Hello, not a long post but just a few thoughts to keep in mind.
Abusers love the holidays as it gives them plenty of opportunities to manipulate and abuse. They have extra chances to use other members of a family or friendship group (or work team) as weapons against their victims.
As I reflect on Christmases past and present I am amazed we're still alive. Indeed there is a reason I never work on new years (sadly it means I have to work xmas but I'm happy to do it), one of the more traumatic ptsd moment occurred then. In truth he used the fact it was new years eve as an excuse to pretend to be drunker than he was in order to do what he did ... he then proceeded to pretend to forget all about it due to being drunk ... another key strategy abusers use in order to abuse and then get away with it.
Even though what he did was unforgivable, he justified it (even whilst claiming no memory of it) by blaming me, I shouldn't have stayed home, I shouldn't have helped him upstairs to his bedroom, I shouldn't have ... blah blah ...
What people who are witness to these kinds of justifications, incidents etc can do is do NOT let those justifications go unchallenged, don't let the abuser narrative win.
I know it is hard, believe me I know, but the less traction witnesses give their excuses the less alone the victims will feel and will be. People who do escape safely are usually those with the largest support networks ie more people who don't go along with the abuser narrative.
Remember it doesn't require a history of physical abuse for these bastards to kill us - help us by being aware of the strategies they employ...
It does help.
Years ago, I helped a lady I knew from school (older than me) and although there and then she didn't leave her abuser it was that incident and one person being prepared to stand up with her and for her against her abuser that stuck with her and helped her to leave him a couple of years later.... sometimes just knowing you're not alone is all you need.
Blessings to all survivors and victims of dv and rape this holiday season ...
bxxx
Thursday, 17 December 2015
Monday, 31 August 2015
Thoughts on Chrissie Hynde's views on rape... stressor warnings rape and victim blaming.
Firstly here is a link to the story and her views
Link to guardian article
Secondly I wish to convey how very sorry I am that she feels she is equally to blame for her rape and assault. The horror of that experience is bad enough, to blame yourself after all of these years, to be such a strong, intelligent woman and to believe the brainwashing of society and patriarchy that the victim is ever to blame for their rape, that's just sad and wrong.
However, as bad as that is it is simply unpardonable to take that and apply it to other victims.
How any victim deals with their own assault is their deal, I personally feel deeply sorry for the clear issues she has with that, and her inability to really heal and move forward. However, to slut shame and victim blame other victims is simply horrendous.
To victim blame is to say to the rapist "you're not responsible for your actions" it says "your victim, the person you raped, is to blame, they dressed provocatively, they were drunk, they spoke back to you, they smiled at you, they broke up with you, they were too ill for sex with you..." it buys into the rapists narrative, to their view of their crime. They too blame their victim.
I worry for Chrissie Hynde, I worry for her blaming herself. I worry for victims who read her words and blame themselves, who think they have to take responsibility for their rapists actions.
Just think about it, everyone who is going on about "common sense" and people not wearing heels or having a drink or living a life, what you're saying to victims is "you were raped/assaulted? Your rapist however isn't responsible for raping you, you are responsible for them raping you."
That is simply sick. Once you buy into a rapists narrative then you are 100% in the wrong, you've crossed a moral line that unless you very publicly denounce you're prior opinion there is no coming back from.
Think about it you're buying the narratives of rapists.
You have a choice of who to blame for rape, either the victim or the rapist; - you are choosing the rapist.
Some sources below on victim blaming.
http://freakoutnation.com/2015/08/chrissie-hynde-slut-shames-rape-victims-does-not-go-down-well/
http://boingboing.net/2015/07/13/the-jackie-fox-rape-disclosure.html
If a victim does tell you there narrative please if you can't be supportive, just shut up and listen. Taking the rapists narrative is pretty much evil.
Link to guardian article
Secondly I wish to convey how very sorry I am that she feels she is equally to blame for her rape and assault. The horror of that experience is bad enough, to blame yourself after all of these years, to be such a strong, intelligent woman and to believe the brainwashing of society and patriarchy that the victim is ever to blame for their rape, that's just sad and wrong.
However, as bad as that is it is simply unpardonable to take that and apply it to other victims.
“If I’m walking around in my underwear and I’m drunk? Who else’s fault can it be?” she said.
“If I’m walking around and I’m very modestly dressed and I’m keeping to myself and someone attacks me, then I’d say that’s his fault. But if I’m being very lairy and putting it about and being provocative, then you are enticing someone who’s already unhinged – don’t do that. Come on! That’s just common sense. You know, if you don’t want to entice a rapist, don’t wear high heels so you can’t run from him,” she said.
