G, aka ToxicShockTaco, commented here about some stupid comments she’s read & frustrating conversations she’s had online which prompted her to write this blog post. Following her links, I found the usual victim blaming mentality which serves to excuse criminal acts; things which shouldn’t surprise me because they are so commonplace. But still, like G, I can’t help but feel compelled to say what I can in hopes that there’s a chance to educate.
Among “Jimbo’s Jems”:
So, I guess if a girl decided it would be cool to smear raw ground beef all over herself & walk inside a pen full of hungry lions, getting eaten alive wouldn’t be her fault either, eh?
Or, on a more plausible note, if she thought it would be cool to walk into an outlaw biker bar & strut around half naked, she wouldn’t be considered to hold one shred of responsibility for anything that happened to her there, either.
Right?
OK, don’t you love how he compares himself & men in general to a predatory beast? And how he thinks sex = food?
Yes, the sex drive is biological, like hunger; but they are neither equal in need nor imperative. And even when it comes to hunger, humans — even the male ones who joke about the 5 second rule for food on the floor, would consider the possible consequences of eating raw (or even cooked) meat they just stumbled upon.
If I were a man, I’d be insulted that you forfeit male ability to exercise self-control. As the mother of a son, I’m angry. How dare you say that penis or testosterone equals inability to control one’s self! As if being male limits a person to some sort of reptilian, reactionary response — of a violent nature yet!
Even the comparison to “outlaw bikers” is ridiculous.
First of all, the very word “outlaw” means criminal, so obviously, the matter of safety is an issue for anyone — and if he meant Outlaw with a capital “O”, well, I’m not sure that violence towards women is in the bylaws… And in either case, I don’t think I’d toss around that implication lightly. (Frankly, I suspect, Jimbo is just throwing around pejoratives, playing with fears &/or negative opinions of bikers; my personal experiences with bikers of any sort, including Outlaws with a capital “O,” have been nothing but respectful — in fact, they have been the first to back me up when a drunk jerk hasn’t backed-off when told to.)
Secondly, with regards to his questions/accusations that a woman “strutting around half-naked” in any sort of a bar believes herself free from the responsibility of the actions of others, let me help Jimbo out here. Such a woman may be risking legal actions such as “indecent,” “disorderly,” and “harassment” — not to mention just plain rude — depending upon what exactly “half-naked” is, what the location is (strippers, for example, are more than 1/2 naked and they are not allowed to be assaulted or raped), and other situational issues. But yeah, she’s not responsible for what other’s do.
Jimbo continues:
Because as we all know, a woman should be able to wear anything she damn well pleases with no thought to the possible consequences, and any consequences she may suffer, will never be considered to be even partially her responsibility, even though she engaged in behavior that expopsed her to risk to begin with.
Right?
No, of course not. A woman shouldn’t be outside wearing a bikini in temperatures 40 degrees below zero. A woman should not violate dress codes at the place of her employment. A woman should not wear clothing soaked in gasoline, even if she’s not standing next to a burning building. And there are countless other situations in which women should follow rules of safety & convention. But “scantily dressed” or even “nude” does not mean that she has put herself in the path of sexual danger — the criminals stalk her down on her path, regardless of how she is dressed.
In case you can’t see the difference between sexual assault & the to-be-expected dangers of my particular examples, let me make them clear for you. In the case of bikinis outside in winter, the elements are not controllable, so humans must dress for the weather or risk threats of exposure to the cold. In the case of employer dress codes, the employee has agreed to the dress codes and risks loss of job if they do not comply. In the case of wearing gasoline-soaked clothing, well, frankly, there’s no reason to wear it and it would be risking burns & death from a spark from anything anywhere along with other health issues — all immutable laws of science which can & should be avoided by not being an idiot. However, in the case of being “half-naked” or whatever, becoming a victim of sexual crimes is not dependent upon immutable laws of science or medicine or legal contracts — it is based upon the actions of another, something one has no control over, outside of societal agreements & norms (which criminals are willing to break, no matter how the victim is dressed or acts) or, after the fact, courtrooms.
