argument that I was disrespectful to her on my positions. But like I told her, I am not concrete in my position on the issue, and am willing to change. If that is disrespectful to you, that’s too bad, but that is a reflection on you seeing the worst in people, not me.

Show me where I said she was "wrong", and I will apologize. But I think you are reading into what you believe are my motivations behind my words rather than reading my words.

And where exactly did I ask a woman to show me my own privilege? By asking ALD to clarify her position on castration? That wasn't a sit back and force her to give me all the information situation. That was a I lay out my own position on the issue and ask her to refute that situation. I'm not asking her to do the work for me, am I? In fact, I looked up chemical castration, I didn't ask her to define it for me. She could have declined to say anything, and I would not have argued. I demanded nothing to be done, all I did was attempt to initiate an exchange of ideas. If you feel that is wrong, well, maybe it is, but at least tell me why?

Julian Real said...

Hi David.

[Quick alert to readers: David tried to post two comments in succession here to this thread_but couldn't, for some reason. So I've had to copy and paste his responses and decided to make a new post out of them (see blog: "Conversing with David: Analysing Male Supremacist Talk Tactics").

[David, there is no reason, other than length, why you shouldn't be able to post directly to this thread. Please try writing shorter responses and submitting those to this thread in the future.]

aladydivine said...

Part 1 of 5 of my response:

“So I'm not sure if it is a pro-male system as much as a pro-white male system. That means that there are plenty of men of color who go to jail for crimes they do not commit, see Troy Davis as a prominent recent example of this.

I am of the impression that you are a white male, so maybe you think your proposed idea will not affect you, because you will not rape/abuse a woman. But a POC male cannot afford the same type of thinking, as they are falsely accused of crimes all the time.”


David, up until this point I’ve been very nice and very kind to you, even in your ignorance of your privilege. I feel very strongly that much of what you are saying stems from ignorance and white supremacy, and I also feel very strongly that you’re largely unaware of it, which is why I have been nicer to you than I would be to most men. That said, gloves are off and swords are drawn, punches will not be pulled, and I request, in advance, that you listen to what I am saying, and not assume it is an attack on you. Disclaimer over.

aladydivine said...

Part 2

What you just said above is VERY typical of a male, and of most of our society. Men of color, primarily black men, issues ALWAYS eclipse female issues, and especially black female issues. Take Skippy gates for example. Fool mouths off at a police officer and the nation is a buzz about race… a Boston Police officer responds to Yvonne Abraham (a writer for the Boston Globe) about her article on the situation. Yvonne is a WHITE female who wrote about race issues and the “struggle” Gates has had to over come to be a Harvard professor. First, that in itself is BULLSHIT because if ANYONE knows Gates or has read his writings on the so called black community you would understand that he doesn’t identify with the black struggle. Actually he trivializes it and holds a very white supremacist view on blackness and black people who aren’t middle/upper class pompous assholes like himself, but I digress. So Abraham writes a column, Officer Justin Barrett responds calling her all types of DISGUSTINGLY anti-female pejoratives, and using very inflammatory anti-black language as well. What does everyone see? They see that Barrett called Gates a banana eating jungle monkey. What they FAILED to see is that Barrett also told Abraham, an established and accomplished Journalist, that she was only good to fetch him coffee, that she was a hot little bird, and worse shows his contempt for women, his contempt for blacks, and his contempt for anyone who talks about race issues in general. Officer Barrett was working out of Mattapan Ma, in Boston which is one of the MOST predominantly Black communities in the city. But people didn’t even see that shit, all they saw was an accomplished black man being called a banana eating jungle monkey by a white officer, because black men’s issues are MORE IMPORTANT than any woman of any color’s issues. Read more on that, and my position on black male issues eclipsing ANY female’s issues here: http://aladydivine.wordpress.com/2009/07/31/apparantly-black-mens-oppression-is-more-important/

That said, you are guilty of that same crime by pointing out how MOC will be affected blah blah blah. I’m very aware of the disparity and the disgusting numbers of black men behind bars doing harsh time for shit charges, it’s a serious issue to me. It should be to anyone who isn’t racist, and white supremacist, HOWEVER it does serve a male supremacist agenda to ALWAYS allude to, and discuss black male issues while IGNORAING black female, and any female, realities and issues. You pointing out how the justice system overwhelmingly impacts black men is done so at the expense of women, of all women. I see how it could need to be addressed, and how it is important that we keep in mind that systemic racism and white supremacy STILL EXIST, yes, great wonderful, however, you say this and place your primary focus on MOC. I’m unimpressed by this… and I’m a WOC. I’ll delve more into this further down.

aladydivine said...

