In which I wonder if I'm the only person in the world who doesn't think sexual violence is hilarious.

I have had an exceedingly depressing hour or so of finding what appears to be an endless stream of Facebook pages dedicated to rape jokes.

- "The awkward moment went your misses wakes up and ya dicks in her arse"

- "Im not a rapist LOL jks get in the van"

- "The awkward moment when a slut is not DTF but you fuck her anyway"

- "Raping pregnant bitches and telling my friends I had a threesome"

- "Looking in the mirror and wondering how you haven't been raped yet"

- "Is raping a hooker classified as theft"

- "You know shes playing hard to get when your chasing her down an alleyway"

Rape jokes are bullshit. I realize some people can find something entertaining and enjoyable about the real-life sexual assault of millions of their fellow human beings, and frankly I'd consider that a symptom of a worrying disconnect from reality. I am one of the unfortunate minority who
a) don't think it's funny, and
b) are not afraid to tell people that I don't think it's funny, and proceed to give them reasons why they should shut the fuck up.

It's not viewed as socially acceptable or 'polite' to call people out on their sickening attempts at humour, and apparently that's supposed to keep me from doing it, but I think that's piss-poor reasoning. I should stay silent and just accept it because...someone might feel perturbed by it if I speak up? Good. They should feel perturbed. Ideally they should feel incredibly embarrassed to be spouting this crap and passing it off as a joke. At any rate, keeping quiet is half the problem -- it's a lot easier to get away with hurting somebody if no one's willing to speak up and tell you you're wrong. And I don't really care if everyone in the group suddenly feels acutely uncomfortable and defensive. You know who's automatically going to feel uncomfortable over rape jokes? Rape survivors. The 1 in 4 women, 1 in 20 men -- and that's only the ones who report their assault. The numbers are higher than that in reality.

So you know a survivor, whether they've told you about it or not -- and if you've been running your mouth about how rape is funny, rape is a funny joke, they're probably not going to mention it to you because they can't trust you to take them seriously. And survivors don't get a choice about whether or not they've been sexually assaulted, but everyone has the choice of whether or not to make a crack about sexual assault.

You know it's in poor taste. And it's not the kind of 'poor taste' your grandmother complains about, when women wear red shoes on a date or something equally trivial and ridiculous. It's the kind of 'poor taste' that very literally and very directly communicates to everyone you're speaking to that you not only couldn't give a shit about rape survivors, you actively support rapists. You're saying that you think what they do is pretty okay, and honestly pretty funny.

I know that most of the time that isn't what you think you're saying, and I know for most people it sounds like you're making a joke ('haha, wouldn't it be funny if I really thought it was cool and normal to force people into sexual acts?' -- to which the correct answer is 'in what way would that be funny?'). There's one type of person who doesn't realize you're joking about that. That person is a rapist, and you don't know who they are. You don't know that you know them. They don't go around with flashing neon signs above their heads, but they exist in disgustingly high numbers in perfectly ordinary society, so I can tell you right now that you have met one. You probably hung out with one. Maybe multiple times. Maybe you thought he was kind of weird, maybe it never crossed your mind that he could ever be violent with anyone. Maybe you made a joke around him; it might've been about rape.

And there, right there, you've just told the rapist that you've hung out with at some point that his actions are normal. He already thinks that, this is statistical fact -- rapists believe that all men rape, it's just that some of them hide it better than others. What you've done when you make a naturalizing, lighthearted comment about rape is reassure him that it is normal, that you all do it too, and that you think it's okay. On top of that you've simultaneously told the rape survivor(s) you know that you're on the side of the person who assaulted them; that you don't believe their hurt is real or that it should be taken seriously. This could be your mother, your sister, your best friend.

Now tell me rape jokes don't hurt anybody.

Thinking about the Slutwalk.

So, clearly, given my leaning toward equality and my complete disgust for the general perception and handling of rape in most societies, I thought that whole Slutwalk thing was brilliant. The idea behind it -- that anyone may be raped, regardless of what they were wearing, and that none of them either asked for or deserved it -- seems so mind-crushingly obvious to me that it almost causes me physical pain that it has to be said aloud, let alone that some people argue with it. 

Tonight I came across a profoundly self-loathing essay written by a depressingly unintelligent woman named Chelsea Fagan. 

I have, like pretty much every 22-year-old girl, gone out looking like a slut occasionally. And I got a significantly higher amount of leers, cat calls, and uncomfortable attention. I was not surprised; I had no one but myself to blame for the sudden nervous feeling that flared up in my stomach as I walked passed men checking out my shape in my revealing dress. I don’t dress like this anymore for that very reason. I want men to look at me and have thoughts other than, “I could have sex with her tonight if I wanted.”

