poster campaign aimed at men cuts rape rate by 10%

[chibi]

in canada

i wish we did this here rather than the terrified woman as prey animal graphic with doomy text about how the onus is on you to prevent your own rape

ps canada i love you

[Xenia]

Let's equip them all. The planet is safer now than ever which always amazes peopkle - less violence, less war so we are certainly doing pretty well with sons and we should pat ourselves as a planet on the back for that but not get complacent.

[BasilRathbone]

I think it's probably more useful to equip our sons, not to be perpetrators.

I don't think anyone would quibble about that eccles -an education campaign which tackled the perpetrators of each victim group proportionate to the known size of the problem, would seem a sensible idea.

[Xenia]

I certanily think it does no harm from time to time to draw people's attention to female violence against men but there is much less of it so it is less of a problem.

On guns for girls in Turkey I learned judo as a child. My parents wanted us to have some self defence. Getting girls to be strong - both my 20 something daughters run, marathons etc and I'm pretty strong actually physically, ensuring girls are fit and effectgive not silly pretty things spending hours on make up helps them.

Last night I watched half om youtube because I have twice been to Iran on business the Stoning of Sorya M (it is all there on youtube) and felt it was as much about the risks women run when they don't have careers, pick low paid work and are reliant on men for women as as much about sexism in Islam or male violence against women.

We can certainly equip our daughters to be less likely to be victims.

[SardineQueen]

Yes that makes sense eccles

And now I have to turn my computer over to cbeebies for a while

[ecclesvet]

I am not exclusively concerned about female rapist situations - that was perhaps clumsy wording in my first post. I think that situations other than 'male rapists, female victims' should be featured in these campaigns - i.e. female rapists, and/or male victims.

I agree with your post, but I still think that maybe 1 in a 100 campaigns could feature a non-typical situation, which would be proportionate to the statistics.

I think ClothesofSand's post was the one which was most persuasive to me about why my criticism of this campaign wasn't fair. But I still think that other campaigns should try and be proportionate in their depiction of the perpetrator/victim make up, even if that just means that one poster/campaign in a hundred is a male victim.

[SardineQueen]

xposts

This campaign was a series of posters put up in male bathrooms of bars and other places where young people gather

That is a shame. I thought maybe it was a wider one, like those awful TFL cab driver posters.

To me, posters of this type should be up in place of the ones that are up everywhere currently telling women that they are prey and they deserve it.

[chibi]

That is a good point - it's been that long since i read the article that i forgot the context for the posters

[SardineQueen]

If you want money to be spent on campaigns about female rapists rather than male rapists, and you dislike this campaign as it shows a potential assailant who is male and a potential victim who is female, well then I don't know how else to take that.

There is a limited pot of funds for the general public for this type of thing and at the moment male on female is concentrated on. Male on male information and support is focussed within the gay community and places like schools where there might be vulnerable people who do not know where to access help. For child victims there are different methods again.

To say that campaigns of this type which are not targeted should focus on women who rape, is to focus on a tiny group to the detriment of a much larger one.

And I don't understand why anyone who calls themself a feminist would want to do that.

[ClothesOfSand]

This campaign was a series of posters put up in male bathrooms of bars and other places where young people gather. It was a campaign aimed at men. There would have been no point in referring to female perpetrators because women would not have generally seen the posters.

If a similar campaign was set up that was aimed at preventing women commiting crime and placed in women's toilets, it would no doubt have to explode different stereotypes and be advertised in a different way.

So there is no reason to take issue with this campaign for not being more inclusive. Sexual abuse with victims or perpetrators from other groups would require other types of campaign because the context is different.

[ecclesvet]

SQ

"You don't want us to talk about the group the poster was aimed at which is the biggest group of perpetrators and victims ie male on female. So who's denying things?"

Perhaps you could point me to where exactly I said anything of the sort?

In fact, I've said that it should be talked about multiple times. You are the one who wants me to stop talking about rape victims, by claiming that in doing so I am somehow trying to silence you.

[BoneyBackJefferson]

CatherineMacauley

I may have to use that it is quite amusing.

