25
   

Hey, Can A Woman "Ask To Get Raped"?

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  3  
Reply Sat 5 Jul, 2014 01:29 pm
@mysteryman,
Quote:
You guys have ignored the good points that firefly has made,
a good 80% of what she posts is filler, news accounts of rapes, often rape-rape, which everyone agrees should be illegal and should be handled by the justice system. There is no point in responding to her pointless posts.

Quote:
To be honest, it is hard to agree with your good points when you immediately turn around and say some of the most vile, off the wall comments possible
Leave me out of it, all I do is point out when she is lying or is otherwise dishonest. It is a valid point which should be brought up.

Quote:
you would find that you really arent that far apart
Until and unless Firefly condemns where the feminists are trying to take sex law we are far apart. She says that she does not want any changes in law but she also claims that their have been few changes in law to this point, which is a bold faced lie. Everything has changed, to include but not limited to the written statutes. The way these cases are handled in the system does not look anything like how they were handled 20-40 years ago. The way the cases are tried, the way prosecutors and judges are pressured to run cases and sentence harshly, the way those who claim the victim label can now tap into huge pots of money (and thus motivating lies), they way that those who take the victim label are not to be questioned and if they are caught lying are not to be prosecuted, the way the "justice" has been redefined as " vengeance for the victim" and so on and so on.

If you think that this who object to current sex law and where the feminist/state cooperative is going with sex law have points that are difficult to agree with the you sir have some very flawed judgement. That the US government is pressuring universities to throw men out of university if a kangaroo court decides that it is more likely than not (with the alleged perp given few to no right to defend themselves) that a sexual boundary violation happened should piss you the **** off. I am offended that you are not more offended, and I make no apologies for my outrage.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jul, 2014 04:13 pm
@mysteryman,
Hi mysteryman--I'm glad you did join in. I'll try to address the things you are claiming I've said--most of which I think are not accurate-- but it is difficult to do since you haven't indicated exactly what I said, by quoting me, or indicated the post in which I allegedly make the remarks.
Quote:
You seem to be saying, and have posted some links that seem to agree, that any and all sex between two people can be considered rape, and we all know that isnt true.

I've never said that all sex can be considered rape. The act of rape is specifically defined in the sexual assault laws of every state, and there is a federal definition as well. Rape is a criminal act, and as is the case with all criminal acts, it is defined in the criminal codes. I've never said otherwise. I consider rape to be only the act that the laws define it to be.

"Rape" is only one type of sexual assault--because it's only one type of criminal sexual contact-- in that regard, rape is always a sexual assault, but not all sexual assaults are classified as rapes. Any type of sexual contact done without consent is legally considered a sexual assault. Canada no longer uses the term "rape" in its criminal code, and several U.S. states have also abandoned the term, and the acts previously defined as "rape" in those criminal codes, are now simply referred to as a specific type of sexual assault. This has allowed for better inclusion of male victims, since the traditional definition of rape only referred to penetration of a vagina by a penis, and did not include penetrative sexual contacts of other bodily openings (the mouth, the anus) either by genitalia or objects.

At the beginning of this thread, I felt the term "rape" should be retained in the laws, but, after giving the matter considerable thought, I no longer feel that way. It is an emotionally loaded word, with a great deal of historical baggage, that gives greater gravitas to certain acts committed by male perpetrators on female victims, downplaying similarly serious penetrative sexual assaults that can be done female/male, male/male, or female/female, so it no longer reflects the range of serious sexual assaults we now better acknowledge as being equivalent.

I also think the term "rape" is still too heavily associated with stranger rapes in the public mind, which leads to confusion because the majority of rapes which occur now are committed by someone known to the victim, and, despite the fact that these non-stranger rapes are also clear violations of sexual assault laws, and are legally defined as "rapes", there appears to be hesitancy, for many people, when it comes to applying the historical term "rape" to those criminal acts, and an unfortunate tendency to view non-stranger rapes as somehow less serious violations than those committed by a stranger, even though the laws regard them equally.

So, while I applaud the recent change in the federal definition of "rape", to better broaden its application to male victims, and to make it more inclusive of a variety of penetrative sexual assaults, I really think we should abandon the legal use of the term "rape" altogether, and simply use the more gender neutral "first degree sexual assault"--or something similar--in defining such acts. Just as the laws have changed in the past several decades, to better reflect changes in sexual mores and community attitudes, the terms we use to describe these criminal sexual acts should also change, for much the same reason.