This paragraph alone is stunningly near-sighted. "I had no one but myself to blame for the sudden nervous feeling that flared up in my stomach as I walked passed men checking out my shape in a revealing dress." Really? Really?

A) At 22 years old, you are not a girl. You are a woman. In Western society, identifying or being identified as a child when one is clearly not is insulting, demeaning, and has been associated with slavery and racism. It equates you with people who cannot live an independent life, which I'm sure is completely coincidental, oh hi thousands of years of gender-based subjugation. Cut that shit out.

B) passed? Look, I can see you have a bit of trouble on the intellectual level, but correct spelling and grammar is a joy we can all share in.

C) If you feel like you are at increased risk of assault because you're wearing tight clothing, that is not your fault. That is the fault of the men who assault women, the society that promotes sexual violence as titillation, and everyone who perpetuates the myth that the only women who get raped are dressed "slutty".

Aside from all that, there is no such thing as "slutty". The idea of a "slut" is a completely subjective thing. It changes from person to person. What looks slutty to your grandmother is probably completely different to what looks slutty to any given 15-year-old schoolgirl. "Slut" isn't even connected exclusively to clothing -- oh, no.

This photo turned up in a Google image search for "slut".

If she doesn't look slutty, that's alright, she can still act slutty, or have a slutty history, or say something slutty, or hell, maybe you just don't like her. It's a nebulous concept, and that is exactly why it's so convenient: it can be slapped on any woman, anywhere, at any time. It's completely meaningless. And it is certainly not justification for assault.

Women are pressured, followed, and hounded by men who, when sober and in the light of day, often would never do such a thing. And for a man, a sexually and visually driven man not in full command of his wits, having a woman tell him “no” while wearing the most provocative, arousing, blatantly sexual outfit possible is, to say the least, confusing. And while that does not give him the right to violate her, it also cannot be claimed that women are entirely innocent in this situation.

Er...yes, it can. If a man is so completely out of control of his instincts around attractive women when he's drunk that he cannot help raping them, I'm pretty sure he belongs in prison. I'm also bewildered by the idea that when a woman dresses "provocatively" (which is a relative concept, again) that means she is looking for sex from anyone at all, regardless of what she says. "Slutty" clothes are apparently implicit permission to all men who lay eyes on her to have sex with her, and if she isn't quick and loud and strong enough to withdraw her implicit consent, well, that's her fault. It's another nonsensical facet of the delicious subject of slut-shaming that it is supposedly so awful for a woman to want sex, and dress in a way she considers sexy, that any woman who does is therefore deserving of rape.

Over 80% of sexual assaults are committed by friends, acquaintances or family members of the victim. It has absolutely nothing to do with how they're dressed, or how much makeup they're wearing, or whether the news is on. Rape is always completely and utterly the fault of the rapist. This is a fact, not an opinion, but it's one an alarmingly small number of people seem to acknowledge.

Hey. Hey, Lauren.

YOU'D LIKE TAYLOR SWIFT TO BE YOUR BFF OR YOUR GF RIGHT?
RIGHT?

On poor explanations.

Today in my wanderings of the wonderful world wide web, I have come across more than a few mentions and debates concerning the custom of men opening the door for women. Just to clarify -- I am not referring to instances where the lady is carrying three bags of groceries and would physically find it difficult to get the door open herself. Nor am I referring to instances where the man happens to be walking ahead of the lady and holds the door open for her because she happens to be following closely. I wouldn't consider either of those scenarios to come under "man opening the door for the woman", because in either of them the woman could just as easily be substituted for a man, and the man's position could also be filled by a woman.

There seems to be a prevalence of deliberately obtuse men crying foul because "I am so nice and polite, and women are all bitches because they don't appreciate my uncalled for acts of kindness!" At this point I'm always reminded of this article. Oh, that everyone could be exposed to the idea that not being a horrible person doesn't mean you are entitled to sex. There should be a class at high school dedicated to teaching young people that feigning niceness in order to get a girl to have sex with you is deceitful, predatory, and actually not nice at all.

Of course, the men doing the obnoxious whining are not explicitly stating "I opened a door for a woman and she didn't immediately fall to her knees and begin the Fellatio of Gratefulness", but it's fairly implicit when they say things like, "You ignored the nice guy. You used him for emotional intimacy without reciprocating, in kind, with physical intimacy", and, "What happened to all the nice guys? You did." 

