![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Generally speaking, I ignore things that are written in the Daily Mail(1).
Also the Hitchens brothers (Peter and Christopher) are two Brits I tend not to notice, because I'm not British and I don't care for either of their politics or anything they have to say.
But this little Gem written by Peter Hitchens really takes the cake at deliberate misogyny and unabated reactionary Right-wing paranoia.
The majority of article dubbed, "How the Left censored the blindingly obvious truth about rape", is the same old, same old victim-blaming nonsense that men (and women) in positions of power spout off because it suits their interests to keep the victims of rape (the vast majority of them women) silent, ashamed and generally weakened.
What's really effed-up in this already dubious(2) piece of writing is this:
Emphasis mine.
It is, simply put, one of the most misanthropic (forget misogynist!) things I've ever had the misfortune to read.
Not only does it reduce the phenomena of rape to men taking "advantage" of women, as though people (women and men) who are raped or sexually assaulted merely showed lax judgment and weren't assaulted, violated and their humanity trampled, ignored and generally taken from them.
It also emphasises the fact that a woman who is intoxicated should have known this would happen. Should have expected something bad would happen because she put herself in a compromising position by being intoxicated/high/stoned/whatever.
Oh, yes there is a qualifier here, men should be punished should they happen to rape someone, no matter how stupid the victim.
Let me ask this.
Perhaps, ummm, these men shouldn't rape anyone in the first place?
No, really, is this too much to ask that when a woman is in a "compromising" position one doesn't fucking assault them!
It's all very well to teach women that we need to protect ourselves, that we shouldn't walk alone at night, to make sure we never accept a drink from someone you don't know, that you are more likely to get raped by someone you do know.
To me, the bottom line of all this is the policing of women's bodies and women's behaviour - despite rape being a phenomena that can be found in every social class, race, sexuality and gender, it is women (the future/current/constant victims of rape, assault, abuse and harassment) who are forced to modify their behaviour so that rape doesn't happen to them.
Let's get something straight, rape doesn't "happen".
Rape is committed.
And it is those who commit rape that should be blamed and not the victim who was forced, coerced and generally disempowered into a situation that s/he really has no control over.
So for fuck's sake, stop blaming the victim and controlling the behaviour of those perceived to be in constant danger due to what's between their legs and start teaching those who are told, constantly, by society that they are entitles to take whatever they want due to what between their legs.
Oh, and fuck Peter Hitchens *flips the two finger salute*
Notes
(1) The whole Holocaust off the curriculum thing notwithstanding... I should have been more critical of the article, but like most things to do with the Holocaust the first things that comes to mind is paranoia and Antisemitism.
(2) My own opinion here as I'm aware that Peter Hitchens (and Christopher) seem to have some kind of journalistic/political clout in the UK, as much as this boggles me.
Also the Hitchens brothers (Peter and Christopher) are two Brits I tend not to notice, because I'm not British and I don't care for either of their politics or anything they have to say.
But this little Gem written by Peter Hitchens really takes the cake at deliberate misogyny and unabated reactionary Right-wing paranoia.
The majority of article dubbed, "How the Left censored the blindingly obvious truth about rape", is the same old, same old victim-blaming nonsense that men (and women) in positions of power spout off because it suits their interests to keep the victims of rape (the vast majority of them women) silent, ashamed and generally weakened.
What's really effed-up in this already dubious(2) piece of writing is this:
Women who get drunk are more likely to be raped than women who do not get drunk.
No, this does not excuse rape. Men who take advantage of women by raping them, drunk or sober, should be severely punished for this wicked, treacherous action, however stupid the victim may have been.
But it does mean that a rape victim who was drunk deserves less sympathy.
Emphasis mine.
It is, simply put, one of the most misanthropic (forget misogynist!) things I've ever had the misfortune to read.
Not only does it reduce the phenomena of rape to men taking "advantage" of women, as though people (women and men) who are raped or sexually assaulted merely showed lax judgment and weren't assaulted, violated and their humanity trampled, ignored and generally taken from them.
It also emphasises the fact that a woman who is intoxicated should have known this would happen. Should have expected something bad would happen because she put herself in a compromising position by being intoxicated/high/stoned/whatever.
Oh, yes there is a qualifier here, men should be punished should they happen to rape someone, no matter how stupid the victim.
Let me ask this.
Perhaps, ummm, these men shouldn't rape anyone in the first place?
No, really, is this too much to ask that when a woman is in a "compromising" position one doesn't fucking assault them!
It's all very well to teach women that we need to protect ourselves, that we shouldn't walk alone at night, to make sure we never accept a drink from someone you don't know, that you are more likely to get raped by someone you do know.
To me, the bottom line of all this is the policing of women's bodies and women's behaviour - despite rape being a phenomena that can be found in every social class, race, sexuality and gender, it is women (the future/current/constant victims of rape, assault, abuse and harassment) who are forced to modify their behaviour so that rape doesn't happen to them.
Let's get something straight, rape doesn't "happen".
Rape is committed.
And it is those who commit rape that should be blamed and not the victim who was forced, coerced and generally disempowered into a situation that s/he really has no control over.
So for fuck's sake, stop blaming the victim and controlling the behaviour of those perceived to be in constant danger due to what's between their legs and start teaching those who are told, constantly, by society that they are entitles to take whatever they want due to what between their legs.
Oh, and fuck Peter Hitchens *flips the two finger salute*
Notes
(1) The whole Holocaust off the curriculum thing notwithstanding... I should have been more critical of the article, but like most things to do with the Holocaust the first things that comes to mind is paranoia and Antisemitism.
(2) My own opinion here as I'm aware that Peter Hitchens (and Christopher) seem to have some kind of journalistic/political clout in the UK, as much as this boggles me.
