inverarity (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
inverarity) wrote2012-04-08 06:52 pm
inverarity) wrote2012-04-08 06:52 pm
Confessions of a Neckbeard
Following Christopher Priest's rant about the Arthur C. Clarke awards, there have been echoes reverberating all over the Internet, particularly as a result of Catherynne Valente's observation that a woman wouldn't get away with that shit.
This really shouldn't be that controversial. And yet, in the comments of Valente's own posts, as well as all the people talking about it, there are all these neckbeards engaging in lengthy diatribes about how it's so haaaaard to be a man and
I mean, some dude actually told Valente, after she recounted her own horrific childhood experiences of bullying and then stated that she's a rape survivor, that she had it easy! Because girls were totally mean to him in school!
Holy shit. Just STFU. STFU forever.
This strikes home for me because... I used to be That Guy. Okay, not the guy who told a rape survivor that women have it easy — I don't think I was ever that big of a douche. (If I was, I have thankfully blotted it from my memory and I'm just glad no one ever gave me the beat-down I deserved.) But I was your typical nerdy dude who was totally pro-feminism but could still pull out Mansplainin' 101 about how Women Don't Appreciate Nice Guys and Of Course No One Deserves To Be Raped But If You Walked Through Central Park At Night Flashing a Roll of Cash... and other classics in that vein.
I am pretty ashamed of my younger self, I am. (Not just for those things, but they certainly give me no small amount of painful recollection.)
I make no claim to perfection now. I try to engage viewpoints I don't agree with in a thoughtful manner, and if I still don't agree with them, I'll be measured in my disagreement unless it's just downright offensive or batshit insane. I keep a somewhat cynical eye on a lot of drama & social justice sites, agreeing with much of what is said, thinking that a lot more is rather unnuanced or self-serving or kneejerk, but unlike my younger self, I don't feel a need to jump in and say "U R RONG!" When I do get into it, I have learned to walk away from arguments that are unproductive or in which the other person is clearly a troll and sees all interactions as a win/lose binary that cannot be resolved until someone cries uncle.
The thing is, when this is an argument over Harry Potter, it's merely annoying, provoking a head shake and some eye-rolling, but when it's guys telling women that their silly lady-brains are seeing misogyny that doesn't really exist, it's contributing to the very thing they are claiming doesn't exist.
This also strikes home because of course I am a big genre fan, and I even like some of those big genre works that get neckbeards so het up when people criticize them. And yet, holy shit, the rage that spews out of the keyboard-wielding howler monkeys of the Internet when a woman criticizes the things they love!
Some (in)famous examples:
- Liz Bourke's eviscerating review of Theft of Swords.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
_allecto_ pretty much calling Joss Whedon a rapist.- Sady Doyle calling George R. R. Martin creepy and misogynistic.
- Pretty much everything acrackedmoon writes at Requires Only That You Hate.
Now, I do not agree with what all of the above women say. And one can intelligently disagree with them. I mean, I think
_allecto_'s criticisms of Joss Whedon, in particular, are reeeeeeeeally reaching (it's one thing to say you don't think his work deserves all its feminist accolades, it's quite another to say that perceived misogyny in his work means the man himself is a rapist). I haven't actually read A Game of Thrones so don't have much of an opinion on it, but Doyle does seem to stretch a few of her points a bit, and I understand she was pretty nasty to some feminist bloggers who disagreed with her. I love ROTYH, but I don't always agree with acrackedmoon (man, ACM, why you gotta keep harshin' on Evil Stevie? And I still like Harry Potter and The Name of the Wind, so nyah nyah!), and I think she can at times be a little too quick to go for the jugular.
But. All of these women get a shit-ton of nerdrage and fucking rape threats dumped on them. I read a lot of bombastic bloggers, male and female, and while men get namecalled and disagreed with, even at their most vitriolic it's usually more of a schoolyard let's-beat-each-other-up-and-have-a-beer-afterwards exchange that's as much backslapping as brawling. My worst and most nasty trolls did some taunting and dickwaving, but no one threatened me, and if they did, we'd both know they were full of shit and it was hot air. Kathy Sierra and Seanan McGuire have received death threats accompanied by personally identifying information.