I did? What happened? Did I frighten them off with my failure to fall desperately in love with the first male I met who came up with a flirty line? Did my belief in their friendship act put them in the inconceivable position of having to be clear about their intentions? For shame! To think I took all that fake niceness and didn't even pay for it "with physical intimacy". Aside from my obvious downfalls in my role as Breathing Sex Doll, I know plenty of nice guys. Genuinely nice ones. Guys who are kind and respectful and -- equally importantly -- funny and smart and conducting lives of their own that don't involve following me around like a desperate little puppy dog.

Anyway. Back to the door thing. I'm sure plenty of men insist on adhering to tradition out of a genuine desire to do the polite thing, and I'm not at all criticizing them for it. Once, a very elderly man opened a door for me, and I smiled and thanked him because
a) he was clearly from a generation where this was an extremely polite and respectful thing to do, and
b) old people aren't the best at learning new tricks, so to speak. He was probably also racist, but I wasn't about to argue with him about it, because the chances of me suddenly enlightening him at his age are pretty slim.
What I am criticizing is this alarming tendency for men, especially young men, to dismiss the views and feelings of the subject of this politeness as 'bitchy' or 'rude' if she doesn't appreciate it: "Because they lack the grace and goodwill to accept that someone is trying to show respect for their feelings."

Let me get this straight: you open the door for a woman, she expresses that she feels uncomfortable with it, and you call it a lack of grace and goodwill, because you were only trying to show respect for her feelings? Her feelings, which you had no idea of before you opened the door in the first place, are clearly not a big priority for you.

I guess my point is that if you were really so concerned with doing someone a kindness, wouldn't it bother you that the person you did it for was at least mildly upset by it? I mean, surely that wasn't your intention. And instead of blaming her for not seeing how great and selfless your gesture was, maybe you should be thinking that not all women like it when you do that. Evidently you cannot assume that that little act of chivalry is going to make her smile -- in fact there seems to be a pretty good chance that it will actually cause dismay. Perhaps it's not the best idea to do it for perfect strangers, whose views and attitudes you have no idea of.

Some women absolutely adore it when a man opens a door for them. It makes them feel special and respected, and that's fine. Some women find it patronizing, and that's fine too. They don't owe you an explanation, much like they don't owe you an explanation for why they dislike seafood or why exactly their favourite shoes are their favourite shoes. However, I feel like a general explanation is required here, because it seems as if the majority of door-opening men who have received a less-than-thankful response for their actions are genuinely bewildered as to why any woman would take offense.

The fact is that the gesture of opening doors for women is a paternalistic one. Do you open doors for men? No. Why not? Because you won't get a date out of it? Because obviously men open doors for themselves, and it'd be weird for you to interfere? Why should you be uncomfortable opening doors for men if your only motivating factor is to do something nice for someone? I'm sorry, but the only way you're going to be able to convince yourself that there is no male-dominant sexism at work here is by burying your head in the sand as deep as it will go.

Of course it's always nice when people do thoughtful things for each other. What makes this particular situation awkward is that it requires an assumption on the part of the man that any given woman must consider his admittedly old-fashioned chivalry thoughtful -- and that a woman who doesn't must be broken. Women like doors to be opened for them, and that's all there is to it. Right?

Well, no, like most sweeping generalizations, that's wrong. It's been wrong for a while now. I'm not saying that opening the door for a lady should be a punishable offence, but I do think it's a bit rich for guys to get pissed off when women feel patronized and insulted by it. Face facts: some women will, and they are completely justified in feeling that way. Bitter remarks about how "chivalry isn't dead, but women's appreciation of it is" only make you look like a nearsighted, over-privileged and uneducated dickhead.

Pretty people saying stupid things? I, for one, am shocked!

Daisy Lowe, you are pretty goddamn gorgeous, but your use of the term "mild lesbian" to describe yourself in a men's magazine is going to go down like a ton of bricks. I can feel it coming in the air tonight, oh lord. At any rate, I welcome any comment that opens up debate on the idea of varying degrees of sexuality in any direction. Kinsey is my hero, etc. On the other hand, this does reek of Katy Perry-style exploitation, and while I adore a large dose of exploitation in my life, I prefer it to hail from the 1970s. It's difficult enough for bisexual women to find any degree of respect - oh hi, people who keep insisting there's no such thing - and this "mild lesbian" nonsense from a modern woman is not helping.

As if that wasn't enough of a wank-generator, there's this gem from the same interview: "Women are so much more beautiful when they have shape. And I'm proud to be part of this renewed appreciation of womanly assets. Although, I do think Mad Men has a lot to answer for."

Generally it's good not to wade into that debate without having thought about it enough to at least realize that women can be beautiful at any weight, regardless of their shape. Even better, to realize that women don't have to be beautiful to be attractive...oh, what am I saying? Models are never going to be the best people to explain that idea.