How any victim deals with their own assault is their deal, I personally feel deeply sorry for the clear issues she has with that, and her inability to really heal and move forward. However, to slut shame and victim blame other victims is simply horrendous.
To victim blame is to say to the rapist "you're not responsible for your actions" it says "your victim, the person you raped, is to blame, they dressed provocatively, they were drunk, they spoke back to you, they smiled at you, they broke up with you, they were too ill for sex with you..." it buys into the rapists narrative, to their view of their crime. They too blame their victim.
I worry for Chrissie Hynde, I worry for her blaming herself. I worry for victims who read her words and blame themselves, who think they have to take responsibility for their rapists actions.
Just think about it, everyone who is going on about "common sense" and people not wearing heels or having a drink or living a life, what you're saying to victims is "you were raped/assaulted? Your rapist however isn't responsible for raping you, you are responsible for them raping you."
That is simply sick. Once you buy into a rapists narrative then you are 100% in the wrong, you've crossed a moral line that unless you very publicly denounce you're prior opinion there is no coming back from.
Think about it you're buying the narratives of rapists.
You have a choice of who to blame for rape, either the victim or the rapist; - you are choosing the rapist.
Some sources below on victim blaming.
http://freakoutnation.com/2015/08/chrissie-hynde-slut-shames-rape-victims-does-not-go-down-well/
http://boingboing.net/2015/07/13/the-jackie-fox-rape-disclosure.html
If a victim does tell you there narrative please if you can't be supportive, just shut up and listen. Taking the rapists narrative is pretty much evil.
Monday, 3 August 2015
Why I won't use 'migrant' except in inverted commas...
Historically immigration laws has been separated by which type of immigrant you were;- if you were making a free choice to emigrate due to your work or personal life then you classed as an immigrant, with no extra factors to consider. If you were a refugee then you were fleeing war, famine other natural disaster or dictatorship in your home land, the Jewish immigrants during and after World War 2 are an example of refugees, as are the Croatian refugees from the 1990's, Rwandan refugees from the same decade and Syrian, Iranian, Iraqi, Palestinian and many others from today. Then there are asylum seekers, these are people whose personal lives i.e. someone lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, trans-gender or queer living in Uganda, Kenya, Russia etc or political views i.e. someone who stands up against the current regime and is in danger or their family is in danger for this i.e. Turkey, Israel, Palestine (danger from Israel), Uganda, Zimbabwe, Russia, China, North Korea, Myanmar (formerly Burma), and many, many others.
To pull all of that complexity into 'migrants' is frankly deceitful, it places everyone under the category of 'choice', when the reality is far, far more complex and human.
Which brings me to the other reason I refuse to use 'migrant' outside of inverted commas. It is dehumanising, it takes all the varied, personal, complex often devastating reasons this person has had to make this journey and makes it a carbon copy identity, with a carbon copy solution, and carbon copy rhetoric, hyperbole and out right lies.
Many years ago I was on a rail replacement bus service from Crewe to Liverpool, at Runcorn a lovely Serbian refugee sat next to me. He told me some of his story, he was a chef, a 5 star chef back in Serbia, he had stood up again the ethnic cleansing the Serbian gov and military were enacting at the time, he and his family had to flee Serbia in fear of their lives, they came to the UK because we had a reputation of accepting diverse political ideas and of not killing activists. (Not sure why we got that reputation but that's a different topic). The war at that time had been over a while, but he was still under threat as a defector and traitor, he desperately wanted to go back home, though he loved Liverpool where he'd been made welcome for the most part, his job was as an oddjob man at a restaurant, 5 star chef in Serbia, oddjob man in the UK; of course he wanted to go home but not until it was safe for his family.
Another person I met was from Turkey, he had been a journalist and pamphleteer against the corrupt regime (the regime given legitimacy by the EU and UN btw) who again perpetuated genocide against the Armenian's in the mountain regions (still not something Turkey admits to). The Turkish police kidnapped and gang raped his wife before beating her to near death as a message for him. The family were able to leave for the UK where they had family who run a take-away. He now works in the kitchen at a take out, get targeted for racist abuse, he was a journalist in Turkey. He misses Turkey desperately but can not return, not unless he is granted amnesty, as he and his family are still in danger. He misses the scents that only his country has, he misses not being judged as a scrounger, even though he works hard, difficult hours in a hot kitchen irrespective of the weather, he misses Turkish coffee, he misses proper baklava, the bazaars.