What makes any type of sexual contact criminal is the fact it was done without consent--and "consent", or the absence of it, is defined in the sexual assault laws of each state. And these contacts can range from touching, fondling, or kissing, to various types of bodily penetration. I don't define, or decide, what constitutes rape, state criminal law defines it. I merely support existing state laws pertaining to sexual assault.
Quote:
You believe that any time someone is raped, it is never their fault, and that even someone that instigates the sex can later cry rape.
You have defended as a "victim", a woman that climbed into a guys bed while he was asleep, and she started the sex. You have said she was raped, when it was plainly obvious that she wasnt.

I don't believe that the criminal act of rape is ever the fault of the victim, because it is legally defined as only an act committed by one party against another, making only the perpetrator of that criminal act the responsible party.

Victims might make themselves vulnerable in one way or another, or they might be naturally or situationally vulnerable, but they are not responsible for the criminal acts of someone who choses to prey on them, by taking advantage of their vulnerability, in order to make sexual contacts without their consent, or when they lack the ability to resist, or when they are not considered legally competent to consent.

Someone might make themselves vulnerable to a burglary by leaving the windows to their home open, but that does not mean it is "their fault" if another person commits the criminal act of entering their home through one of those windows, and illegally takes their property. Similarly, a rape victim, who might be vulnerable, due to extreme intoxication, or advanced age, or developmental disabilities, etc. is not responsible for criminal acts of sexual assault committed against them, simply because they were in a vulnerable state. And the laws are designed to protect vulnerable individuals from sexual assaults, precisely because they could be more easily targeted for such crimes due to their vulnerability or diminished capacities.

Who instigated or initiated sexual contact has nothing to do with whether an act of intercourse is legally considered rape--it has to do with whether consent was present at the time the intercourse took place. One could initiate fondling or kissing, but then withdraw consent for any further acts. One could also agree to intercourse, but then withdraw consent because a condom wasn't being used, etc. Any act of intercourse done after, or while, a person is saying, "No" or "Stop", or trying to physically indicate resistance, would legally be considered rape--regardless of who initiated the sexual contact.
Quote:
You seem to want to deny the FACT that men have been falsely accused, having their reputations destroyed. You seem to look at that as acceptable.

That's downright untrue, mysteryman. You've made this unjustified accusation before, and I've corrected you before, but I don't seem to be getting through to you.

I most definitely do not deny the fact that some men have had intentionally false allegations lodged against them. Nor do I deny that such deliberately malicious behavior, on the part of an accuser, can be extremely injurious to the reputation of anyone so accused. It is also damaging to the credibility of all the very real victims of rape who need to have their reports regarded seriously and investigated. And, in no way, do I feel that the lodging of deliberately false accusations is ever acceptable--not just in the case of sexual assaults, but in the case of any crimes.

However, in discussing the general issue of sexual assault/rape, I do think the issue of intentionally false allegations has to be kept in its proper perspective, both because it is a quite separate and different type of crime than sexual assault, and because it is often an issue raised by those who are intentionally trying to deny the prevalence of sexual assault, or distract attention from discussion of the very real crimes of sexual assault, or trying to impugn the credibility of any woman who alleges sexual assault, and it is often accompanied by exaggerated claims regarding prevalence of false allegations, and all of that has been the case in this thread.

The best, and most current research, done in several countries, which I have repeatedly posted in this thread, indicates the percentage of intentionally false allegations to be between 2%-8% of all rape reports--meaning that 92%--98% of rape complaints are not deemed to be deliberately false. So while the problem definitely exists--and it is a problem for law enforcement, as well as for the falsely accused, and for real rape victims as well, it is not an issue that should dominate a discussion of the actual crime of sexual assault, or one that should serve to discredit most reports of sexual assault. The crime of filing intentionally false allegations, and how that crime should be dealt with, really goes far afield from a discussion of the crime of rape--it is an entirely separate issue, that really should be dealt with in a separate thread.