In any other area of life, all people, both men & women, are considered responsible for their own safety & well being. If you have unprotected sex with strangers & get aids, it will be considered your fault for engaing in risky behavior. Drive without your seat belt & get injured in a wreck, even your insurance company will successfully argue in court that you share some of the responsibility for your injuries. But when it comes to fashion choices & how a gal presents herself in public, whether by dressing in skimpy, revealing clothes or posting sexually suggestive pictures of herself online, suddenly reponsibility goes out the window & it’s a ghastly social faux-pas to even hint that she may have brought something on herself by the choices she made.
OK, so my other examples should make most of this clear, but…
Are you, Jimbo, saying that if a woman is raped by a stranger who doesn’t use a condom & ends up with HIV or AIDS, that she is at fault? Maybe that’s not what you intended, but I’m pretty sure it’s implied there somewhere.
Even if it’s not, when a person consents to sex with anyone, stranger or not, condom use or not, this act of sex cannot be be compared with rape in any way because rape is by definition lacking consent, you freaking idiot!
Ditto the seatbelt. Use or non-use of a seatbelt is a matter of consent. And when a woman dresses skimpy, the only thing she is consenting to is being dressed skimpy. She is not consenting to sex. In fact, the question hasn’t even come up yet.
Assaults, rape and other sex crimes are without consent. Which means she said “No” or was unable to say “Yes” by virtue of physical or mental state, and what she had on or off is absolutely meaningless. At this point of “no” or inability to give consent, any action or continuation is solely the act & responsibility of the rapist/attacker/criminal.
He is the perpetrator, she the victim; and he carries all the blame. Period.
So yes, it is “a ghastly social faux-pas to even hint that she may have brought something on herself by the choices she made,” you misogynistic twit.
Furthermore, when talking about rape, do not condescendingly refer to females as “gals.”
Of course stalking or raping a woman is criminal & morally wrong. But that doesn’t mean that it’s just perfectly OK for women to exacerbate their chances by making themselves a target.
How do we, exactly, “exacerbate our chances” of making ourselves targets of crimes which are perpetuated by criminals who hate women? That is the million dollar question. But this has nothing to do with, as you ignorantly believe & argue, the dress, talk or actions of women/potential victims, attractive or not. Simply by opting to remain ignorant (because you refuse to read the actual information, studies &/or statistics), you show no concern for the realities and safety of women and are exposing yourself as a danger to women.
More from Jimbo:
I don’t think most women really understand what the sight of an attractive, nearly naked female does to a man with an active libido. Most men can control themselves, but some just can’t. And those guys have eyes, too.
This is the belief system which exposes you as a man afraid of women. You believe women have “power over men,” rendering men, if they are not already unable to control themselves, powerless to T&A. I guess in your fear of the big bad women, you see on the horizon nothing but a future of weakness, pity & self-loathing for you & your gender and so you think men have the right to take what they want to ward this off. But, Jimbo, that’s not a man.
In another comment, Jimbo wraps up his philosophy:
You make it sound like I’m somehow excusing the act of rape, when I’m not. But I will state categorically, any woman who goes out to nightclubs by herself or even with another girl or group of girls, dressed in an ultra short, tight-fitting skirt with a plunging neckline showing off a lot of cleavage & wearing what Amy Winehouse referred to in song as “Fuck Me Pumps”, then spends the evening hanging out & flirting with strange men, is putting herself in a dangerous situation. And if something bad happens to her, while it might not be technically “her fault”, SHE BEARS A PORTION OF THE RESPONSIBILITY for doing all the things that put her in that situation.
So let me recap too.
By removing any of the responsibility from the person who committed the crime, you are excusing the perpetrator of that crime.
By placing any percentage of the responsibility, no matter how small, on the part of the victim, you are blaming the victim.
Here’s the math, Jimbo: The person who commits rape is 100% responsible.
Of course, I’m aware that Jimbo, if he reads this or G’s post, will just sneer. He’ll likely dismiss this post with his usual rhetoric, “It’s a total lack of a sense of humor & an air of deathly self-seriousness that all feminists seem to have in common.” Or maybe he’ll just call me a “fat old hag” — because that’s the other usual attack. *yawn* (Even if I was, it wouldn’t make me any less right, pinheads.)
But maybe, just maybe, we can reach a few more enlightened folks who at least want to believe that males can & should control themselves & their predatory instincts.
Whether they do or not, they are 100% responsible for their actions.