To use 'migrant' to talk of the 'migrant crisis' is to take the very real, very scary reasons people flee to the UK as asylum seekers or refugees and pretend those reasons are unimportant. Worse it is to pretend that the UK's past colonial history has had no role in creating these situations in the world.
Israel and Palestine, Israel is an artificially created state, sure it was created in part to give the Jewish people a home, a home the holy books of Abraham say is their's, however that land was already Palestine, it was already someone's home. Once you do that it creates tensions, to then allow Israel to keep taking land through the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and now, as the UN et al have done. To permit Israel to do so whilst committing the most accept mass genocide the world has seen, it's surpassed the nazi holocaust, the Rwandan genocide, all with applause or excuses from the UK and US and UN.
India and Pakistan, literally when India won independence Lord Balfour's private secretary drew a line on a map and created a border. One hardly has to be an expert in international relations or global sociology to know that's a bad idea.
Zimbabwe, swapped the dictatorship of the whites for the revolutionary leader Robert Mugabe, the night freedom from the white oppressors was won, was a glorious night... sadly Mugabe loved power too much and kept it. He was able to keep it because no rational system of governance was in place, because the white (UK and Boer descendants) kept it so. Kenya, again the issues there go right back to colonialism... the list goes on.
Iraq is the mess it is because of how the 'invasion' occurred, because it wasn't about freeing a country from a dictator it was about selling off the resources and riches to rich US/Europe based businesses, all owned by white multi-billionaires, funny that.
We can't create these problems by our actions, current and historical and blame the persecuted for their persecution and refuse them succour, we have a moral, a human, and a perpetrators responsibility to treat these asylum seekers, refugees as people, as victims of circumstances they have no control over. We shouldn't be labelling them 'migrants' and ignoring their individual narratives nor our part as a nation, currently and historically, in their desperation.
Please at least think twice before using 'migrant' - language is powerful, how we choose to use it is as powerful.
Please read this article tackling myths about the refugees and asylum seekers in Calais
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/07/31/calais-migrants-crisis-myths-facts_n_7910350.html
And this is a great piece about colonial privilege
http://www.uhurusolidarity.org/2014/02/10/the-material-basis-of-white-privilege-is-colonial-domination-of-african-people/
To pull all of that complexity into 'migrants' is frankly deceitful, it places everyone under the category of 'choice', when the reality is far, far more complex and human.
Which brings me to the other reason I refuse to use 'migrant' outside of inverted commas. It is dehumanising, it takes all the varied, personal, complex often devastating reasons this person has had to make this journey and makes it a carbon copy identity, with a carbon copy solution, and carbon copy rhetoric, hyperbole and out right lies.
Many years ago I was on a rail replacement bus service from Crewe to Liverpool, at Runcorn a lovely Serbian refugee sat next to me. He told me some of his story, he was a chef, a 5 star chef back in Serbia, he had stood up again the ethnic cleansing the Serbian gov and military were enacting at the time, he and his family had to flee Serbia in fear of their lives, they came to the UK because we had a reputation of accepting diverse political ideas and of not killing activists. (Not sure why we got that reputation but that's a different topic). The war at that time had been over a while, but he was still under threat as a defector and traitor, he desperately wanted to go back home, though he loved Liverpool where he'd been made welcome for the most part, his job was as an oddjob man at a restaurant, 5 star chef in Serbia, oddjob man in the UK; of course he wanted to go home but not until it was safe for his family.
Another person I met was from Turkey, he had been a journalist and pamphleteer against the corrupt regime (the regime given legitimacy by the EU and UN btw) who again perpetuated genocide against the Armenian's in the mountain regions (still not something Turkey admits to). The Turkish police kidnapped and gang raped his wife before beating her to near death as a message for him. The family were able to leave for the UK where they had family who run a take-away. He now works in the kitchen at a take out, get targeted for racist abuse, he was a journalist in Turkey. He misses Turkey desperately but can not return, not unless he is granted amnesty, as he and his family are still in danger. He misses the scents that only his country has, he misses not being judged as a scrounger, even though he works hard, difficult hours in a hot kitchen irrespective of the weather, he misses Turkish coffee, he misses proper baklava, the bazaars.
To use 'migrant' to talk of the 'migrant crisis' is to take the very real, very scary reasons people flee to the UK as asylum seekers or refugees and pretend those reasons are unimportant. Worse it is to pretend that the UK's past colonial history has had no role in creating these situations in the world.