On the importance of history

Those who have been blessed with the opportunity to view the comedic brilliance that is Mean Girls may have thought the main character's name - Cady - was a strange choice for the lead role in a mainstream American film.

In fact it is in keeping with the film's theme of female empowerment; it shares its unusual spelling with the birth surname of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, an 18th-century pioneer in the American women's rights movement.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton

Before she began her activism in the name of gender equality, Elizabeth Cady Stanton was also an abolitionist. She attended the International Anti-Slavery Convention in 1840, where she and every other female present were required to sit in a roped-off section where the men in attendance would not have to look at them. This incident was partly responsible for pushing her politically active spirit towards the issue of women's rights.

The Anti-Slavery Convention of 1840

Also present at the convention, and one of the only women to be included in the painting of the event, was one Baroness Byron. The name should sound familiar; she was the long-suffering wife of the poet Lord Byron, and mother of Ada, Countess Lovelace -- a brilliant and highly educated mathematician who is now regarded as the world's first computer programmer.

Annabella Byron, 1812

And that is how Mean Girls and Lord Byron conspired to make me consider the invention of the world's first analytical engine.

On the f-word and why it's tragically funny that so many women are afraid of it.

So, almost all of us have at least a vague idea of what 'feminism' is, and the majority of the uninvolved public is pretty much wrong. But the best bit is women who don't seem to realize or want to acknowledge that That Dirty F-Word is the one and only reason why they aren't chained to a kitchen, running the risk of childbirth every single time they have sex, and so economically limited that they will never, ever be able to do anything they actually want to do. Unless everything they want to do takes place in the confines of the house their husband buys for them (and takes reparation for in the form of sex you legally cannot refuse even if you want to).

Sadly, most women will react to the mention of feminism with disgusted comments about armpit hair, because as women, they know that one of the foulest crimes they can commit is to utterly disregard gender roles and do something different with their bodies. They probably don't know that the only reason any of them have had it bashed into their heads that this thing is incredibly important is that in the 1920s, short-sleeved clothing for women was introduced, and Gillette saw an opportunity to sell more razors. So they ran a smear campaign against female body hair, denouncing it as revolting and ultimately undesirable. And it worked! Our consumerist great grandparents fell for it and decided that the marketing scheme was preaching holy truth, and ever since girls and women everywhere have been obligingly shearing themselves. Is this an inherently evil thing? Not necessarily, but it's pretty hilariously sad.

Having said that, fuck body policing up the ass with a splintered plank of wood. Shave, wax, grow, trim whatever the hell you want to. It's none of my damn business. Put on 20 kgs and wear the tightest clothes you can find, because people who find themselves offended by the sight need to grow the fuck up and realize it's not actually a problem. There are plenty of real problems in the world already without oversensitive judgmental shitheads taking it upon themselves to add hysterical, pretend problems. "Oh, I can't control the way that woman looks! My world is falling down around me! War is a totally acceptable fact of life that I have no problem with because there's no point arguing with it, but other people's body fat is something I'm going to take the time and effort to bitch about and loudly disapprove of!" Please. Go clutch your pearls over stupid shit somewhere else.

On female comedians and their hilarity in relation to their genitalia.

It confuses and infuriates me that there are still people in the world today who don't realize what an embarrassing thing it is to seriously claim that 'women aren't funny'.

What are you backing that up with, babe?

Because if I was that dickheaded and logic-deficient, I might conclude that men aren't funny.

"Aw man," I would say, "men aren't funny. All of their comedy is just them cracking gay/racist jokes and rambling about their ex-girlfriends and/or wives."

Which makes a similar amount of sense as "Women aren't funny, all female comedians ever talk about is their period and their kids."

This clever and obviously hilarious individual bases almost all of his acts around race or imitating the speech impediments of the mentally disabled. He's also so funny he has to steal jokes. A+

Oh good, another routine about your shit relationships. Don't men have anything better to talk about?

This one's such a pitiful attempt at comedy that even the guy filming can't force realistic-sounding laughter.

And then there's Carrot Top...the guy copying the watermelon guy and somehow managing to be even less funny.

I suppose the point I'm trying to make is, your anecdotal evidence that women aren't funny sucks. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that men aren't funny, and that is an equally stupid statement. What mystifies me is where you people decided that humor is innately connected to your sexual organs. Oh right, it was right around the point where sexism and the entertainment business intersect.

I have the simplest tastes. I am always satisfied with the best.

Tonight I am considering the ideas of sophistication and elegance. I am in love with them. In an abstract sense both of those words have always conjured vague images of clean, precise lines and expensive fabrics. For some reason 'elegance' has a direct connection with fashion in my mind, which in turn leads me to idle admiration of Coco Chanel.