Part 3:

“ALD responded and agreed, but also added that I was not focusing on male responsibilities and that classes that taught them why rape/violence against women is bad would be good as well. I conceded that, and agreed.”

I do not WANT you to just concede and agree. David for ME this is more than some debate, and it is certainly not just an argument that I want to win. I want to point by point make crystal clear to you YOUR privilege and YOUR ignorance to female issues. I want you to walk away from this discussion and think “Why didn’t I see that saying that women need to take defense classes puts the responsibility on WOMEN to stop rape? Why didn’t I think that it would be MORE PRODUCTIVE to create classes on sexual harassment, rape, and coercion for men as a BETTER means to stop men from raping women? How can I change that, how can I address my male privilege so that I don’t view everything through THAT lens?” I do not want you to simply agree with me, glad you do, but that does NOTHING for me or for women who are raped. It is most important that you address, consider and OWN your own male privilege so as to be accountable for it, and to make sure you filter every thought, word, deed before you proceed. It is your JOB to do so; it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to do so.

“My goal is to protect the innocent. Innocent men from a punishment that cannot be reversed in light of new information, innocent women from rape/other types of abuse. I am not sure how this is only about protecting innocent men, maybe you could clarify?”

Only recently did you even mention WOMEN when you were talking about innocence. Prior to here, and perhaps in an email to me (but only after I pointed it out to you) you didn’t put innocent and woman in the same sentence. In prior conversations innocent=man as your point of contention, it wasn’t until I asked you were not women and girls innocent? Is a rape victim not innocent? So the point HERE is to yet again get you to see your privilege and ignorance as I believe that your failure to acknowledge the innocence of girls and women who are raped to be a product of your privilege. If your goal is to protect the innocent, period, and there isn’t a presence of thought or a bias towards men, then why was your ONLY solution to defending women and girls one that places responsibility on THEIR shoulders? If your goal is to protect the innocent, why do you continually mention innocent men when we’re talking about MEN WHO HAVE INDEED raped women (as with the fucker in the article on my blog)? Think DEEPLY about that, and when I say think I really mean that. You men are rarely able to think without an instant need to rebut, I do not want to debate you, I do not want you to go on the defense, I want you to THINK and to consider these points without needing to defend yourself. No one is saying you’re a rapist; no one is trying to call you anything negative. What I am trying to do is to get you to see, own, acknowledge and deal with your privilege. If you respond with the same nonsense after I have very clearly spelled it out for you it will be very telling of the depths to which your privilege/ignorance runs. That is not an indictment on your character, it is the truth about men raised in patriarchy and the way we normalize male privilege in this culture in such a way that men don’t even SEE it.

aladydivine said...

Part 4:

“The only point of contention I had was that me arguing to defend men who did not rape was not me putting them over innocent women (I felt that was a result of me only referring to men, which was a result of the points I addressed leading me to only responding to points about men). I also suggested a way to protect innocent women, through self defense classes.”