Israel and Palestine, Israel is an artificially created state, sure it was created in part to give the Jewish people a home, a home the holy books of Abraham say is their's, however that land was already Palestine, it was already someone's home. Once you do that it creates tensions, to then allow Israel to keep taking land through the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and now, as the UN et al have done. To permit Israel to do so whilst committing the most accept mass genocide the world has seen, it's surpassed the nazi holocaust, the Rwandan genocide, all with applause or excuses from the UK and US and UN.
India and Pakistan, literally when India won independence Lord Balfour's private secretary drew a line on a map and created a border. One hardly has to be an expert in international relations or global sociology to know that's a bad idea.
Zimbabwe, swapped the dictatorship of the whites for the revolutionary leader Robert Mugabe, the night freedom from the white oppressors was won, was a glorious night... sadly Mugabe loved power too much and kept it. He was able to keep it because no rational system of governance was in place, because the white (UK and Boer descendants) kept it so. Kenya, again the issues there go right back to colonialism... the list goes on.
Iraq is the mess it is because of how the 'invasion' occurred, because it wasn't about freeing a country from a dictator it was about selling off the resources and riches to rich US/Europe based businesses, all owned by white multi-billionaires, funny that.
We can't create these problems by our actions, current and historical and blame the persecuted for their persecution and refuse them succour, we have a moral, a human, and a perpetrators responsibility to treat these asylum seekers, refugees as people, as victims of circumstances they have no control over. We shouldn't be labelling them 'migrants' and ignoring their individual narratives nor our part as a nation, currently and historically, in their desperation.
Please at least think twice before using 'migrant' - language is powerful, how we choose to use it is as powerful.
Please read this article tackling myths about the refugees and asylum seekers in Calais
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/07/31/calais-migrants-crisis-myths-facts_n_7910350.html
And this is a great piece about colonial privilege
http://www.uhurusolidarity.org/2014/02/10/the-material-basis-of-white-privilege-is-colonial-domination-of-african-people/
Sunday, 26 July 2015
Why is it survivors make non survivors defensive...
Over the last several days, as I've been a little unwell I've spent more time on facebook than normal.
Abuse seems to be the theme of the week, and the one thing that is common is that when abuse survivors speak out and share our experiences to offer some real life perspective we're roundly dismissed as being emotional, as allowing our abuse to rule our heads. I was advised to get counselling and to stop using the internet if I couldn't separate my experiences from real life, I saw a male survivor being told his abuse wasn't as bad as if it had been done by a man, a lesbian survivor told she can't have been abused as lesbians don't abuse, a gay man told he wasn't as badly off as if his abuse had been to a woman....
In each case, all the above and more, the survivor's story is being silenced because for non survivors they can't quite accept that abuse is NEVER the survivors fault. One male survivor whose story was horrendous, even compared to the many, many stories I've listened to over the years, was told he'd no doubt deserved it as he probably abused his partner first ...
None of these derisive comments were from actual survivors.
One facebook page Another Angry Voice (a political page), posted a piece critiquing a tool designed specifically for female victims of male violence, a tool which already has a male version a trans version and gender neutral versions and variations thereof. In the comments AAV actually dismissed views from survivors and professionals in DV support as contentless because they didn't support his poorly written piece.
His attitude to said survivors was that our experiences were basically irrelevant. As were the majority of the MRA commentators who supported him.
As survivors, as allies we have a responsibility to a) listen to other survivors even if we disagree with them b) never tell a survivor they deserved their abuse c) if a page you follow dismisses survivor stories and concerns unfollow it and tell them why, only by challenging this derisive attitude towards survivors and abuse can we change how non survivors respond to us.
Above all don't let derision silence you, your story is powerful, that is why they are scared of it and you, be proud, be true to you, and don't let them silence you without consequences.
You're awesome!
Added later ****
So yesterday evening AAV posted this on his blog - of all the comments, at least hundreds, critiquing his piece he picked posts from ONE person to be representative of the opposing arguments put to him and his shallow piece...
All of those contributions and he chooses to attack the least of them, he chooses to attack survivors...
my repsonse to this asshattery is this; -
his reply is about as perfect an example of white male privilege as you can get, the red pillers couldn't do better; -
And just for extra proof that some women don't know that hating feminism is akin to self hatred, oh and several sterling attempts to silence survivors here's one Jan Cook; -
To which I replied; -
To which she tries to pretend she didn't basically say "you're too emotional to be rational"; -
And so again my reply is; -
A selection of my other responses to equal facile woman silencing attempts: -
A typical male reply to my above initial response to AAVs apologist bs; -
My response, please feel free to bastardise it for your own needs when you're challenged in a like manner, though it only works if your prior non sweary responses are in black and white (if you don't control the thread/forum delete/edit options then I suggest copying everything into a word doc); -
He hasn't replied to that yet.
