You’d think that remarks by us survivors would merit some acknowledgement and maybe even consideration, but so far, that doesn’t seem to be the case, and maybe that tells us something. I hope I’m wrong.
Still reads like victim blaming to me. The distinction between blaming Ford for exposing people to the threats and blaming her for making them herself is a distinction, yes: but it’s still blaming. It’s not a distinction that’s relevant to the question of whether it’s victim blaming.
But that’s not, I don’t think, what anybody’s saying. What’s being said is this:
And your own perception is influenced by your own experience and your own perspectives. What I think you may be missing here is that, in most cases, the experience and the perspectives of women in this society differ from those of men. That doesn’t mean that the experience and the perspectives of men don’t matter, or should be ignored. But it does mean that, when multiple people do see a problem, the fact that others don’t see it doesn’t mean that the problem isn’t there.
Or, as RTFirefly said:
It may not even look like shit to some people; it may look like fertilizer. And in some contexts it may be fertilizer*. That doesn’t mean it’s not shit to the people having it thrown at them; or that, even if it goes past them and lands on the next person over, it’s not going to still be shit from their perspective.
You can argue that a particular bit of shit has sufficient fertilizer value, in a particular context, that the fertilizer value outweighs the shit effect and so it ought to be allowed. But that’s a different argument from the argument that says, in effect, ‘It doesn’t look like shit to me so others are wrong about its being shit.’
*though the original post being complained of isn’t fertilizer, it’s just a terrible argument; for one thing, it’s assbackwards. Whistleblower laws exist precisely to encourage wrongdoing to be reported. Violating whistleblower laws by naming whistleblowers discourages reporting wrongdoing – just as blaming victims of sexual assault for the distress of those accused discourages reporting wrongdoing.
Bone, I like you as a mod. I think you’re one of the best here. But you have a blind spot on this topic.
I understand that based on your experience and your reading of HD’s posts, it doesn’t seem misogynistic to you. But I hope you will listen to others and consider that maybe other points of view are valid. Try not arguing this from your perspective; instead look at it from others’.
I disagree on threadshitting. Threadshitting implies the thread is too stupid, or for whatever reason, should not have even been posted. The comments in question don’t do that- they are commentary on the quality and nature of the posts not on whether the topic is worth discussing.
Let me see if I have this straight then–so if I start a thread about how being kicked in the testicles is nowhere near the kind of big deal men make it out to be and a bunch of other women agree and opine that men are just big whiny babies for making out that nut shots are particularly debilitating and then a man comes in and tells us that we don’t have the requisite experience or wherewithal to put forth an informed opinion on the painfulness of taking a boot to the 'nads then he’s threadshitting. Is that how it works?
What surprises me is that survivors aren’t furious about those who lie about being abused.
Probably because those who lie about being abused are exceptionally rare.
I don’t believe anything will be done, beyond lip-service, about the misogyny and victim-blaming that occurs on this board. Pity; it’s only done by a virulent few, who manage to stay just within the letter of the rules. Apparently it’s so important to amplify these “conservative” voices* that chasing off women is quite acceptable.
*“Conservative” because they are actually of the radically reactionary right.
Here on the board?
No, people like Ms Ford.
I don’t consider 8% to count as *exceptionally *rare, and that appears to be the number the FBI consider provably false. It’s enough, in my opinion, to cast doubt on any unsupported claim, and something that, again in my opinion, actual victims should be furious about. This is not, of course, victim blaming, as these people lying about being raped are not victims.
Well, I don’t know about other survivors, but I’m not upset because I don’t think she lied.
Now how come THIS isn’t threadshitting??
I believe it ties directly into the issue of victim blaming. If the mods disgaree, I’ll drop it.
She may not have lied, but the accusation is, based on the majority of the evidence, false. It is possible she is mistaken about the identity of the person who assaulted her. That’s certainly far more likely than Kavanaugh assaulting someone he appears never to have met, at a party that appears never to have happened.
To continue to believe that Kavanaugh assaulted Ford, you have to ignore every single piece of evidence apart from Ford’s testimony. When that evidence includes testimony from people who Ford claimed would support her, that doesn’t seem to be a logical position to take.
No, I’m considering Kavanaugh’s testimony as well, which was actually more convincing than anything else.
Yeah, the SDMB really doesn’t like it when women do that.
I am sorry for your experience.
How can I express the following opinions -
[ul][li]Dr. Ford’s allegation against Kavanaugh is unsubstantiated.[/li][li]All the witnesses who she alleges were present say they remember no such thing.[/li][li]She is unable to remember exactly where or when the party happened.[/li][li]Dianne Feinstein and/or Anna Eschoo or their respective staffs pushed Ms. Ford’s name into public view for political reasons, even though this exposed both Bret Kavanaugh, and Christine Ford, to possible death threats[/ul]in such a way as to respect your status as a survivor?[/li]
Regards,
Shodan
None of those opinions are misogynistic or disrespectful to survivors or women. These opinions are also very, very different from the post in question that was, indeed, misogynistic, victim-blaming, and IMO, contributing to a rape-enabling culture.
If we were talking about some random subject, that would make sense. But we are talking about misogyny, something that only women face. They are the experts in the subject, and thus their opinion should hold more weight than any man who isn’t some sort of expert.
This isn’t an unusual proposal. Let’s try an unrelated example: If a cis woman was talking about how it felt to be kicked in the balls, and she disagreed with all the men, would you not think she was probably wrong?
Finally, I point out that it’s not just women. It’s women who are actual survivors of rape. They are even more likely to be aware of the sorts of tactics used to blame them.
Why shouldn’t you give their opinion more weight?
I’ve opened up a Pit thread just for you.