I would first suggest that you do some reading on rape, and on how victims respond. I can tell you that when I had 3 men chase me home because I refused to go round the corner with them the very last thing I was thinking about was the 6in knife I kept in my coat pocket. ALL I could think of was “fuckin pick your feet up and put them down girl, get your keys ready, faster, faster, don’t turn around it will slow you down, breathe, pay attention to the sounds of their footsteps you will know if their gaining on you, ok there are two to the left of you and one right behind you, oh shit one on the left is trying to get ahead of you so you’re surrounded… would it be better to run to the main street where there are more people? What if you run to the main street and NO ONE HELPS You? Make it look like you’re going straight and at the last second bang that left they’ll never see it coming. God help me please I don’t want to be hurt tonight, ok up the stairs, key in door QUICK FUCKIN CLOSE THE DOOR.” After getting safely behind one door and going through the second door to the stairs I collapsed on the stairs out of breath, heart racing, tears streaming down my face, scared out of my mind, wondering if I should call the cops, and then I ran up the stairs to my apartment, of course I didn’t turn the lights on, because they were throwing their bodies into the fuckin door. So typical of a man, who will NEVER in his LIFE have to face the fear of what it means to be a woman being preyed on by men to say take self defense classes. Been there done that, and NONE Of it would’ve helped me in that situation. I didn’t even REMEMBER any of it. This isn’t fuckin Kill Bill! This is real life! And as a woman who has gotten into her fair share of fights with men, I would’ve been no match for THREE MEN hell bent on getting what they wanted from me that night. I was just trying to go home after a long day at work and a night class that went from 7-9pm. But yeah, thank you for throwing us poor womyn folk a bone by saying we should be taught how to defend ourselves against men. How does that address incest? Or Date rape? Or when a woman is raped by her friend? I’m going to say something publicly that I never thought I would… when my “friend” preyed on me, when he waited until I was so fucked up and vulnerable that I wouldn’t be able to resist him, when he got closer and closer to me with the goal of fucking me, I wasn’t able to fight him. I wasn’t in any way prepared for what he did to me… you never are. I don’t care how kick ass you are, how strong and empowered you are, when someone preys on your weakness, and waits until something tragic has happened to you to make their move you freeze. You don’t think of the moves you learned in some damn class… you introvert, you steel yourself emotionally and you prepare for the worst. But of course, a man full off of his privilege would think that he’s “done something” grand by saying self defense classes for women means he acknowledges our innocence. It speaks more to your IGNORANCE and the lack of knowledge you have on rape, and victim responses than anything else.

aladydivine said...

Part 5:

“Since the basis of my argument is that it is better to let ten guilty go free than to punish one innocent, I expect you to disagree with me… If you believe that I am saying, a few innocent men are worth more than many innocent women, I am trying to tell you I would not.”

And here is the most male supremacist thing you’ve said to date. Of COURSE to YOU it is better, and my anger wants to tell you to fuck off for being so ignorant to the pain that inflicts on women like me who have been victimized and who have watched their attacker go FREE. How the hell do you think you’re not saying a few innocent men are worth more than many innocent women when you also believe that it is “better to let ten guilty go free than to punish one innocent?” To let 10 guilty men go free is to sentence countless women and girls to victimization. It is to put innocent men over innocent unsuspecting unprotected women and girls and I deeply resent you for saying that. I am enraged in a way I cannot even begin to describe to you cordially, for DARING to say you’re concerned about innocent women and girls then spit that filth about 10 guilty men freed being “better” than 1 innocent punished. How painfully MALE of you to say so, how ignorant, privileged and FUCKED UP of you to say something like that, particularly on a feminist woman’s blog with NO KNOWLEDGE of what her reality is, and with NO CONCERN for what such a comment could and would mean for women who read her blog who have been raped, then further victimized by the “justice” system only to see her attacker walk free. I don’t think I can even attempt to address anymore of your ignorance right now, because I am so fuckin angry at the level of contempt you show for women and the camaraderie you show with men. You are supporting rape in that statement whether you acknowledge it or not.


“If that is disrespectful to you, that’s too bad, but that is a reflection on you seeing the worst in people, not me.”

Yet another privileged statement from you David. You did that same thing to me remember? I was “attacking” you when I pointed out male privilege and the typical arguments male supremacists make when talking about holding men accountable for raping women and girls. It’s not about Julian seeing the worst in people, it’s him seeing the TRUTH in people, and particularly men like you.

aladydivine said...

Last comment regarding what you wrote to me in email:

"So when I read your blog, I read it knowing that I am basically relearning everything. Which is not to say I am going to accept whatever you say unconditionally, but I understand that in this dynamic, on matters of sex I need to listen and learn. I just think that when sex issues cross over into other fields like criminal justice, I don't consider myself the "student" but rather more like a "peer", and I have no problems getting into a debate, as long as it's civil."

You're still very much so the student when it comes to legal issues regarding rape and the law. Being male and raised to be male in a patriarchal society means that you need to listen and read and research and own your privilege. It is NEVER truly absent from your thought process until you own and acknowledge your privilege and work daily, hourly to not allow it to cloud your judgment. It is typical to say someone is attacking you when they're pointing out your ignorance and privilege too. Not to say that some WON'T do that, but not everyone who calls it, is trying to attack you.