I usually find myself conflicted at some point during this line of thought, because while I consider class to be a virtue above most others, I can never quite put my finger on what makes a classy thing classy. Money can be classy, but only to a certain extent before it becomes vulgar. Clothing can be classy - but is there a law that says, for example, that underwear as outerwear can't be classy? Surely not, because what was deemed risqué a few decades ago is now considered unremarkable.

The entire concept of 'modesty' (one I generally detest in the aesthetic sense) is completely dependent upon the time and place. I must concede that concepts of elegance are similarly malleable, adapting to the situation. I suppose the deciding factor for me is usually not the clothing itself but the way in which it is worn - an overt cry for attention is almost never elegant, no matter the setting. This isn't to say that wearing something extraordinary is necessarily tacky; merely that wearing something extraordinary due entirely to a craving for attention will most likely show in one's behaviour, and come across as pathetic.

I should note here that I am not the modesty police. The concept that anyone, women in particular, should be 'covered up' in order to be deserving of respect is abhorrent to me. This is not the issue. It isn't the fact that her boobs are on show, or the fact that she's trying to show her underwear to strangers in a bar, that actually irritates me - it's the fact that this display is merely an attempt to get people to "look at me". Now, this is not an unusual desire to have. But when it is expressed by people who apparently feel that their most interesting facet is a part of their body or a suggestive piece of clothing, it becomes a pathetic cry for attention, and that is what irritates me. This is an attitude, not a style of dress, and I find it far more grating than any outfit could ever be.

Maybe I should pity these creatures who measure their worth by so little that they seem content to rely solely on their own objectification to gain friends or admirers, but I think that would be a little too arrogant. I choose instead to believe that most of them are not really stupid or genuinely boring, merely lazy. It's too much effort for them to try and gain the interest and approval of strangers without the aid of a neon sign floating above their heads that reads, 'LOOK! TITS! LIKE ME! LIKE ME!'
Oh, grow up.


GIFSoup

Between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before.

Upon reviewing Christopher Nolan's 'Batman Begins', I believe I could overcome my natural aversion to comics in order to further immerse myself in this world. Of course I'd obviously prefer an animated series, and I do have a vague urge to track down a copy of 'Batman Beyond' somehow, but there's a first time for everything. I'm particularly fond of the villains; I'm almost convinced that the only reason Batman appeals to me at all is because of the recent shift toward the anti-hero, a role which Batman adapts to with minimum fuss.

At any rate, I think there's an unfair tendency to rag on the supervillainesses more than their male counterparts - oh, sure, The Joker, The Riddler, Scarecrow, Two Face, they're all fine, they're more or less substantial enemies, worthy of the (strangely square-jawed) Batman's attention, but Poison Ivy? Harmless, a tease. Catwoman? Isn't she practically Batman's girlfriend? Harley Quinn is passable based purely on excessive amounts of badassery, but she's still just the Joker's sidekick (and punching bag). I find it largely unjustified and distasteful.

Dr Pamela Isley is an eco-terrorist with a penchant for plant-based toxins and mind controlling pheromones, plus she has an immunity to all natural toxins and diseases. I'm sorry, but that is fundamentally pretty cool. On top of that, at least one of her storylines involved attempting to bring Gotham down via huge amounts of superpowered marijuana. So basically, you could think of Poison Ivy as the ultimate dealer.

Dr Harleen Quinzel (are you noticing a trend here? Higher education = villainy? Interesting) is a trained psychoanalyst and a talented gymnast with a whole lot of crazy packed in there to boot. Although she's possibly one of the worst role models for young women imaginable, they're both so batshit insane that no one could mistake her romance with the Joker for a 'healthy' relationship. Harley eventually gains immunity to toxins from her partner in crime, Poison Ivy.

Selina Kyle is the original feline fatale, a whip-wielding jewellery thief with a talent for breaking and entering. Catwoman has gone on to become one of Batman's most enduring love interests, and in recent times has been portrayed as more of an anti-hero than a supervillain. She has always been slightly different from other supervillains in the sense that she is not a killer. This isn't to say she doesn't have claws; she does, literally, razor-sharp retractable claws, along with an assortment of bullwhips and cat-o'-nine-tails, in addition to which she is an extremely skilled hand-to-hand combatant and a gymnast.

It's not that I don't think these characters have flaws, I just don't see why they're so easily dismissed in comparison to the male villains. I'm pretty sure they would turn out just as brilliantly as the already iconic portrayal of the Joker by Heath Ledger if Nolan would give them the chance.


GIFSoup