The wild cat analogy is an interesting one. Our society has a standard response when a wild cat attacks a human — even someone who decided to go into areas that are known to have wild cats and who choose to ignore safety guidelines. When people are attacked by wild cats such as cougars those cats are hunted down and killed.
If rapists are truly like wild animals that have started attacking humans then the analogous response would be to immediately put all rapists to death. Somehow I doubt that Jimbo believes in his analogy enough to support this solution of holding victims partly responsible but only after their rapists are hunted down and shot to death.
Why do people like him keep tacking on that disclaimer that they aren’t blaming rape victims, when their whole argument is that women bring rape upon themselves through our own choices? It’s like how starting something with “With all due respect” doesn’t make whatever comes after actually respectful. It makes the whole thing logically inconsistent. He ought to just own it; be an out and proud rape apologist.
abyss2hope is right, too. If men are like wild cats, or bears, or sharks, or any other essentially wild and dangerous creature that rape apologists compare them to, why shouldn’t they be hunted down and shot? If a significant, impossible to identify portion of them cannot hold themselves back from attacking women, they should at least be the ones pressured to stay home, limit their drinking, and face suspicion if they ever go out alone without some kind of ankle monitor. We don’t ban people from surfing in the ocean. If an attack happens, we go out and kill a bunch of sharks.
Really, I believe that men are no more animalistic than women. They choose to rape because society allows them that freedom. People keep telling them that women make them do it. They know their victim will be on trial, and that they will likely get away with it.
I have urges too. Like most women, I have strong sexual urges, but because I haven’t been raised to feel entitled to other people’s bodies, because the concept of femininity isn’t tied up with conquest and domination, I’m more likely to find an enthusiastic partner, or go masturbate. Why is this so hard?
Abyss2hope, it’s amazing the number of times this trite & untrue analogy of wild animals & their urges are used to blame victims. You’d think by now the sheer volume of writings & proof to the contrary — as well as the implied insults to men — would shake these folks out of their fog, but not yet…
With all due respect, Marge, you’re 100% right.
Marge, when I read this from you, I stood and applauded!
And this…
You know what the response to that is/will be, right? A whiny, “But it’s easier for women to find a sex partner than men.” Which, if they really thought about it, may have something to do with their lack of respect of & for our rights, right? I know I don’t screw misogynistic twits — and if that means I have to wait for another (non-twit) fish to swim by, I’m only too happy to use my Hitachi Magic Wand on my twat while I wait.
I am so fed up with victim blaming arguments. I wrote a paper for school about how the legal system perpetuates the culture of rape. As you said, rape is about lack of consent, but in the legal system lack of consent is not usually enough to prove rape. You have to show force too. If merely saying no is not enough, that means that men effectively have a legal right to rape women up until the point of physical resistance. That’s what is at stake. Ending the victim-blaming phenomenon would mean limiting that sense of entitlement men feel towards women. This issue makes me so angry. Everyday when I walk down the street and men blatantly look me up and down, whistle at me, try to stop me and/or touch me, I am reminded of their sense of entitlement, reminded of the fact that everyday men are getting away with their aggressive expressions of sexuality.
Alessia,
I didn’t expect for you to link my blog, let alone create a post of your own about it, but I’m so glad that you did! I also appreciate the positive responses you received on it as well.
I was so upset after reading Jimbo’s ignorant responses (and some of the other poster’s as well) that I haven’t even been back to that website yet. I refuse to read anything else in that thread, which is why I stated “I’m done with this”.
People like that are not worth arguing with, and this is not the first time that “Jimbo” has posted such ignorant, misogynistic drivel. You countered everything he said much better than I could, and I’m so glad to have some support on my side.
Not long ago, a Swedish women’s shelter manager said in an interview: “as you know, men are animals”. Public outrage and she was forced to resign. I can’t help wondering why, as long as the courts still assume that men are, indeed, animals without self-control.
And yes, I am in fact personally insulted by the notion that my hormones would make me unable to stop myself from committing a serious crime.
Hi Angel, this last line of yours, “Everyday when I walk down the street and men blatantly look me up and down, whistle at me, try to stop me and/or touch me, I am reminded of their sense of entitlement, reminded of the fact that everyday men are getting away with their aggressive expressions of sexuality,” that really moves me. There’s a fine line between admiration and, as you put it, an aggressive expression of entitlement. I think if men (at least the clueless ones) had to endure such continual intimidation everyday in any aspect of their lives, they’d understand just how exhausting, infuriating & unnerving it is.
