![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
zeborahI wasn't going to link to this incredible post "On Rape and Men (Oh yes, I'm going there)" because of... something I didn't understand well enough to judge whether or not I should step carefully. Later because... well, as of this moment, it's got 1684 comments and:
a) amazing as so many of them are, who's going to read through all those unless they've been having them appear in their inbox 200 at a time over the last several days?
b) the poor author deserves a rest from her moderating!
But you should totally read the post. I hereby give you permission to read only some of the comments. :-)
This is a preamble because someone asked me to repost one of my comments, with context, so he could link it elsewhere. And so:
Context:
Someone had asked, "So you would consider a man part of the problem if he treats women with respect and equality, and would never participate in sexist remarks, but does not call out other men when they do?"
My comment:
To paraphrase: All it takes for injustice to prevail is for good men to do nothing.
Silence tends to be taken as assent. So if one man makes sexist remarks, and five men stand around and let him, then:
a) the women present will feel as if all six men approve of that sexism;
b) the man speaking will believe he has been given tacit approval to keep on speaking;
c) each of the five men will believe that the other four have given tacit approval to those sexist remarks;
d) each of the five men will have reinforced in his own mind that the appropriate thing to do in this situation is to be silent. (This is because, when we make a choice to do X, we reinforce our approval for X. eg If you choose to buy something, you'll like the thing more after you've bought it than before.)
Silence reinforces the problem. Therefore it's a (passive) part of the problem.
Further pondering:
I was discussing the general topic with a friend at lunch, and a couple of the many powerful stories from the comments. Particularly one where a creepy man was being *seriously* creepy to a teenage girl in a train full of people in a way no-one could possibly not notice -- and no-one did a thing to stop him (until finally the train stopped in a station where someone on the platform noticed, came in, and pulled the creep back out). My friend was astounded that no-one had done anything, until I talked about how people do just go along with the crowd. Even if the fire alarm's going, if no-one else reacts, you don't either. At which she remembered a local case some years ago where a white person was beating up a PoC and a crowd was just watching and watching and watching until finally one man broke out of that mob-induced stupor and stepped in; then others helped, but it took all that time.
And... the thing is that once a mob of do-nothings has formed, it will be hard for people to do something. So we need to put in the effort to teach ourselves and teach our friends and teach our families that as soon as you see something icky going on, you step in that *instant*, so that the mob of do-nothings never has time to form in the first place. We need the stepping in to be practically instinctual.
We also need to teach ourselves and our friends and our families what "icky" is. "Icky" includes rape but you're not likely to see the actual rape, only the stuff leading up to it and enabling it. So "icky" also includes-but-is-not-limited-to physical intimidation, and verbal intimidation, and emotional blackmail, and victim blaming, and disbelieving women's experiences, and sexist remarks, and gendered language, and all that crap. We need to know that it's all icky, and we need to learn to recognise it when it happens, and we need to step up and make sure other people know it's not cool too.
[A note on comments: In homage to cereta I'm leaving comments open and unscreened. However, ickiness as defined above is strictly forbidden. Icky comments will be frozen or deleted at my discretion, and offenders will be sentenced to read all 1692 comments on cereta's post. This is to be a safe space for women and other rape survivors.]
a) amazing as so many of them are, who's going to read through all those unless they've been having them appear in their inbox 200 at a time over the last several days?
b) the poor author deserves a rest from her moderating!
But you should totally read the post. I hereby give you permission to read only some of the comments. :-)
This is a preamble because someone asked me to repost one of my comments, with context, so he could link it elsewhere. And so:
Context:
Someone had asked, "So you would consider a man part of the problem if he treats women with respect and equality, and would never participate in sexist remarks, but does not call out other men when they do?"
My comment:
To paraphrase: All it takes for injustice to prevail is for good men to do nothing.
Silence tends to be taken as assent. So if one man makes sexist remarks, and five men stand around and let him, then:
a) the women present will feel as if all six men approve of that sexism;
b) the man speaking will believe he has been given tacit approval to keep on speaking;
c) each of the five men will believe that the other four have given tacit approval to those sexist remarks;
d) each of the five men will have reinforced in his own mind that the appropriate thing to do in this situation is to be silent. (This is because, when we make a choice to do X, we reinforce our approval for X. eg If you choose to buy something, you'll like the thing more after you've bought it than before.)