In our justice system, deliberately false allegations that damage the character or reputation of another person are viewed as civil matters, and not criminal matters, and the appropriate place for adjudication of these offenses is in civil court. And anyone who feels they have been victimized, or damaged, by such intentionally false allegations, can bring a civil action against the party who made such allegations. This is true, not just in the case of deliberately false accusations made regarding sexual assaults, but in the case of deliberately false accusations of any crime, and whether these knowingly false allegations were made by an individual or by law enforcement. And a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, helps to restore the good name of those who were falsely accused, and the defendant in such an action is generally required to pay punitive monetary damage awards as additional compensation.

The misdemeanor crime of filing an intentionally false police report is regarded as a criminal act against law enforcement because it needlessly ties up police resources and time, and wastes taxpayer money. D.A.s file charges for filing false police reports when they feel it is in the public's interest to do so, since this is also a use of their resources and taxpayer's money. The penalties for filing intentionally false police reports most often include fines and community service, as well as mandated mental health treatment, but can also include jail time. Again, this is true, not just in the case of intentionally false reports of sexual assaults, but in the case of deliberately false reports of any crime. And, anyone who makes a deliberately false allegation under oath, has committed an act of perjury, something that is considered a far more serious crime, and one that carries a much harsher criminal penalty.

I have no problem with how our legal system, both criminal and civil, currently handles the issue of intentionally false allegations/police reports. Those who do have a problem with it, should start their own thread to address that issue because it is not related to the topic of this thread--it is an entirely separate issue from actual crimes of sexual assault, and it would, and should, include discussion of intentionally false reports of crimes other than those involving sexual assaults. What's rather curious, and somewhat suspect, is that no one in this thread, who is allegedly dissatisfied with the current penalties and remedies, for intentionally false allegations, seems willing to start that thread.

I've gone to great length to explain my thinking to you, and what my current positions are. If you still can't accurately comprehend my thinking, mysteryman, I give up. And, in the future, I would appreciate it if you directly quoted me, or linked to my actual posts, rather than just basing erroneous conclusions on what you think I said somewhere.


nononono
 
  0  
Reply Mon 7 Jul, 2014 08:44 pm
@mysteryman,
Quote:
Firefly,
I have not seen anyone on this thread ever say anything about rape not being evil, nobody disputes that.

AMEN!

Quote:
You seem to want to deny the FACT that men have been falsely accused, having their reputations destroyed. You seem to look at that as acceptable.


...and this is why firefly is a bigot.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jul, 2014 11:17 pm
Quote:
Rape trauma: Why cops may think victims are lying
Research » Reaction to trauma can account for fragmented, sketchy stories.
By Christopher Smart
The Salt Lake Tribune
Jul 06 2014

Frustrated by a lack of rape prosecutions, West Valley police Detective Justin Boardman is developing a new way to investigate sexual assaults based on recent research surrounding the neurobiology of trauma.

Important to a successful investigation is understanding the impact of trauma on a rape victim, Boardman says, pointing to studies by a Michigan State University researcher. They explain why a victim’s story could be inconsistent and even incoherent — and why, after undergoing an invasive exam seeking forensic evidence, a victim would drop the case.

"A soup of hormones," including opiates, cortisol and oxytocin, released at the time of an attack can disrupt the victim’s consolidation of memory temporarily, according to psychology professor Rebecca Campbell’s examination of the neurobiology of rape trauma. Victims can provide "fragmented and sketchy" statements that investigators often discard as not credible.

Pressed for more details, the victim can experience a "secondary victimization," Campbell says in an interview. They feel "blamed, depressed and anxious." When the victim realizes police don’t believe her, she disengages from the investigation — case closed.

A victim should be afforded time — about two sleep cycles — before any in-depth questioning by detectives, according to Campbell. And investigators should show empathy and not question the victim as they would a criminal suspect with challenges, such as, "You are making this up."

Campbell’s research is "life changing," Boardman says.

"I was going, ‘Oh, my God, I’ve been doing this wrong all this time,’ " he says of the traditional approach to questioning a rape victim. "That was frustrating because we don’t go to work every day to do a bad job."

The West Valley City Police Department is in the initial phases of adopting a process similar to that suggested by Campbell, Boardman says. It has led the department to develop a new protocol for questioning rape victims that already is increasing the number of cases being filed for prosecution.

Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill says Campbell’s work in rape trauma is groundbreaking. It outlines an approach similar to that taken with victims of child sex abuse, he says.