Hello again, G :)
You’re right; people like Jimbo are not worth arguing with. But we continue to point out their stupidity (& dangerousness) with hopes that others will be educated or at least reconsider their thoughts — perhaps seeing them for the insulting pack of lies (however packaged in defensive testosterone) will help open their eyes to how they diminish real masculinity.
I’m glad you feel supported here (by myself and the great folks who leave intelligent comments) and hope to see you again soon :)
Hi Peter,
You raise another good point here: How the insulting male thoughts about the poor behavior of (some) males are acceptable, but when a woman dares to say the same things, it’s unacceptable.
This is the sort of thing which makes women feel as if the whole world’s message is that we are to shut-up and take it. We aren’t equal, we aren’t safe, and if we open our mouths about it, we are discredited, punished and diminished even further in our lowly status.
I bet that woman who ran the Swedish shelter was labeled “fat, old & ugly” and a “foaming at the mouth man-hating feminist” too — all things designed to diminish her even further, labeling her in ways that make her less meaningful in a (male) world.
I am sorry that you, by virtue of your gender, have been insulted that your hormones prevent you from being fully human. I’m not being sarcastic here; it’s so much like the BS women are told — that by virtue of having our hormones we are unable to vote, fly planes, make intelligent decisions & be full humans. So I do know how insulting that is.
I’m glad, Peter, that you commented here — that you were able to be insulted by Jimbo (and those like him), yet see that even we “foaming at the mouth” types can & do distinguish between violent bad men and men in general. We need good, decent men in this conversation/battle as much as we need good decent women.
Sorry, but I have to disagree with you here. There has to be some admission of guilt on both sides. Rapists deserve to go down, hard. But a woman who goes about wearing sexually provocative attire has by nature consented to the looks and the thoughts of those around her, both male and female. She may not have consented to someone else touching her, but there has to be some acceptance that while the man’s action was wrong and sick, there are specific actions she could have taken to prevent the thing from occurring.
Understand, this is not in all cases, but in those it applies to, I think part of the post-rape counseling really should include a few simple suggestions about being a little more sexually conservative. Then again, I also think that we should be teaching that, along with every form of safe sex, in schools. Explain to the boys what happens if they get out of line. Explain to the girls how to discourage those actions.
Rape is both a sex thing and a dominance thing. In a super-feminist society like we have, many young men, including myself, have some severe issues with masculinity: where it applies, how it applies, what it means to be ‘masculine’ or ‘macho’ without being ‘chauvinist’. Terms referring to male power in society are being devalued for more gender-neutral terms, which is just fine. But at the same time, I feel that it’s one of the many causes of transsexualism and rape.
Give men a little power and respect by not undermining their confidence in themselves as males, and I’ll bet that rape will start to have a downturn. Make men feel that they are in control of their sexual selves, that it’s not ‘dirty’, and that sex is not entirely the place of the woman’s consent.
I understand that some people may disagree with me and that’s cool. We all have our opinion. This is mine.
@Anon Y Mous Wow. A woman dressing sexy makes her guilty of being raped? WTF? If a man dressed sexy and was raped by another man, you can bet that they wouldn’t put it down to his clothing but would blame the man who raped him. You’re spouting the ideal of sexual conservatism, but women should be able to enjoy their sexuality however they like it without someone forcing themselves on them. My being a sexual person does not give ANYONE the right to touch me without my consent. I make sure I get consent from people before I have sex with them, why is it so hard for a man to do the same? Really, men sound terribly pitiful from the descriptions of being animals. (Just like I look down on societies where the women have to be covered head to toe to not tempt the men. Really? Are men really that weak? How pathetic.)