This whole issue is a prime example of white male privilege, talk about activism by the oppressed for the oppressed, whine it isn't about you, tell the oppressed you know better than they do and they need to get in line and stop being angry. those "not all men" "all lives matter" imbeciles all seem to be the same people... funny that.
Abuse seems to be the theme of the week, and the one thing that is common is that when abuse survivors speak out and share our experiences to offer some real life perspective we're roundly dismissed as being emotional, as allowing our abuse to rule our heads. I was advised to get counselling and to stop using the internet if I couldn't separate my experiences from real life, I saw a male survivor being told his abuse wasn't as bad as if it had been done by a man, a lesbian survivor told she can't have been abused as lesbians don't abuse, a gay man told he wasn't as badly off as if his abuse had been to a woman....
In each case, all the above and more, the survivor's story is being silenced because for non survivors they can't quite accept that abuse is NEVER the survivors fault. One male survivor whose story was horrendous, even compared to the many, many stories I've listened to over the years, was told he'd no doubt deserved it as he probably abused his partner first ...
None of these derisive comments were from actual survivors.
One facebook page Another Angry Voice (a political page), posted a piece critiquing a tool designed specifically for female victims of male violence, a tool which already has a male version a trans version and gender neutral versions and variations thereof. In the comments AAV actually dismissed views from survivors and professionals in DV support as contentless because they didn't support his poorly written piece.
His attitude to said survivors was that our experiences were basically irrelevant. As were the majority of the MRA commentators who supported him.
As survivors, as allies we have a responsibility to a) listen to other survivors even if we disagree with them b) never tell a survivor they deserved their abuse c) if a page you follow dismisses survivor stories and concerns unfollow it and tell them why, only by challenging this derisive attitude towards survivors and abuse can we change how non survivors respond to us.
Above all don't let derision silence you, your story is powerful, that is why they are scared of it and you, be proud, be true to you, and don't let them silence you without consequences.
Added later ****
So yesterday evening AAV posted this on his blog - of all the comments, at least hundreds, critiquing his piece he picked posts from ONE person to be representative of the opposing arguments put to him and his shallow piece...
Here's a little tip (I'm not sure if you'll need it or not).
"If you want someone to engage you in debate, it's probably not a good idea to bombard their Facebook page with comments calling them a "COMPLETE DICK". Not only is all caps abuse annoying to look at, it's also counter-productive.I do enjoy getting involved in the debates my posts stimulate when I've got the time, but I'm far more likely to engage with people who avoid slinging insults at me when they didn't like what I said."
All of those contributions and he chooses to attack the least of them, he chooses to attack survivors...
my repsonse to this asshattery is this; -
"You are a dick, an abuse apologist dick. You left comments up, even agreed with comments, actively abusing female commenters on that post and frankly all your work is invalidated by that shallow inaccurate bunch of lies. Also in your edit you STILL failed to acknowledge there are versions of the wheel for male victims, trans victims and a gender neutral version too.
Your post lacked depth, content, and sources/citations, yet you are still acting justified at attacking women and a life saving resource for women.
You rip up the gendered language without listening to professionals in dv support telling you why gendered wheels for victims of specific genders, male as well as female, helps survivors to recognise the abuse as abuse and begin having a chance of moving forward.
Speaking as a survivor who has worked with a whole range of survivors from many genders and backgrounds the sheer ignorance and yes arrogance of your piece and your subsequent responses, leaves me sickened.
So sure someone yelling 'dick' at you is pretty pointless but so is focusing on that rather than the reams if reasoned responses from experienced dv people, mainly but not exclusively women.
You've lost valuable, intelligent, decent supporters through this. If you had any decency you'd choose to at least listen and acknowledge the reasoned, rational, experienced responses you had."
his reply is about as perfect an example of white male privilege as you can get, the red pillers couldn't do better; -
" Another Angry Voice "Attacking women" "abuse apologist" - you lose credibility when you just make stuff up to suit your argument.
Cite me some sources to back up these outlandish claims or admit your utter hypocrisy (your post lacked ... sources")."
