Just like responding to Obama kicking open a door or saying that men are rapists and “we” need to teach them not to rape (sorry, while the first was clearly a microaggression, that last one wasn’t a microaggression - where did that come from?), people need to learn to develop an emotional shield, not crusade against those slinging these supposed microaggressions, as time will make fools of them all. Not to mention that to address some of these requires pandering to these marginalized groups, such as #16. Typically, if anyone outside of a transgender community is mistaken for another gender, they correct the person and move on, and unless you want to argue that mistaking someone’s gender is actually some sort of universal microaggression, then #16 is not valid as transgendered people should not be given special treatment in that regard. Now, of course, if someone was intentionally calling Chelsea Manning “he” or “Bradley Manning” when that person has the express knowledge that the person identifies as female, that is a different case, likely akin to someone repeatedly referring to a non-transgendered female as “she.” I am, for the purpose of the idea expressed in this paragraph, assuming that that is not the case, however. But yeah, controversial ideas all up in this post. I totally know.
Response to What Is Rape Culture?:
So, I want to put something out here. I wanted to address the double standard of some who say that rape accusations should be taken seriously, and that false accusers should not be prosecuted for their crimes. Let me get this straight. Because false accusers exist does not mean that rapists do not exist. We could argue whether or not the consequences of rape on a victim are higher or lower than that of someone who is falsely accused, but that’s not what I’m doing in this post. I want to posit some ideas: 1. Rape is a serious crime and thus accusations of rape should not be made lightly.
2. Those falsely accusing others of rape (AND CAN BE PROVED BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT TO BE DOING SO) should be prosecuted, as accusations of rape should not be made lightly. and this can be seen with other crimes in our society: 1. Physical assault is a serious crime and thus accusations of physical assault should not be made lightly.
2. Those falsely accusing others of physical assault (AND CAN BE PROVED BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT TO BE DOING SO) should be prosecuted, as accusations of physical assault should not be made lightly. And other things: 1. There are limited resources to deal with real fires and thus a fire alarm should not be triggered if there is no fire.
2. Those falsely triggering a fire alarm should be prosecuted, as he/she is using up resources that could be used to deal with a real fire. etc. And as a society, we punish those who falsely accuse others of crimes because it not only wastes the resources of those who are responsible to investigate crimes, it creates a social crisis for the falsely accused. To put this into a storybook analogy, it eliminates those who cry wolf so that those who report problems can be taken more seriously. As such, defending those who cry wolf only undermines the issue at hand - it trivializes it, and makes it into something that a false accuser could make a gain from. Defending false accusers also unfortunately contributes to a societal idea that rape claims aren’t serious because, in a literal sense, people are fighting to defend those who aren’t treating it seriously themselves. If we were to adamantly defend those who falsely accused others of physically assaulting them, how are we to take claims of physical assault seriously? If we weren’t prosecuting those who pull fire alarms when there is no fire, how are firefighters supposed to believe that any given fire is actually real? That’s where the true double-standard comes from. The “have your cake and eat it too” mentality. If we as a society want to universally treat rape claims as serious at least 95% of the time, then we have to take away the false accuser’s shield to make false claims.
Response to What Is Rape Culture?:
@Benjamin, it is not counterproductive. I would say that it is counterproductive NOT to prosecute people who make false rape accusations. The Young Turks recently did a piece about how the FBI CONFIRMED that 8% of rape accusations were false. These 8% were proven, beyond a doubt, to be false. Some studies indicate that this number could be as high as 70%-80% (and hard to prove as true or false, like rape, because most of the time it falls down to hearsay and it’s impossible to rule either way). False rape accusations ruin lives, even if they are determined to be false. That being said, the justice system should strive to make every effort only to punish a woman making a false claim when it can be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it is a false rape claim, not simply because the local police station has suspiscions that it is one. Your argument is similar to saying that we shouldn’t prosecute those who falsely pull fire alarms heavily because those who would be legitimately pulling fire alarms would be scared of legal prosecution. You may say “well, there’s more likely going to be evidence of a fire, unlike a rape!,” but that doesn’t change the fact that like with the false fire-alarm puller, the false accuser should not be charged as guilty unless she is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I’m a humanist, not an MRA, but it makes me sick at the pathetic attempts of people to defend those who cry wolf because they don’t like their partner, or they don’t like someone in their neighborhood, or whatever. People who are falsely accusing other people of committing a crime are committing a crime themselves, and those who are victims of said crime truly are said victims. In both cases, the wrong-doer should only be punished if there is valid evidence that the wrong-doer did the wrong-doing. And in all of this, why is it that the well-being of the false accuser takes precedence over the falsely accused? The falsely accused is shunned by their community as soon as someone utters the word rape, even if it never happened, and people go up in arms defending the despicable human who falsely accused another. Is this not worth stopping? Does the livelihood of the falsely accused not matter? Why? If I falsely accused you of physically assaulting me, should I not be prosecuted, or would that be threatening to those who were actually physically assaulted and wanted to report the crimes done against them? Maybe someone can come along and shed some light on how the defending of false accusers (which, I would imagine that feminists would want to fight because defending false accusers of rape only trivalizes rape and makes it somewhat of a game, even!) is not pathetic bullshit and how I am the most misogynistic bastard alive. Or perhaps I’ll just get seven thumb-downs instead, because argument pales in comparison to the gut instinct of the people.