[SardineQueen]

Who has actively denied anything?

You don't want us to talk about the group the poster was aimed at which is the biggest group of perpetrators and victims ie male on female. So who's denying things?

MNHQ have also sent me that post and it doesn't mention anyone by name. Which makes sense as it wasn't aimed at any single person.

[chibi]

that is v interesting, xenia about turkey. in my darker moments i wonder if women should be issued with guns and ammo at birth here

the alternative would be a world where women were actually and for real percieved as human, with all the attendant rights to bodily integrity, and not seen as some sort of intersting adjunct to the real people, men.

[ecclesvet]

SQ

a) you mentioned me by name

b) perhaps you missed the part where it then said "But actively denying those survivors you don?t center is a different story. Castigating someone else for talking about them ever, and for even calling their experiences rape, is an entirely different subject ...Ejecting other survivors from a larger community of survivors is alienating, as is also attempting to eject those who dare mention their existence."

[Xenia]

It's all very simple. More men commit violence against women so the campaigns rightly should target men and they do. I am sure most men and women support them.

In Turkey women are being taught to shoot which sounds a great idea (as so very very many have been shot by male partners this year).

[SardineQueen]

ecclesvet

a. you are not the only poster on this thread who my posts are aimed at, so why think it is all about you.

b. that thing you linked. "It?s absolutely acceptable to center a particularly oppressed group when talking about rape, especially when you belong to that group yourself. I find it entirely acceptable and even positive for women to focus on rape committed against women, and to not be constantly compelled to talk about men, who are in a position of relative privilege."

Great Maybe we can talk about that then.

[ecclesvet]

"thecurvature.com/2010/06/11/rape-male-victims-and-why-we-need-to-care/

"Here?s the thing: if you?re going to go around erasing survivors, it?s pretty difficult to erase only the ones you want to. You can?t come up with a good reason why male rape survivors don?t count without also erasing some women rape survivors or survivors of other genders. If it?s about the rapist having oppressive power based in gender over the victim, you erase women who have been raped by women or by people of non-binary genders. If it?s about penises, you erase women who have penises, men who don?t, and victims who were raped with something other than a penis. If it?s about men having so much power in society and you just being understandably really angry about that, it?s impossible to make a non-oppressive argument that white rape survivors, straight rape survivors, cis rape survivors, abled rape survivors, and so on, shouldn?t also be erased.

In short, you can?t come up with a good reason why any rape survivor doesn?t count without creating a bullshit litmus test that damages us all.

It?s absolutely acceptable to center a particularly oppressed group when talking about rape, especially when you belong to that group yourself. I find it entirely acceptable and even positive for women to focus on rape committed against women, and to not be constantly compelled to talk about men, who are in a position of relative privilege. I find it similarly acceptable and positive for trans people of whatever gender to focus on rape committed against other trans people, and to not be constantly harassed about caring more about cis survivors. I find it acceptable and positive for people with disabilities to talk about sexual violence specifically committed against other people with disabilities, and to not have to deal with constant reminders that abled people are raped, too.

And I honestly have not the slightest clue why anyone would think that I might want to take that from them.

But actively denying those survivors you don?t center is a different story. Castigating someone else for talking about them ever, and for even calling their experiences rape, is an entirely different subject. Outright saying that you do not care if they are raped may indeed be an expression of righteous anger, but it?s sure as hell not getting us anywhere, collectively. Ejecting other survivors from a larger community of survivors is alienating, as is also attempting to eject those who dare mention their existence.

No one should be expected to care more about male survivors of rape than any other survivors, or even to care just as much. But if we really believe in the right of others to define their own experiences, if we really think that sexual violence is wrong, and if we really think that rape apologism and denialism is a destructive force both personally and socially, we do still have to care."

