anon895 comments on LW Women Submissions: On Misogyny - Less Wrong

27 [deleted] 10 April 2013 07:54PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (472)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: TimS 12 April 2013 03:41:04AM 3 points [-]

The threats weren't from family members. And the very debate we are having is whether Steubenville is exceptional and unusual for what happened to the victim or simply because it became world famous.

General vs. specific is a reasonable point - but looking at headlines from news sources that we each already agree with is unlikely to help us resolve this issue. I could point to examples from the yesmeansyes blog, but obviously they filter the evidence to focus on what they find problematic. No doubt you could also point to mostly reputable news sources for examples that you find problematic.

Comment author: OrphanWilde 12 April 2013 01:26:42PM 2 points [-]

Interesting that you accept that narrative as a full explanation, when the link it itself provides refers to one of the girls as a relative.

Indeed, one of the death threats mentioned was: "You ripped my family apart, you made my cousin cry, so when I see you bitch it’s going to be a homicide"

That sounds less like "...women often find it more personally beneficial to go along with sexism than to try to fight the power, on the theory that if you're going to be treated like a second-class citizen anyway, you might as well not get yelled at all the time for speaking up about it" and more like an immature teenager whose life was thrown into turmoil and is looking for somebody to lash out against.

Let's talk Steubenville, but let's compare like to like. What do you think public perception would be of two teenage girls who played with the genitals of an unconscious drunk guy?

Comment author: anon895 12 April 2013 03:56:09PM *  0 points [-]

What do you think public perception would be of two teenage girls who played with the genitals of an unconscious drunk guy?

Tangentially, it might be similar to public perception of this writer. From the top-displayed comments:

This is rape. Period. You're one sick fuck.

Also:

Yes, because when a man is aroused it's totally not rape is it...Fucking hell you're stupid...

Edit: It might be a poor example of a gender-symmetrical act, since one actually can "play with" male genitals non-sexually; I do it whenever I use the bathroom, and have it done whenever I have a medical chekcup.

Comment author: OrphanWilde 12 April 2013 04:41:51PM 1 point [-]

Two comments don't exactly constitute public perception.

Incidentally, some women also touch themselves when they use the restroom (incidence rate is who the fuck knows) for approximately the same reasons, and, uh, you've never heard complaints about speculums?

Ford, Liwag-McLamb, and Foley, 1998 (among other studies, such as "What is a typical rape? Effects of victim and participant gender in female and male rape perception" by Irina Anderson in the British Journal of Social Psychology) suggest that people are less likely to label a given incident rape if the victim is a male, more likely to regard a male victim as complicit in or partially responsible for the rape, and more likely to regard male victims of rape negatively (the term used in the literature is generally "homophobic response").

Incidentally, as for the legal status of the two girls - it wouldn't be rape. It wouldn't even be sexual assault. It's generally classified as sexual battery, and is a misdemeanor in most jurisdictions.