Radfem 2013 and the MRAs(861 Posts)
As many of you will remember, the Radfem 2012 conference in London was explicitly open only to born women and consequently attracted lots of condemnation and anger from people who saw this as transphobic. It was kicked out of its original venue at Conway Hall and went underground (very successfully in the end).
This year Radfem 2013 has not explicitly banned transwomen... but instead it's come under attack from Men's Rights Activists, who have staged a demo at the planned venue, the London Irish Centre, while making lots of unpleasant and ridiculous claims about how radical feminists want to murder small boys and the like. As a result the venue is threatening to cancel the booking.
I have mixed feelings about the whole trans issue but have no hesitation in declaring the MRAs utter misogynist knobbers and am disappointed the London Irish Centre has seemingly caved into them.
I agree Basil and I think their creepy loitering around in areas where women want to talk to each other online -and they aren't welcome- by trolling and derailing with such a deep level of commitment, and working in tandem with those who harass and intimidate venues to prevent women wanting to meet face-to-face at the at the Irish Centre, just shows, rape aside, how much they love to violate and control- women in particular.
There isn't a reasonable motive for continuing to insist that false allegations are a serious problem when confronted with the statistics, or for denying those stats even though they are accepted by governments and police forces, none of whom are known for their feminism.
I always suspect a man who insists on doing so, is either already a rapist or wants to keep the door open to becoming one without being held accountable. I don't mean they spend their time in dark alleys waiting to pounce on women - just that they want to be able to rape women they know without it being recognised and acknowledged as rape. Hence their unreasonable support for rape culture - they've got a vested interest in maintaining it.
I agree POPG
It gives the impression they are personally invested in propagating the myth that women, children and other vulnerable groups are unreliable witnesses, best disbelieved, when they disclose being raped by men.
Contemplating any possible motive for this personal investment is incredibly dark..
I know we make sport of their stupidity, but it really is dark....
What I don't understand is how they come on and go 'bla bla bla ... false rape allegations ... terrible ...' and they get told how rare false rape allegations are but they don't seem at all pleased or relieved to learn this.
If I was worrying about something and someone pointed out how rare and unlikely it was to happen, I'd go 'oh phew!' and devote my energies to something else.
PlentyOfPubeGardens Sun 12-May-13 18:30:40
Nice name change though LazEruss, that 'e' really suits you
SabrinaMulhollandJjones Sun 12-May-13 18:14:02
Funny how Laz "I've never even heard of an MRA before this thread" Lozenge is suddenly such an expert on rape, isn't it?
Is that how the MRE trolls operate on mumsnet- a tag team, when one gets worn down by facts and logic that expose the pesky unarguable truth- MRE 2 comes in to keep up the work of suppression? Its incredibly organised for such a time-consuming and futile activity.
Was interested to see this story today on the BBC website following rebuttal on this thread (think it was this thread though I haven't trawled back) that doubted that any army officer would have said prostitution was necessary in relation to soldiers.
We've all heard of the Korean comfort women in World War II but the fact that even today it is still being semi justified by a prominent Japanese politician (Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto) is interesting.
Extract from his comments:
"In the circumstances in which bullets are flying like rain and wind, the soldiers are running around at the risk of losing their lives,"
"If you want them to have a rest in such a situation, a comfort women system is necessary. Anyone can understand that."
He acknowledged that the women had been acting "against their will". He also claimed that Japan was not the only country to use the system, though it was responsible for its actions."
What's your point Laz?
Not misunderstanding willfully, Sabrina.
I've re-looked at Sapphire, and have now found the reports that I assume you are referring to. Oddly, the met's own website didn't advertise any problems.
Yes, it appears that even the specialist unit the Met set up is full of problems. Especially given the number of officers disciplined.
Yep, I've been reading about Yewtree. I also read the bits where some of the victims themselves said that his fame put them off at the time. I wasn't commenting on the Police actions of the time.
John Worbouys wasn't famous, but his victims weren't believed. He was left to carry on raping with impunity, because the Met told one victim "a licensed black cab driver wouldn't do that..."
You haven't read any of the links have you Laz?
Or you are wilfully misunderstanding them.
The point of the IPCC report into Sapphire was that they weren't even believed in the interview room.