What the fuck is wrong with these people?
ETA: Locked. Not because I'm a mean ol' lefty who can't stand to hear dissenting opinions (though I expect that's what
jordan179 is going to claim), but because I have to go to work, I cannot access LJ at work, and I really don't want to read ten more pages of this shit when I get home.
no subject
anyway, though, wanted to chime in to point out my problem with these kinds of 'was in the victims responsibility/fault' too arguments from a different perspective. Lets just say, for the sake of argument, that in SOME cases, perhaps yes, the victim took some reckless action that contributed to a rape. As some here have said, it doesn't absolve the perpetrator of THEIR responsibility for the crime, so dwelling on it is kind of pointless.'
More than that, though, the fact that it becomes the norm to ask those kinds of questions - how did the victim contribute to their victimization - even in an EXTREME case like Bob the lurking rapist jumps out of the bushes in the park and pounces, creates an atmosphere wherein rape victims do not feel safe in coming forward and reporting crimes committed against them.
Most rapes are NOT of the stranger jumped out of the bushes in a dark alley type. Statistically actually, in all violent crimes, men are more likely to be attacked by strangers while women are more likely to be attacked by people they know. So say a woman goes out on a date, lets the man pay or whatever, lets him come in to her place for a bit afterwards. Then he tries to take things further, she clearly, articulately, forcefully says no multiple times. He rapes her anyway. Afraid of further escalating violence, she does not fight back. Afterwards, in considering best course of action...any rape victim who doesn't live in a bubble KNOWS that reporting the crime will lead to questions:
But didn't she want it?
Why did she invite him inside then?
Why didn't she fight if it really wasn't consensual?
What was she wearing?
What is her past sexual history?
Has she ever done anything the least bit dishonest?
What's her job?
How does she speak?
Is she a bitch, a whore?
What was a ten minute incident will turn into potentially months of ordeal with so many people, rather than offering sympathy for her ordeal, instead questioning not just her story but her moral character, her clothing choices, her intentions. And statistically, the likelihood that her word will be taken against the rapists in a court of law? The chances that this will all at least be worth it in that sense? Not very high.
And I don't mean necessarily to use gendered pronouns because though male rape is rarer, I do feel they have just as much trouble being taken seriously, albeit not for completely the same reasons.
By creating/buying into a culture where it is acceptable to focus on the potential fault/responsibility of the victim, you are creating environment where any LOGICAL victim is likely to see it as being in their best interests to NOT report their crime. It's the victims responsibility to deal with repercussions, mental and physical, while the rapist gets a free pass to do it again.
no subject
And your argument is talking about social attitudes. I'm asking where does responsibility for one's own actions end and is it right to absolve someone of responsibility for their choices just because they became a victim.
no subject
and fair enough that personal responsibility is a good thing for everyone to develop. that is true. however, responsibility for a person's lack of wisdom in walking alone at night would NOT outweigh the responsibility of the perpetrator of a crime to not physically/financially/whatever violate the rights of another person. and my point regarding social attitudes towards rape is relevant because, to some degree, it creates a culture of impunity regarding that particular crime. if the victim who really did make a stupid/reckless/unsafe decision (which does not in any case mean they deserve to be attacked) does not feel safe coming forward to report the crime due to the attitude/reaction they will no doubt face which will exacerbate the trauma they already experienced, the rapist/attacker is free to continue attacking others, not all of whom will be similarly lacking in 'personal responsibility' at the time of the attack. social attitudes mean that for some victims, those experiencing spousal rape, for example, have next to no chance of their attacker getting any sort of punishment/castigation at all. where exactly is the personal responsibility in 'i told my spouse i wasnt in the mood and they decided they didnt care and attacked me/forced me anyway'?
also, i do think this is also thread derailing to continue on with so, so apologies for that.
no subject