I dispute your saying we have a super-feminist society. Live a week as woman and you’d see what I mean, but from your position of entitlement you can’t see it. Rape has been prevalent for centuries – even in patriarchal societies. Women have had to endure rape all along – what makes you think that feminism has caused more? Rape also affects men, as my boyfriends can attest to in dealing with the after affects from my rape and sexual assault. Blaming the victim will not get rid of rape. Educating the perpetrators and making this a society where it’s truly verboten to rape someone will stop rape.
to the dumbass who typed”
“Rape is both a sex thing and a dominance thing”
rape is an act of violence, one of my friends was raped by some loser high on coke…she was NOT the type to undermine men in any way yet she was a victim and someone i haven’t seen since that fateful day…
Anon Y. Mous, I’m not sure where to begin with you…
I too am sorry to disagree with you — but not from the point of view of politeness or even respect; from the point of deep sorrow that people like you are so completely, dangerously, willfully, ignorant.
While you say that “some people may disagree with me and that’s cool. We all have our opinion. This is mine.” I must respectfully remind you that one cannot have the opinion that rape is about sex; that’s like being of the opinion that the earth is flat. Science does not hold up your faulty opinion.
We do not live in a “a super-feminist society,” therefore I cannot “Give men a little power and respect by not undermining their confidence in themselves as males,” and take you up on the dangerous & ill-founded “bet” that rape would then “start to have a downturn.” Even if I could, I wouldn’t because your so-illogical-it-is-ridiculous gamble plays with female lives.
When you ask that men be made to “feel that they are in control of their sexual selves” — well, they are, they should be. And that control includes refraining from forcing themselves upon another person. However…
When you ask that part of male control of their sexual selves should include “that sex is not entirely the place of the woman’s consent” I urge you to re-read that. Again and again until you see how wrong that request — the very idea is!
Men do not have the right to deny females the right to control their own bodies &/or their right to consent to sex. Women are the only ones who have the entire — yes, the entire — right to control their bodies & give their individual sexual consent. Any male who even asks otherwise is asking for sexual slavery.
Men have the right to their own individual sexual consent, including masturbation; but they do not have any rights to another person’s body or consent.
When you say, “There has to be some admission of guilt on both sides,” this is entirely absurd — there is no “both sides,” like some gentleman’s agreement. Rape is non-consensual. One attacks, abuses, violates another; there is no guilt for the victim to bear or share. She may have consented to the looks and certainly has no say regarding the thoughts of those around her, but once she has, as you state, “not consented to someone else touching her,” any and all touching or other action — other than walking away — is to cease.
You say that “the man’s action was wrong and sick,” but then you proceed to blame the victim. You even go so far as to suggest “part of the post-rape counseling really should include a few simple suggestions about being a little more sexually conservative.” Again, this is both against all fact & more victim blaming. I cannot stomach yet another volley of victim blaming, so I urge you to read more here — and to get professional eduction &/or help regarding your processing of the facts.
Furthermore, I find this statement wildly inappropriate & offensive: “Rapists deserve to go down, hard.”
Your fundamentalist ignorance is further exposed by your equation of transsexualism and rape; it’s so delusional, other than by the fundamentally ignorant and the ignorant fundamentalists (who fear, among other things, science), no one comprehends you.
When you say “many young men, including myself, have some severe issues with masculinity: where it applies, how it applies, what it means to be ‘masculine’ or ‘macho’ without being ‘chauvinist’,” I suggest you begin by educating yourself. True men are educated, aware, caring humans who neither opt to remain ignorant nor argue in the face of facts; neither do they rape, attack, assault or harm others — nor do they blame the victims of such horrible acts. True men champion education, equality, and the safety of all.
Anon Y. Mouse (starts off a coward) you need to go gargle a fence post. I’ve been a man all 65 years of my life. I’ve spent about 50 of them apologizing for morons. Women are built differently then men, given. Most men find women attractive. Attractive does not have the same meaning as “target”. Women can dress in a manner that may be more attractive than sweatpants and a hoodie that does not make them a target. When I dress up, suit and tie, shaved, hair combed, shoes polished. I do not intend to be a target. When I go to the beach wearing a swim suit, which normally shows much more of me than a womans suit, I do not expect to be a target. Noticed? Yes, and I am flattered by it but I STILL DO NOT EXPECT TO BE A TARGET!. Why should a woman not be able to dress attractively without being considered a target? And if one shows up at a nightclub with a see-through blouse and a 12 inch long skirt, yes, I will notice (though not for long as I consider it tacky) but SHE IS STILL NOT A TARGET!
Men who target women for rape will do so no matter how the woman is dressed because in the end they are less than men.