Nor were Jimmy Saville's victims. And many others. Care to check into Operation Yewtree? And how so many historical rapes are now being prosecuted?
As for poo-poohing the British Crime Survey - I'm guessing Laz knows something the police and the Home Office don't, because they both accept those figures as being statistically robust and reliable.
Check out #Ididnotreport on Twitter to find out a few reasons why women don't report rape.
so why are they not introduced to this sort of thing (at an appropriate age) perhaps as part of a development class at school?
Should parents receive help to ensure their kids know what a loving and trusting relationship actually is?
Sabrina, there is a distinction you are missing I feel.
They may have been believed in the interview room, but ultimately their story must convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt.
Your mention of the famous people is interesting. I assume I am beyond the pale because I believe the accused should be allowed to keep their privacy (in this case I am purely talking about rape cases) but there was a Guardian or Independant piece I read about 4 hours ago that actually used the ched evans case.
I am unfamiliar with the full details of the case, but I understand that it didn't take long for his fans to release the name of the complainant. Also (I may be right I may not) wasn't this the case where female fans thought the alleged victim was 'lucky'?
Basically the jist of the article was, that famous people would actually be easier to bring to trail without their name being released. They are famous so can use this to hammer their accuser before they even get to trial. That's before you bring in their fans, who in this case were unbelievable.
It seems that jimmy saville may also have been seen as 'untouchable' due to his fame. If complete secrecy of the case could have been assured, would his victims have come forward? When there could have been a chance to prove guilt to the standard required, and thus a conviction.
When Mini said "it would be easier if I could just understand what your motivations are in being here?" you responded Lazarus by saying "My motivation? I've left a predominately male environment, that by accepted terms is probably heavily 'violently masculine' (still don't like the term).....Oh, and I like to think I am Libertarian, but will sometimes veer left or right depending upon topic."
I really don't see how that follows
Could you explain how leaving the armed forces and being right wing motivates you to Mumsnet, FWR and this particular thread- because it isn't self-explanitory.
And all of that isn't even touching on the victim-blaming that is rife in society when it comes to rape victims. What were you wearing? - how much had you drank? - did you go home with him/invite him in? - had you been flirting etc etc.
This victim blaming culture means that women will actually blame themselves for their own rape for "putting themselves in that situation" and so will be more reluctant to report.
Plus, as has just been mentioned, many victims are young and vulnerable and may not even name what has happened to them as 'rape. Even though it was.
Why do women not report? That is a good question Laz, and I respond by referring you back to the misogynist police and the reports like those into the Sapphire Unit where women were not believed. Then I'll add about people like Jimmy Saville's, John Worbuoy's and many other serial rapists victims who came forward and were not believed. Then finally, I'll refer you to Ched Evans's victim, who was believed, but was vilified by his fans and named on twitter, despite being legally entitled to anonymity.
I'll happily link to some more surveys - including threads on here about the prevalence of sexual assaults - but I fear that would pointless. You'll just make out we're all lying.
According to the American Medical Association (1995), sexual violence, and rape in particular, is considered the most under-reported violent crime
The most common reasons given by victims for not reporting rapes are the belief that it is a personal or private matter, and that they fear reprisal from the assailant.
"A 2007 government report in England says "Estimates from research suggest that between 75 and 95 percent of rape crimes are never reported to the police."
Plus I think you may also have to take into account that many vulnerable and younger women have absolutely no idea what actually constitutes rape or coercion. Teenagers are growing up believing that women should always be available to men, should never say no, to do so is very uncool and boys are growing up with an even greater sense of entitlement to sex.
"So why not report it properly, but bring it up in surveys?"
Are you really unable to work that one out yourself Lazarus?
So why not report it properly, but bring it up in surveys?
Which other surveys?
A small trend like lots of women don't report rape?
Yup. It's a trend repeated in every survey carried out.
British Crime Survey.
50,000 people isn't a very large group to investigate, in comparison to the population of the country. Even a small trend could extrapolate massively.
What procedures are in place to ensure the claims are even true?
Because you're worth it.
Indeed it does Plenty. Here.
I think the unreported figure comes from the British Crime Survey.
Join the discussion
Please login first.