"This emphatically addresses what the victim’s needs are before we press for arrest or prosecution," he says. "Why we haven’t applied it to adult victims boggles the mind."

Gill proposes a "multidisciplinary team" approach in which police, prosecutors and health-care professionals work together to seek better outcomes.

Key to that, he says, is uniformity in training that is based in science and focused on the victim.

Such changes, however, are not easy, the D.A. concedes. "The biggest challenge we have is the complacency of our institutional biases. We get comfortable with our practices and that becomes our reality."

"We have to move away from the old model," he says. "This will require buy-in at all levels."
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/58142434-90/campbell-cases-lake-police.html.csp
nononono
 
  0  
Reply Mon 7 Jul, 2014 11:56 pm
@firefly,
firefly, if this thread is truly about a specific TV ad, and not about a personal vendetta against men, then why do you keep it going 4 years after it started with non-related articles. And why is it that you ALWAYS have to get the last word in....?
nononono
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 12:41 am
@nononono,
Quote:
firefly, if this thread is truly about a specific TV ad, and not about a personal vendetta against men, then why do you keep it going 4 years after it started with non-related articles.


Oh, that's right. It's because ONLY women are sexualy assulted. And men who are falsely accused of rape don't matter...

For someone who's told me to "Stay on topic" of a thread, it sure seems like you haven't stayed on topic in this thread of yours AT ALL.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 12:43 am
@nononono,
nononono wrote:

firefly, if this thread is truly about a specific TV ad, and not about a personal vendetta against men, then why do you keep it going 4 years after it started with non-related articles. And why is it that you ALWAYS have to get the last word in....?

you have not been around long so let me be the one to give you the 911: at A2K threads tend to run far and wide from the opening subjects. We dont have moderators here, so we tend to do what we want. I love that this happens, it is pretty much the last place where wide ranging conversation is possible.
nononono
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 12:47 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
you have not been around long so let me be the one to give you the 911: at A2K threads tend to run far and wide from the opening subjects. We dont have moderators here, so we tend to do what we want. I love that this happens, it is pretty much the last place where wide ranging conversation is possible.


And yet I've been attacked for going "off subject"? Smells like horseshit to me.
hawkeye10
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 02:08 am
@nononono,
Quote:
And yet I've been attacked for going "off subject"? Smells like horseshit to me.

Firefly and some others employ that tactic when threads go where they dont have good arguments. The owner of this site had once intended to let thread starter's be the police, where they could delete any post they wanted to. Thankfully this has not happened. Can you imagine how useless this thread would have been if Firefly had the power to delete any post should could not refute!
nononono
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 02:17 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
The owner of this site had once intended to let thread starter's be the police, where they could delete any post they wanted to. Thankfully this has not happened. Can you imagine how useless this thread would have been if Firefly had the power to delete any post should could not refute!


Very good point!

But just look at how yours and my posts are downvoted... And for ZERO good reason other than disagreeing with socially popular sentiments!

Give me ONE good reason ANYONE OUT THERE, why you down voted my lasts FOUR posts in this thread! What THE **** did I say that was so wrong or offensive???

Oh, that's right. It was because I was speaking up against firefly's propaganda and hypocrisy.

Like I've said, It takes NO COURAGE AT ALL to speak up for women (or gays for that matter.) Women are viewed as a protected class of people by society.

Whereas, ANYONE who DARES speak up for men will be openly attacked without just reason!

Guess all that "male privilege" is paying off!
hawkeye10
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 02:28 am
@nononono,
Quote:
But just look at how yours and my posts are downvoted

A very useless feature of the new A2K...Conventional wisdom is more often wrong then right, take the no votes as a indication that you are right. People vote their appetites, which is more often than not their unexamined prejudices. This triumph of fantasy over reality is the major reason America is now a basket case....I consider myself lucky that I figured this out by the time I was 25YO.

Quote:
Whereas, ANYONE who DARES speak up for men will be openly attacked without just reason!
Ya sure, but they cant put us in chains...yet, so speak truth! At least then you can look at yourself in the mirror in the morning.
nononono
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 02:32 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Quote:
Whereas, ANYONE who DARES speak up for men will be openly attacked without just reason!
Ya sure, but they cant put us in chains...yet, so speak truth! At least then you can look at yourself in the mirror in the morning.