[chibi]

i like how the campaign puts the spotlight on men, and does not make women responsible for their own rapes, and shifts the whole dynamic away from the extremes - unless he jumped out of a bush and had fangs, he can't be a rapist, unless she was a virgin on her way to choir practice, she can't have been raped

to clarify the sexual assault vs rape issue, i am pretty sure that rape as a category of crime doesn't exist in canada; what we call rape would be sexual assault there (i think, it is many years since i lived there)

this is a good start. The police in this province particularly (though everywhere, really) have an appalling track record on taking sexual assaults seriously, especially where they have been committed against women in the sex industry, and First Nations women


some of this contributed no doubt to the serial killer Picton getting away with it for so long.

the police have a lot of atoning, self-criticism, and practice changing to do

this is a start, and it is exciting to see that it has had an appreciable effect

[ecclesvet]

I think I'll post where I like, thanks, chibi.

[chibi]

You should start a new thread ecclesvet so that you can explore these issues further, i don't think this thread has the scope for it

[ecclesvet]

SQ, my first post was about what I liked and didn't like about the campaign.

If that is not clearly an on-topic response then I do not know what is.

Most posters manage to post here without personal attacks. I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, but I draw the line at people saying they disagree with me and that I would probably tell female cancer victims to "shut the fuck up".

I didn't report your post just because it was upsetting; I reported it because it was upsetting and a personal attack. I mentioned the upset because I've let personal attacks go unreported because they didn't bother me - this one did.

"Which is why so many get utterly fucked off when time and time again we are told not to talk about it"

Never said that.

"talk about something else instead"

Never said that.

"it's out of order to talk about this"

Never said that.

"X is a much bigger problem and we must talk about that instead"

Never said that.

"It is so wearing."

Quite. Imagine how it must feel to non-'traditional' victims who never see any acknowledgement that what happened to them is worth speaking up about. Indeed, when the possibility of that acknowledgement is floated, other people shoot it down because those victims are too much of a minority to deserve support. Must be 'wearing' at the least?

[chibi]

Fwiw i no longer acknowledge those posts, sardinequeen

Anyone who thinks i ought to be discussing x,y,z instead is cordially invited to start their own thread, which i will also tbh ignore

rape of men by men, women, women is very serious indeed, i am v supportive of anyone's efforts to combat it, but i will focus my energies on the liberation of women from male violence

everyone is likewise free to choose how to spend their time and energy, i wish them well

[SardineQueen]

FGS eccles your first post on here asked why this campaign ignored female rapists and said that in your eyes it minimised the experiences of men and women who are raped by women.

If that is not a clear derailment then I do not know what is.

If I were to go around reporting all the posts saying that we should forget about male violence against women and concentrate on female violence on men instead, as they are hugely upsetting to me for personal reasons, then certain posters wouldn't have any posts on here ever.

Of course women who have been subjected to sexual violence by men find this topic personal. Which is why so many get utterly fucked off when time and time again we are told not to talk about it, talk about something else instead, it's out of order to talk about this, X is a much bigger problem and we must talk about that instead. It is so wearing.

[Dworkin]

When it stays on topic, this is a great discussion and I think Basil has changed my mind.

@Catherine love your posts and I often quote wikipedia as dickipedia.

[ecclesvet]

I know that, Frothy - earlier in the thread I acknowledged that female-on-male rape statistics were near impossible to find since they don't legally exist. That might be changing in the future; I think America just changed their legal definition? But as a feminist, my definition of rape is just "non-consensual sex"; that's also a definition I've seen other people use here, because it includes stuff like a husband nagging his wife into sex, or a woman knowing that if she refuses he'll go into a sulk, etc. So by that definition, women can rape men.

I'm not derailing the discussion. I am literally talking about this campaign, and my minor criticism of it. I am 100% on topic. Apparently other posters just can't believe that someone might not toe the Official Feminist Party Line?, even though I've said again and again that I support this campaign and others like it, even if maybe there might be a case that the portrayals of rape scenarios these campaigns presents exclude a small category of rape victims, and that maybe that should be addressed.

SQ, I never asked women to turn their attention away. I don't even think it's a shift in concentration/attention - it's just pointing out a blind spot we have in our view of rape victims.

I reported your last post by the way. "Would you just do it to people with ovarian cancer, probably." That was hugely upsetting, for personal reasons.