And just for extra proof that some women don't know that hating feminism is akin to self hatred, oh and several sterling attempts to silence survivors here's one Jan Cook; -
"Jan Cook Seems to me that you are still carrying all that baggage. If these posts upset you don't torture yourself by reading them - insults add nothing to rational debate and won't make the world a better place"
To which I replied; -
Jan Cook that's the best you can do? All those points and your response is basically 'you're too emotional'? Very rational :-S In case you missed it there WAS a rational debate, or an attempt st one, sadly the rational posts by experienced dv people of all genders were ignored and the basically pissed on by AAVs subsequent posts. He made zero attempt to engage anyone in a reasoned discussion, he chose to dismiss insights from dv people. Now you have the ignorance to tell me because I dare to speak up and be honest about my experiences I should be quiet? While I'm sure it makes life easier for you if survivors keep quiet and don't say our piece we're told to be silent and unheard enough thank you. Try listening instead of jumping to stupid ignorant conclusions.
To which she tries to pretend she didn't basically say "you're too emotional to be rational"; -
"Where in my post does it imply you are too emotional? It is something you feel strongly about, and you are very obviously putting a lot of anger in to your posts.You are reading 'put downs' into innocent comments - that is feminism (or any other kind of 'ism') in it's worst possible form. Calling me stupid and ignorant demonstrates that you are not arguing rationally. Insults have no place in a rational debate. No one expects you to keep quiet about the damage you have suffered - but taking your wrath out on other people will not change the fact that it happened. I have suffered emotional abuse, but one has to let it go. Reliving bad experiences over and over just means punishing and distressing ourselves unnecessarily - life really does go on. Giving oneself permission to let past events tarnish what is in the present, will never be compatible with true happiness.So, as I said in my previous post, (and meant it kindly) don't torture yourself by reading topics that upset you."
And so again my reply is; -
"(To) Jan Cook. You dismiss feminism yet you are here typing your opinions in the public sphere - without feminism you wouldn't have that, you have a right to earn an income in your own name, you owe that to feminism, you have a legal right not to be raped, not even y your husband/wife - you owe that to feminism ... be dismissive of it if you so choose, again you owe that to feminism. So yes I label you ignorant of feminism and ignorant of why I speak out in the manner I do - the latter you only need to listen but you aren't doing that either."
A selection of my other responses to equal facile woman silencing attempts: -
" Lewis Marche you don't change something by being silent.
I no longer follow this page, but I'm disappointed in AAVs complete dismissal of genuine, rational points made by good people experienced in dv support work. AAV on other topics has proven himself better than this. I had hoped he might at the very least acknowledge there are legitimate counter points to his original, instead of the arrogant dismissal of those of us who put those counter points across as simply angry feminists. Most of us did so initially without swearing, if you're ignored for long enough, and then have your experiences further labelled inconsequential the you will swear too. The fault lies with whomever refuses to listen."
A typical male reply to my above initial response to AAVs apologist bs; -
"Becca all your points sound valid. Why the need to diminish the strength of your arguments by resorting to ad hominem?"
My response, please feel free to bastardise it for your own needs when you're challenged in a like manner, though it only works if your prior non sweary responses are in black and white (if you don't control the thread/forum delete/edit options then I suggest copying everything into a word doc); -
"Stefan Haselwimmer
I posted many posts without swearing or personal remarks as did others AAV chose to ignore them and pretend all those disagreeing had no valid points and were all angry and attacking.
When someone does you and those like you an injustice you will shout and make personal remarks to be heard too.
It's essentially what direct action is."
He hasn't replied to that yet.
This whole issue is a prime example of white male privilege, talk about activism by the oppressed for the oppressed, whine it isn't about you, tell the oppressed you know better than they do and they need to get in line and stop being angry. those "not all men" "all lives matter" imbeciles all seem to be the same people... funny that.
Abuse jokes do not gain equality for anyone .... stressor warnings re DV
A few days ago this image meme joke showed up on the Lizzy the Lezzy lgbtq activism page. It is generally speaking a good page, though of late there have been several post which have raised a few red flags re lack of care for abuse and rape survivors.
This image is at best simply misguided and thoughtless. Originally it was simply a ghost meme, changed by lgbtq activists to indicate there were two mums not one mum and a ghost.
Not sure how to even begin pointing out the giant problems with this; - so let's begin with the obvious, the text of the original meme says "you see your mom in front of her bedroom door, terrified, she whispers "Don't go downstairs. I heard her too". Now in the context of the ghost story thats perfectly fine, in the context of it being her partner downstairs it is so far from fine it has passed fine a few towns ago and is heading into morally repugnant.
