Rape apologists on MN(73 Posts)
Why are their comments allowed to stand? I don't feel I can be part of a community that displays such material, usually avoid threads (triggery triggery) about sexual violence so am not sure whether it is the norm for posters to show up (on support threads, not hypothetical debates) simply to spout vile, distressing views. I saw lots of anti-feminist posts yesterday that were comedic either intentionally or otherwise but that's a very different situation from a poster looking for support and information following an assault - whether completed or not.
I feel, vicariously, horribly let down by MN. Any other sort of hate speech would surely be deleted?
I do agree that it is hateful and distressing, but I did not report the posts and have no idea if someone else has. If they are not reported then they cannot be deleted.
Added to that, I am coming around to the idea that if a poster writes something vile then it is no bad thing to keep the post up there so that others can be warned or their fuckwittery.
It might be good though, if MNHQ could warn those who post on relationship threads that these are real people, real problems, real attempted rape (in that instance) and not a hypothetical situation that is open for debate.
that would be good mmelindt.
i started this thread, but no takers as yet, sadly. if one were being uncharitable, it would seem that adding to a distressed poster's further distress is actually part of the attraction. grim.
I have reported that thread and asked MNHQ to make a statement on the thread.
Thank you. Would be good to know whether educating the deliberately ignorant takes precedence over the intentional distress inflicted not only on the OP but every reader and contributor who has been affected by sexual violence.
To be honest, I suspect that those posters are most likely trolling for reactions.
i think some men get a bit upset when they see women's spaces, even virtual online ones, and feel compelled to put 'the other side of the story' or 'play devil's advocate' somewhat. there was a poster called footlong a little while ago who was eventually banned due to his charming habit of barging into realtionships threads to tell people off for man bashing and urge women not to give up on their shitey marriages.
i think this stuff is a little of that. plus on mra sites they c+p threads from here and organise excursions over here to set the uppity women straight.
it's all very odd.
I just want to know, is MN a place where reasonable steps are taken to protect users from people who only come here to peddle rape myths and cause serious distress or not?
There is no educational value in those exchanges that justifies the harm caused. If we must have some educational goal let's put a sticky at the top of the relationship boards or on the main active talk page that clearly outlines the law and dispels myths and some guidelines about what does and does not constitute an appropriate response to disclosures of sexual violence.
well, it's like the disablist remarks thing. where does someone's right to an opinion (no matter how revolting and stupid) end, and deliberate hate speech start? i'm not saying i necessarily agree with where the line is being drawn, but i can see how difficult it is to get it right.
i do think though that, since the op has been back and commented on how unhelpful she is finding the rape apologist remarks on her own thread, that should really be enough for people posting in good
fuckwitted faith. those people choosing to stay there arguing the toss despite op's remarks are showing their true agenda imo.
I agree with you, Ideo, a sticky of that nature would be a good idea.
I think the problem is - MRA trolls notwithstanding - posters on MN reflect the views our society has on rape and sadly, there are an awful lot of misconceived and misogynist notions about it, which some MNers are bound to reflect in their posts.
Studies have been done that show women are actually more likely to blame a rape victim for being raped than men would. Distressing, depressing, but true. Juries with more women on than men are less likely to convict a man of rape.
The whole thing makes me furious.
I don't think posts should be reported because someone disagrees with them.
I read the first 3 pages of the thread you linked to, and the "not really rape" posters were challenged in no uncertain terms.
Personally I prefer to see people challenged on their views, and the debate left there for future readers to see, rather than have them silenced.
I think it's important to remember that one of the issues here is the way in which rape culture infiltrates to such an extent that it influences women too. And it's (although horribly painful for that poor OP) really interesting to see how womens' boundaries can be so eroded that they buy into the rape apology arguments.
I think it should be noticed that at least one of the posters discussed on that thread is in what can only be described as a horrendously abusive marriage; I suspect for some people, opening their minds to what rape is involves opening a whole personal can of worms that they thought they had contained.
So although I abhor their comment, I have compassion for at least some of the individuals who made them; I suspect they have suffered too.
It is not difficult to err on the side of those who are or might be distressed - I don't think anyone has a right to go through life without ever being offended by anything, but I do think MN can create and maintain a safer environment by refusing to tolerate rape apologists, especially when they are not even thinly disguised.
(am OP, have changed back to normal but equally stupid name)
Debates have no place in a support thread, none whatsoever. Posts like that can be moved to a separate thread if they are so valuable.
It is tricky, isn't it?
A sticky (or a comment at the top of each Relationship thread) to state that this area is a place for posters to ask advice and receive support, not to debate would perhaps make it clearer. And the clear indication that posts will be moved or deleted if they are seen to be debating or furthering the posters own agenda.
Insults and personal attacks are barred on MN, but if debate and opinion, however contentious, are barred then what are we left with?
Censorship is an indicator of fear and insecurity.
Debating and awareness raising about the rights of women, in the face of enduring ignorance, insecurity and brainwashing is important. Surely conscious feminist women are not so delicate that the voice of the opposition, or those who are still under the pyschological and emotional thumb of old fashioned views, will bring on an attack of the vapours?
'It's your own fault' isn't appropriate in the face of a woman's distress that she had to struggle to maintain her refusal to have sex, and it is important that that is made clear.
I wonder also how far the 'AIBU' atmosphere now pervades serious threads in relationships, and also whether MN's profile in the release of the Reg Bailey report has drawn fuckwit antagonists.
Support threads are not the place for debate and awareness raising, and the aftermath of rape and sexual assault is not a matter of delicate sensibilities ffs.
has there ever been a case of rape that wasn't 'not really rape'? this shit would never be tolerated in any other context. No! Wait! It would - domestic violence.
The posts I reported last night have been removed thankfully.
Censorship is always difficult, but the last thing someone who was almost raped needs to hear is that she put herself in danger, or led him on.
There seem to be a lot of fuckwits on MN atm- the SN threads are good examples of where personal opinion seriously needs to be challenged.
I know the thread you are talking about, and I agree.
It's one thing to spout this sort of nastiness on an opinion thread, but to do it on a support thread is really low..mind you, I am not suprised as its happened on here before.
It is good to see these opinions being challenged tho.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
Join the discussion
Please login first.