Louise O Neill on rape culture.

mzungu wrote: »

It's late , so the below is pretty much verbatim what I said earlier in the thread.

As I see it, the problem with the entire "rape culture" mantra is that like all theories, it can be moulded to mean whatever one wants it to mean. The scale starts at the act itself but then casts the net wide enough so that any form of the "male gaze" can be viewed as a being a part of it. This is where it runs into problems (and there are many), almost everybody (asexuals aside) buys magazines, watches movies, tv shows, adverts, music videos, video games etc where the gaze will be present, and this goes for both sexes. So, when you follow it down that rabbit hole, you find out that pretty much everybody who is living today is part of this grand conspiracy to normalise rape.

The fact is, it is mostly vested interests pushing the whole idea for commercial and political reasons. Very cynical when you think about it. Therefore, it is no surprise that the whole concept has been largely discredited and rape crisis networks do not subscribe to it in any way, shape or form. For example RAINN has suggested that by pushing the myth of "rape culture", it makes their job harder to help victims. This is what they wrote regarding the subject of:

If rape crisis networks think it is all a load of hokum, then that speaks volumes.

To answer your question, it fails to make any logical sense to large swathes of the population because it in no way describes their day-to-day reality. Unless of course their reality is a war zone somewhere in Sub-Saharan Africa. But in a western democracy? Not so much.

Deleted User wrote: »

py2006 wrote: »

Depends on how it is delivered and by whom. If I was a parent I would have serious reservations especially if I had a son. I would want to see the material first and speak to the person delivering it.

I would not want a LON or a Mullally type character speaking to my son/s.

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I cannot believe that Trinity 'forces' folks to go to that in first year-how do you enforce it, by giving a test at the end? Seriously? And do they appreciate the irony of not allowing a 'choice'.

And what would be the questions on the exam? 'You're female, have drank a few drinks, he has drank more than you, you decide to have sex with him and he is willing to do so-how soon after do you report the encounter as a rape, and how long do you think he will spend in jail?'

I imagine many students skip those classes. I would personally not want to sit tthere and be told I was the problem, because of my gender.
I've known a few lecturers in the past who were leaning towards the 'rape culture', but at the time, it was more a derivative, the 'raunch culture'. The raunch culture was all about things like 'pole dancing' classes, and certain writers who view it as 'ways to please your man' and putting your own emotions aside, as a woman-but then again, I do have to wonder, why is it wrong for a woman to intentionally want to be viewed as sexually attractive? Like, as some writers call it, the 'exhaltation' of the female, aka the almost worship of the female form? We have magazines, upon magazines, talking about how the female figure is so powerful, so beautiful, and has been immortalised in art for centuries. And in pole dancing classes, it's the woman who makes the rules. They have the power.
I personally don't understand it. If you don't like it, don't do it.

Hell, look at the Independent today-article objectifying young Pierce Brosnan, Pierce photos


Or shirtless Justin Trudeau-

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/banter/trending/photos-of-a-young-shirtless-justin-trudeau-send-the-internet-into-a-spin-35495997.html

And then we have this article which, comes courtesy of Huffpo, claims that JAne Fonda's molestation as a child is down to the Patriarchy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/jane-fonda-opens-up-about-rape-and-child-abuse-in-powerful-interview_us_58b84db9e4b01fc1bde691c0?ob42grn4jr5ritqpvi&

No-just, no, that is down to a mental health disorder within the abuser-a sick individual. Not anything within society. Nobody with a sane mind would look at that and say 'well, that preteen kid disserved her abuse'...

Also, apparently Ian O'Doherty and Una Mullally were due to go on the Late Late show to discuss safe spaces, rape culture etc-Ian opposing her views, Una espousing hers...
Guess who cancelled, and guess who's raging about it on twitter (so much so UoM refuses to respond to the discussion)-on the other hand, LoN and co are 'defending' Una-aka gang upon on him for wanting to have a reasonable discussion.

So they mock Trump when he runs from stuff, such as bankrupptcy, but when their own ilk flees...oh, it's the guys fault.

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/837071272529944577

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Oh I would agree too, but then again, he may be getting a torrent of abuse from folks that have been 'set' on him, as the saying goes.

Even the best of us would reveal an ugly streak under duress-or moreso than usual. Definitely not defending him, btw, but I think he's playing into these types hands by doing so.

And that just further fuels the wrong kind of opinions-about people who want a genuine, respectful debate.

Sasha Wide Squash wrote: »

thing is, say if a debate happened and it involved Mullaly/O Neill, they'd end up crying, going for the sympathy vote, what I would prefer is a strong feminist who would debunk half the crap these "oppressed victims" sprout

mzungu wrote: »

TBH I would have expected somebody like O'Doherty to be somewhat immune to Twitter mobs. He seems to rub people up the wrong way an awful lot. Plus, I have no idea if they were sending him abuse, they could have just been asking him what the hell he was playing at. Which is a valid question. Obviously Twitter mobs are not nice, and I do not condone it if they were abusing him. But after him going on that rant, I doubt he expected they would be sending him a bouquet of flowers!!

I think he revealed his unpleasant streak when he sent those tweets.

I think if the LLS want to do a segment on safe spaces, free speech and all that jazz, then they would want to give it a bit more than the usual 20-25 minute slot. There is potential for something interesting to happen there, but maybe if they went for a panel of between 4-6 might make for better viewing.

HamsterFace wrote: »

I usually got a kick out of his columns, even if I didn't always agree with him.

But I followed him for a few weeks on twitter last year and he shows himself to be an aggressive, vulgar yob.

So I really dislike him now. The language he used towards a fellow journalist as per the above goes well beyond what is warranted.

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Simple question to the men on here: do you think women have traditionally, and are now, treated well in Ireland?

In my personal instance, I left Ireland, and the misogyny was one of the reasons.

I live in another country in Europe now and Im so happy. I am treated better. I look back on Ireland now and I see it suffers because it is so isolated from the rest of the world, under such a male catholic grip for so long, so many sex abuses.Thank god I dont live there anymore!