Silence reinforces the problem. Therefore it's a (passive) part of the problem.
Further pondering:
I was discussing the general topic with a friend at lunch, and a couple of the many powerful stories from the comments. Particularly one where a creepy man was being *seriously* creepy to a teenage girl in a train full of people in a way no-one could possibly not notice -- and no-one did a thing to stop him (until finally the train stopped in a station where someone on the platform noticed, came in, and pulled the creep back out). My friend was astounded that no-one had done anything, until I talked about how people do just go along with the crowd. Even if the fire alarm's going, if no-one else reacts, you don't either. At which she remembered a local case some years ago where a white person was beating up a PoC and a crowd was just watching and watching and watching until finally one man broke out of that mob-induced stupor and stepped in; then others helped, but it took all that time.
And... the thing is that once a mob of do-nothings has formed, it will be hard for people to do something. So we need to put in the effort to teach ourselves and teach our friends and teach our families that as soon as you see something icky going on, you step in that *instant*, so that the mob of do-nothings never has time to form in the first place. We need the stepping in to be practically instinctual.
We also need to teach ourselves and our friends and our families what "icky" is. "Icky" includes rape but you're not likely to see the actual rape, only the stuff leading up to it and enabling it. So "icky" also includes-but-is-not-limited-to physical intimidation, and verbal intimidation, and emotional blackmail, and victim blaming, and disbelieving women's experiences, and sexist remarks, and gendered language, and all that crap. We need to know that it's all icky, and we need to learn to recognise it when it happens, and we need to step up and make sure other people know it's not cool too.
[A note on comments: In homage to cereta I'm leaving comments open and unscreened. However, ickiness as defined above is strictly forbidden. Icky comments will be frozen or deleted at my discretion, and offenders will be sentenced to read all 1692 comments on cereta's post. This is to be a safe space for women and other rape survivors.]
no subject
Date: 2009-06-11 07:23 pm (UTC)Yeah. I don't like any kind of "Men are inherently [whatever]" because a) it's false and b) it's not fair to those who aren't and (frankly, more important-to-me-right-now) c) it feeds into the idea that therefore they can't help themselves so it's up to us women to police them, and that's the whole problem. If a given man is [whatever] then it's up to *him* to change.
I suspect that this is partly because women/people don't have a suitable terminology to speak well about Men. About a certain man or group of men, sure, but not about Men. It's not easy, in an age when we don't acknowledge any vital differences between men and women, beyond the purely sexual ones.
I don't believe in any vital differences (beyond the physiological) myself, so the idea of such speeches at all is weird for me and if I were arranging such an event I'd be so tempted to arrange for the speeches for Man and Woman to be switched. :-) But what you say about terminology: yes, absolutely. It is actually socially unacceptable to expect good behaviour from men. And that's just wrong.
However, there are ways to signal that you don't want to participate in a certain discussion, even if you are at a social event where you run the risk of making a fool of yourself. You can change the subject. You can turn away, and talk to someone else -- options are a bit limited here, I admit that. You can make a point of not laughing at jokes. All those methods are equally available to, and used by, women and men. It is also possible to simply state your disagreement.
My feeling is that I would really prefer that men state their disagreement explicitly rather than change the subject, if at all possible. Because not all men are going to realise that a change of subject = societal disapproval. Obviously if you're talking to your boss or the mayor or something, that's a lot harder; otoh if it's someone in power then it's all the more important that *someone* tell him. And if it's in the middle of someone's grieving memories at a funeral reception, that's awkward too, so...
Eh. Life is complicated, film at eleven. One does what one can, anyway.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-11 08:32 pm (UTC)Do you mean: have a man give the speech to Man and a woman the one to Woman? Yes, that could be interesting. You'd have to choose the speakers carefully, though. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 01:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 01:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-12 04:21 am (UTC)(Now you made my imagination start working too early in the morning)