Why would you be cowering terrified of your partner? Because the abuse you, end of list.
Some of these lgbtq activist suggested as justification of this vile edited meme that she heard the partner trying to get them and the child to do chores - what the ever loving fuck? Since when has not wanting to do chores resulted in anyone cowering in terror of a person?
If you think that is bad then the other justification /I was handed literally made me gape in sheer disbelief "it's not as if lesbians even commit abuse anyway", that is such a lie it is smacking every victim of female to female abuse again.... it is telling them because their abuser wasn't male it wasn't abuse .... bullshit!!
Not only does this edited meme make abuse out to be something to laugh at, it makes it out as something to excuse away with weak excuses, survivors of abuse do this to ourselves anyway, we excuse our abuse by saying "they didn't mean it" I've heard female victims of abuse tell themselves "it can't be abuse, only men abuse", our abusers tell us "you're only scared cause I'll make your lazy ass do some work" even when we're the ones who do all of the work.
This edited meme and all of the comment that went unchallenged and undeleted simply reinforce the abusers view of the world, they reinforce that abuse is a funny, it's a laugh. And if you challenge such memes as I did on the Lizzy the Lezzy page you get abused, mocked, called humourless, I was told the only reason I felt it was an abuse situation was because I was allowing my abuse to colour my judgement and such out my humour. Apparently it's perfectly natural to be terrified of a person asking you to do chores ....
.... each and every person finding that funny would probably have at least thought about their reaction had a rape survivor queried a rape joke meme, but abuse? Abuse is a free for all and abuse survivors? "Stop making us feel uncomfortable and crawl back under your rock, stop killing our fun" to quote one commentor on the Lizzy the Lezzy page ...
At the time of writing all comments aside from the one denying lesbians can be abusers are still on the page, and that one the author removed not the admin.
At the time of writing the author of this blog has been told because the meme was edited from the original the fact the mum was 'terrified' is irrelevant .... the amount of excuse people come up with the excuse making fun of abuse is incredible, especially on a supposedly safe page.
I urge my friends who follow this page to unfollow it and state why, please do not participate in what is essentially abuse apology. This kind of meme edited or otherwise doesn't gain equality for anyone.
Thursday, 11 June 2015
The elephant in the room when your parent/s is an an abuser ... (image triggers, dead eyes)
 |
| Our biological father |
 |
| Me |
It is one of the areas of having a parent as an abuser that I talk the least about, in part I think because it is so intimate a part of my identity, and an issue with which is an ongoing struggle.
"Am I like him?"
Throughout my childhood an oft heard refrain was how like my father I was, at first it made me proud. Who doesn't want to be like their father afterall? Then as the true nature of his abuse and who he was began revealing itself it became a stick and an anxiety, a fear "I'm like him? I have to ensure I'm not"...
In time as my own recovery took root that fear became less, it is still there but it is manageable. We had to realise that he's not just an abuser he is also a person and can be charming (all part of the abuser facade though) and the good memories we had of him were part of us. Part of the trouble is alot of who they are is actually quite superficial, so it's hard to know if they're sincere and by extension if you're sincere or if you're also as superficial.
Luckily I have my brother Thom and we keep each other grounded and don't let our fears run rampant these days.
Looks however are a little harder, you are what you are features wise, it takes alot somedays to accept those of my features most like his. It is an issue Thom is also coming to terms with ... again we help each other through.
What has worked for me is to look at the physical features as family features, those of our granddad and nan than those of his.
It also helps as we age we take more and more after our maternal family...
Also we learned the secret of the eyes - abusers have soul dead eyes, our father included, we don't, ergo no matter our fears, no matter our looks, our eyes are not his, ergo we are assuredly not him.
Their crimes, their abuses are their own, we may be their blood but we are not them. :) And they too are people who have likes dislikes and personality, admittedly not always a great personality and often accompanied by at least one personality disorder but people nonetheless.
Keep positive lovely peeps.
Thursday, 26 March 2015
Why aren't you angry?
This last week I've had arguments with too many mra's (alleged mens rights activists, in reality seriously disturbed abusive men), pissed off white people, people who just can't see the realities of racism and misogyny, and god forfend they understand such complex ideas like privilege and intersectionality ...
Oh but that ignorance doesn't stop them, oh no, they have to try to explain their BS to you as if you're stupid, because of course you need everything fecking mansplained to you. Even apparently that mansplain isn't a word, except it is in the recent OED editions, so officially a word in the English language.