THANK YOU!
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 03:44 am
@firefly,
firefly,
Everything I posted was based on my opinion, I did not claim it was factual.
An opinion is just that, nothing more.

As for this part...

Quote:
That's downright untrue, mysteryman. You've made this unjustified accusation before, and I've corrected you before, but I don't seem to be getting through to you.

I most definitely do not deny the fact that some men have had intentionally false allegations lodged against them. Nor do I deny that such deliberately malicious behavior, on the part of an accuser, can be extremely injurious to the reputation of anyone so accused. It is also damaging to the credibility of all the very real victims of rape who need to have their reports regarded seriously and investigated. And, in no way, do I feel that the lodging of deliberately false accusations is ever acceptable--not just in the case of sexual assaults, but in the case of any crimes.


I dont remember ever discussing it with you.
Since I am to lazy to go thru 2+ years of posts to check, I will accept your word that we have discussed it in the past, and apologize for saying it again.
nononono
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 04:05 am
@mysteryman,
Quote:
Quote:
That's downright untrue, mysteryman... I most definitely do not deny the fact that some men have had intentionally false allegations lodged against them. Nor do I deny that such deliberately malicious behavior, on the part of an accuser, can be extremely injurious to the reputation of anyone so accused.


But you see mysteryman, firefly has belittled me and derided me for bringing up the VERY REAL fact of false accusations. She's told me that that has nothing to do with this thread, and that I should "stay on subject." ...Yet the original subject of this thread was objecting to some TV add, and now firefly continues the thread with all kinds of non-related rape stories. But when I bring up rape stories that end in the accused being acknowledged as falsely accused, I'm "Not staying on subject."

It's what's known as "Hypocrisy", and firefly is neck deep in it...

Builder
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 04:42 am
@nononono,
And you're a non-entity enlisted by hawk/william to bolster support for their ridiculous claims and misinformation? You're about as credible as snow on a Summer's day. NEXT.....
nononono
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 04:51 am
@Builder,
Quote:
And you're a non-entity enlisted by hawk/william to bolster support for their ridiculous claims and misinformation?


How. The ****. Is it "misinformation" that men out there are being falsely accused of rape or that men's issues aren't being addressed by society???

How ******* high is the pile of horseshit you're sitting in?
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 05:23 am
@Builder,
Quote:
And you're a non-entity enlisted by hawk/william to bolster support for their ridiculous claims and misinformation? You're about as credible as snow on a Summer's day. NEXT..


LOL.............
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 05:35 am
@nononono,
Quote:
How. The ****. Is it "misinformation"


it does not conform to the feminists script, ergo it is "misinformation". This term is interchangeable with "myth".

Obviously you missed the memo on the redefinition of words to suit the zealots.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 03:12 pm
@nononono,
Quote:
The Toxic Appeal of the Men’s Rights Movement
James S. Fell
May 29, 2014
A growing movement driven by misogyny and resentment is pulling in frustrated men struggling with changing definitions of masculinity. A men's fitness columnist on why they should walk away.

Imagine a kid who got a cone with three scoops of ice cream in it. Good flavors, too. Like peanut-butter chocolate, plus a scoop of cookie dough. In a waffle cone. And then this child whines about the lack of chocolate sprinkles on top.

Welcome to the men’s rights movement.

Wait, what? Men’s rights? That’s a thing? Yes, it’s a thing, and while there are certain legitimate aspects to men’s rights activism, or MRA, it’s overwhelmingly a toxic slew of misogyny. This world of resentment and hate speech has been brought to light in recent days as we learned about the vitriolic forum posts and videos left behind by Elliot Rodger, the 22 year-old accused of killing six people in Santa Barbara last week. But it’s hard to comprehend from Roger’s delusional rants how potent the movement’s message can be for ordinary men.

MRAs believe the traditionally oppressed groups have somehow seized control and taken away their white male privilege. They tap into fear and insecurity and turn it into blame and rage. Often the leaders of these groups are men who feel as though they got screwed in a divorce. They quote all sorts of statistics about child custody and unfair alimony payments, because in their minds, the single mother who has to choose between feeding the kids or paying the rent is a myth. They believe passionately in their own victimhood and their creed goes something like this: Women are trying to keep us down, usurp all our power, taking away what it means to be a man.

