wuglife (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
thegingeryone) wrote2018-01-12 01:48 pm
thegingeryone) wrote2018-01-12 01:48 pm
Entry tags:
Rape, Intersectionality, and the Big Ol' Misogyny Problem
This year, I'm trying not to dwell on things that make me angry. I'm trying to step back and examine why something makes me angry, and address the root causes of it, rather than dwelling on being irritable. But I'm having some trouble stopping dwelling on this thing, so maybe writing it out will help.
Naturally, warning for discussions of rape and misogyny under the cut.
Yesterday, I read an article in which the author suggested that people being coerced into sex, at the cost of their careers or reputations, wasn't comparable to rape. I don't think I've been that angry in a while. It was discussing Hollywood's sex scandals recently and...honestly it highlighted something for me that I feel I never really 'got' before. People do not know why rape is bad. They don't. This person didn't think that coercion equalled rape; they thought that the people involved should suck it up- no comments on the people who were doing the coercing. Not even a thought.
To me, that's kind of scary. This person portrays herself as an intersectional activist, but she'd happily engage in victim blaming if it furthered her own agenda. If she could make her point that these women were just whining. They chose to have sex. Never mind the blacklisting, the shame, the coercion. They chose to have sex, so it isn't rape.
I wish I was surprised by the attitude, but I've seen it a lot recently. There are activists who claim they're for victims, they campaign and write in favour of marginalised groups- on racial lines, gender lines, sexuality, income- but as soon as the victim isn't favourable, they're as disgusting as the people they claim to be against.
You cannot call yourself intersectional if you are only intersectional when it's convenient. It doesn't work like that. You cannot start blaming victims because they aren't the victims you want them to be. If you do that...and an alarming amount of activists do...I do not want you campaigning for me.
You're talking about people. That is the crux of the matter. You can discuss who gets the spotlight, whose struggles are glossed over, how people are portrayed- but you cannot say it didn't happen. A rape isn't less of a rape because it happened to a man. Coercion isn't less of a coercion because it happened to a rich person.
Once again- talk about the racial lines. Talk about income. Talk about gender and sexuality and disability, how the factors relate to who is believed, who gets the spotlight and sympathy.
But don't you dare say it didn't happen because they aren't the right victim.
Don't you dare.
Naturally, warning for discussions of rape and misogyny under the cut.
Yesterday, I read an article in which the author suggested that people being coerced into sex, at the cost of their careers or reputations, wasn't comparable to rape. I don't think I've been that angry in a while. It was discussing Hollywood's sex scandals recently and...honestly it highlighted something for me that I feel I never really 'got' before. People do not know why rape is bad. They don't. This person didn't think that coercion equalled rape; they thought that the people involved should suck it up- no comments on the people who were doing the coercing. Not even a thought.
To me, that's kind of scary. This person portrays herself as an intersectional activist, but she'd happily engage in victim blaming if it furthered her own agenda. If she could make her point that these women were just whining. They chose to have sex. Never mind the blacklisting, the shame, the coercion. They chose to have sex, so it isn't rape.
I wish I was surprised by the attitude, but I've seen it a lot recently. There are activists who claim they're for victims, they campaign and write in favour of marginalised groups- on racial lines, gender lines, sexuality, income- but as soon as the victim isn't favourable, they're as disgusting as the people they claim to be against.
You cannot call yourself intersectional if you are only intersectional when it's convenient. It doesn't work like that. You cannot start blaming victims because they aren't the victims you want them to be. If you do that...and an alarming amount of activists do...I do not want you campaigning for me.
You're talking about people. That is the crux of the matter. You can discuss who gets the spotlight, whose struggles are glossed over, how people are portrayed- but you cannot say it didn't happen. A rape isn't less of a rape because it happened to a man. Coercion isn't less of a coercion because it happened to a rich person.
Once again- talk about the racial lines. Talk about income. Talk about gender and sexuality and disability, how the factors relate to who is believed, who gets the spotlight and sympathy.
But don't you dare say it didn't happen because they aren't the right victim.
Don't you dare.