But don't be fooled into thinking it is just these ignoramuses who are the problem, that would be far too easy. No it is each and everyone of us who on hearing about a race issue going "well they shouldn't have been ..." or on hearing about a rape say "well it's terrible but she shouldn't have been drunk, stoned, dressed sexy ...." and the million and one fecking bullshit platitudes we mewl. Fucking get angry, stand up and be counted.
Because if you don't, if you join the ranks of the "well he shouldn't have been playing with a water pistol" "well he was wearing a hoodie" "she was out after dark" "she had been drinking and flirting with him all night" then you ARE the fucking problem. You are as good as the rapist, you are as good as the cop, thug racist freak who thinks killing black kids is ok because after all 'niggers' ( I loathe that word and all it means) ain't the same as us white folks ... For the love of god get angry, shout, stand, pick a damn side and make a fucking stand because mewling racist, sexist, transphobic, homophobic platitudes whilst pretending not to be racist, rape apologist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic is fucking disgraceful!
Yes I can put all of this into coherent academic language, yes I get all the theories, yes I intellectually understand the opposing view points, it's still all BS. End of the day this is life and death, sitting on the fence shouldn't be an option.
Oh but that ignorance doesn't stop them, oh no, they have to try to explain their BS to you as if you're stupid, because of course you need everything fecking mansplained to you. Even apparently that mansplain isn't a word, except it is in the recent OED editions, so officially a word in the English language.
But don't be fooled into thinking it is just these ignoramuses who are the problem, that would be far too easy. No it is each and everyone of us who on hearing about a race issue going "well they shouldn't have been ..." or on hearing about a rape say "well it's terrible but she shouldn't have been drunk, stoned, dressed sexy ...." and the million and one fecking bullshit platitudes we mewl. Fucking get angry, stand up and be counted.
Because if you don't, if you join the ranks of the "well he shouldn't have been playing with a water pistol" "well he was wearing a hoodie" "she was out after dark" "she had been drinking and flirting with him all night" then you ARE the fucking problem. You are as good as the rapist, you are as good as the cop, thug racist freak who thinks killing black kids is ok because after all 'niggers' ( I loathe that word and all it means) ain't the same as us white folks ... For the love of god get angry, shout, stand, pick a damn side and make a fucking stand because mewling racist, sexist, transphobic, homophobic platitudes whilst pretending not to be racist, rape apologist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic is fucking disgraceful!
Yes I can put all of this into coherent academic language, yes I get all the theories, yes I intellectually understand the opposing view points, it's still all BS. End of the day this is life and death, sitting on the fence shouldn't be an option.
Tuesday, 6 January 2015
Victims and survivors and cases such as Ched Evans
What a weird few days. The case of Ched Evans, a convicted rapist who is trying to convince various appeal courts and the public that continuing to have sex when your partner falls unconscious isn't rape - it is, morally and in the English law it is - has brought about something of a controversy. Should Evans, who is a pro footballer, be signed to any pro club?
In the ensuing internet discussions the most disgusting thing has been the amount of alleged rape victims who have declared even if she did fall unconscious it wasn't rape because it wasn't violent, then using their own alleged rape as a reason they get to question this.
Wrong!
Rape is legally defined as; - "The Act extends the definition of rape to include the penetration by a penis of the vagina, anus or mouth of another person. The 2003 Act also updates the law about consent and belief in consent.
In the ensuing internet discussions the most disgusting thing has been the amount of alleged rape victims who have declared even if she did fall unconscious it wasn't rape because it wasn't violent, then using their own alleged rape as a reason they get to question this.
Wrong!
Rape is legally defined as; - "The Act extends the definition of rape to include the penetration by a penis of the vagina, anus or mouth of another person. The 2003 Act also updates the law about consent and belief in consent.
The word 'consent' in the context of the offence of rape is now defined in the Sexual Offences Act 2003. A person consents if she or he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice. The essence of this definition is the agreement by choice. The law does not require the victim to have physically resisted in order to prove a lack of consent. The question of whether the victim consented is a matter for the jury to decide, although the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) considers this issue very carefully throughout the life of a case." link - click here
Violent force isn't necessary for rape, lack of consent and lack of ability to give consent however ARE.
As rape victims and survivors we don't get to stand in judgement of each other, we have to stand with each other. Irrespective of gender, race, age, ability, sexuality etc we have to stand as survivors, and not judge each other. No-one else will guarantee support for us and our stories so we MUST do so for each other.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)