One popular MRA site is AVoiceForMen.com, with a mission to “expose misandry on all levels in our culture” and “denounce the institution of marriage as unsafe and unsuitable for modern men” as well as “promote an end to chivalry in any form or fashion” and “educate men and boys about the threats they face in feminist governance.” They also want an “end to rape hysteria” and promote “civil disobedience.” In their defense, AVFM does support nonviolence, but with all the inflammatory rhetoric, do readers always take heed?

There are Reddit threads and other Internet forums dedicated to men’s rights, and the language and vitriol towards women and especially towards feminism is appalling. Any messages of nonviolence seem lost in the hate mongering. These groups spew logically faulty statistics about the prevalence of male rape and spousal abuse, and how there really is no glass ceiling or pay inequality, and general complaints about how “that bitch got my promotion because she has a uterus.”

Men’s Rights Canada made headlines again recently with their classless response to an anti-sexual assault campaign called “Don’t be that guy.” Posters went up across the nation implying women aren’t punished enough for infanticide, stating, “Women can stop baby dumping. “Don’t be that girl.” This was a follow up of the same campaign from last year alleging many women made false rape accusations because they felt guilty over a one-night stand.

As a white man who writes about fitness, I’m very aware of the pressures on men and the many ways that these kinds of hateful messages reach my audience, both overt like the Canada ads and the less blatant claims of male victimhood in mainstream media. It’s clear that the definition of masculinity is in flux, and for some men that’s frustrating, especially with near-pornographic ad campaigns promoting women as objects of sexual conquest. And while there are aspects of MRA that are worth bringing to light, as a movement it can suck a good man down a rabbit hole of resentment. It is backward-looking and pining for good old days that never were.

Are there some problems with specific instances of unequal treatment? Yes. Is there some anti-male sentiment out there? Yeah, that happens too. But turning these issues into a movement is laughable. It is a like a multi-millionaire who whines that a tax loophole was closed and he’s losing 0.5% of his annual income.

Men, especially white men, aren’t marginalized, we aren’t under attack, and we not in danger of losing the overwhelming privileges society bestows upon us for having pale skin and a penis. However, MRAs have been described as whining children by the women they call “feminist bitches.”

So to any man who feels like he’s getting caught up in such a movement because they feel emasculated or are just having trouble relating to women and perhaps sympathizing with Elliot Rodger, I will tell you this: Life isn’t fair. Life is NOT fair.

Women will judge you. Some will judge you based on your appearance, your height, your width, you genitalia, your wealth, your car, your clothes, your acne. In other words, they will judge you the exact same way you judge them.
http://time.com/134152/the-toxic-appeal-of-the-mens-rights-movement/


firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Jul, 2014 03:30 pm
Quote:
Fox News’ “destructive” ignorance: Network gets schooled by male rape survivor
Fox News thinks the idea of men as rape victims is hilarious. A survivor has a message for Tucker Carlson and co.
by Katie McDonough
June 19, 2014

On Fox News last week, contributor Jesse Watters made some wildly ignorant and dismissive comments about men, boys and sexual assault. While discussing a statutory rape case involving a 46-year-old woman and a 16-year-old boy, Watters said, “It is a serious crime. But if you’re a 16-year-old kid and you have sex with your best friend’s mom, you usually get high fives.” It wasn’t the first time a pundit — on Fox or elsewhere — said something to make light of the experiences of male survivors. Two weeks earlier, Tucker Carlson argued that sexually assaulting a teenage boy is a victimless crime, since according to Carlson boys think any sexual contact is “the greatest thing that’s ever happened.” When his co-panelists limply pushed back on his comment, Carlson replied, “That’s just real. I don’t know what to say. I don’t want it to be true, it just is true.”

Despite Carlson’s assurances that he is speaking for all male survivors, he is not. Most people with even a modicum of compassion and common sense understand that sexual assault is a violent and deeply traumatizing thing for survivors of all genders, but hearing about the pain that sexual assault causes from the mouths of male survivors is something we could all stand to listen to more often. Michael Skinner — a musician, educator, advocate and survivor of sexual abuse — knows all too well the consequences of minimizing the sexual violence that happens to men and boys. We spoke a few weeks ago — after Carlson made his comments about boys and rape — but our conversation is just as relevant right now.

“It’s ignorance. It’s destructive. It’s hurting so many men,” Skinner said of our cultural attitudes about men and sexual violence. “We need to break the cycle. Society reinforces this whole myth, these stereotypes, this stigma that it’s not destructive for a man, for a teenage boy. That it’s not hurtful. When in fact it is. It hurts like hell.”

Skinner was sexually abused as a child by members of his family, but was also victimized by a trusted adult when he was a teenager. Shame about these things kept him silent about the abuse well into his adulthood. “For the longest time I kept it to myself because I just felt horrible inside about what happened,” he said. “I felt dirty and perverted because of what I experienced — what was done to me. I felt weak because of it, always odd or weird. I blamed myself.”

While Fox News pundits may have a fine time joking about teenage boys being harassed and abused by adult women, Skinner knows there’s nothing funny about it. He shared his experience of being assaulted as a teenager, and discussed the many dynamics — power, physical strength and size, gender — that he struggled to understand while it was happening and in the aftermath of the assault:

As a teen — maybe around 15 or so — I was babysitting for this couple with four young children. He was an engineer and she worked part time, and they were living the American dream, if you will. And then they separated. One night, the woman came home, and as she was about to pay me, she pinned me up against a wall. Now, keep in mind, I’m 6 foot 4 and I’m a big guy. Back then, too. I could take care of myself. I wasn’t afraid of anyone. And I’m not saying that to try to sound macho, I am saying this because when this woman pinned me up against the wall and put her hand down on my crotch and stuck her tongue in my mouth, I froze. I literally froze. I was scared. I was in deep fear.

It seemed like an eternity but I know it wasn’t, it was just that split second or so. It took me a while to compose myself and push her away. And I couldn’t run out of that house fast enough. And it left me in fear, it left me feeling like I wanted to throw up.

She was the perpetrator. This was an adult. This was a woman in her mid-thirties to early forties. There was a power dynamic. It was wrong. If a male did this to a female, it would be called rape or sexual assault. It was sexual assault. It was a violation, period. I understand people on these shock radio shows and talking heads on television — they’re saying stuff just to get ratings, but saying [teenage boys can't be sexually assaulted] is so wrong.

Watters and Carlson might want to listen to men like Skinner before making sweeping pronouncements about the things they “know” about men and sexual assault. Unfortunately, their attitudes are fairly common. We tend to diminish the trauma of sexual violence against men — it’s usually played for laughs in film and television when it’s addressed at all. And the parameters of heteronormative masculinity hardly leave room for expressions of emotion or pain from most men, particularly about a topic like sexual violence.

Skinner pointed to male survivor organizations like 1 in 6 and Male Survivor as a sign that there is more support than ever for male victims of sexual assault, but said there is still a long way to go to break the stigma and stereotypes around men coming out about their experiences of abuse. “I feel like there is a double whammy for male survivors,” he said of his own experience seeking help. “I was supposed to suck it up and just get over it.
And that was fed to me by a doctor. ‘This will help you pull your bootstraps up’ — a doctor telling me to pull up my bootstraps. There wasn’t the awareness and there still isn’t.”

I can’t imagine anything more direct than these Skinner’s honest insights into our destructive cultural norms and the harm they cause, and yet we’re generally very bad at listening to people like him. We ignore survivors of all genders. And when we do hear them, we’re even worse at taking them seriously.

The statistics on sexual violence should be impossible to ignore. The same goes for the voices of survivors like Skinner.

“As men, we’re not supposed to express these emotions. We’re supposed to be tough and all that garbage. It’s wrong. We should be able to express our emotions,” he said of the shifts that need to occur to create room for more survivors — particularly men, but really survivors of all genders — to come forward. Finding the courage to speak changed Skinner’s life, and he said he wants to see that happen for others:

I think for survivors, male and female, it really is worth it to come forward and share these things in order to break that silence. It’s hard. It is painful in the healing process, but I tell you the rewards are great because, I survived. I definitely survived some horrible things, but I truly feel I’m thriving in life today. Once I was able to break that silence and do this work, I’m in a better place.

I think sharing the secrets, getting rid of the stigma, because it’s not our shame to bear. I can’t go back, I can’t change what happened to me. But if I can share my experience and it can help one other person, that’s worth it to me. It really is.

http://www.salon.com/2014/06/19/fox_news_destructive_ignorance_network_gets_schooled_by_male_rape_survivor/
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 05/17/2024 at 02:20:00