Holla Back and Fire Extinguishers
So--Biting Beaver (y'know, the blogger that makes me sound all delicate and polite?) dropped me a line that made reference to her presence on Holla Back,* so I went over and checked it out, and I was looking around when I realized I was having a thought that I'd had when I'd first seen it--a thought that didn't quite break the surface last time, but did this time and made me do a nasty double-take.
The thought was:
"Hmm. This idea kicks ass, but what are the odds that someone's going to get pissed off about getting their picture taken some time and something bad's going to happen...?"And suddenly I went "Goddamn, that shit is Fucked Up!" It's classic blame-the-victim: if some abusive cretin attacks a woman because he doesn't like being (non-violently) called out on his abusive cretinous shit, it's somehow her fault? How fucked up is that?
I mean, is it statistically likely that some asswipe, somewhere, will get pissed off and assault a woman he wouldn't have otherwise assaulted because she had the guts to confront him and take his picture? Sure.
But in the meantime, it is also statistically inevitable that hundreds--if not thousands--of other asswipes will be shamed, intimidated, or otherwise affected in ways that will make them less likely to harass women in the future, and hundreds--if not thousands--of women will have the experience of confronting a sexual bully and letting him know that
a) what he's doing is not innocent funBut without thinking about it, I found myself falling into the same patriarchal bullshit they used to teach (back in the 70s and 80s) that it was better for women *not* to fight back if they were sexually assaulted because, well, golly--if you make the mean man angry, he might actually do something bad to you. Y'know, other than rape and possibly kill you.
b) she is not going to stand there and let him do it
c) she is not afraid of him, and
d) he might actually have a reason to be afraid of her.
Seriously--does anyone else remember this advice? "Don't fight back--he'll get angry." What a load of crap. It belongs right up there with "Don't leave your abusive partner, he'll get angry," and "Don't tell anyone your Uncle's molesting you--he'll get angry." And yet it still bubbled to the surface when I was thinking about Holla Back.
The analogy that keeps sticking in my mind is telling women that they shouldn't keep fire extinguishers in the home because of the chance that they might drop one and break their foot. I mean, it could happen--feet are fragile, good fire extinguishers are heavy fucking cylinders of steel, and accidents happen. Shit, I wouldn't be surprised if the CDC had statistics on that.
Theoretically, a woman could even grab a big-ass extinguisher, try to put out a kitchen fire, drop the big-ass thing on her bare foot, crush it, and die because she was unable to get out of the house in time. It could happen. And then you could stand around and say, "See? If only she hadn't had that fire extinguisher, she'd be alive now. Face it, ladies: fire extinguishers are dangerous."
But, no. If you suggested that to any sane sentient being, their response would be something along the lines of "Are you out of your fucking mind?! Fire extinguishers save lives every day! Of course there's a non-zero chance that some woman somewhere will drop one on her foot, but that's fucking trivial compared to the benefit of women being empowered to defend themselves against injury and death with a good fire extinguisher! What the fuck are you using for brains?"
Or, if they're sane, sentient, and discerning, they might look you coolly in the eye and ask:
"Why do you hate women so much?"
____________________________________
*If you haven't visited, you must. Just to get the idea in your mind. Just a quick look.
posted by RJ @ 8:25 PM
9 comments
links to this post
9 Comments:
They're still teaching women to lie back and take it. I remember reading on the BBC last year that police advised women not to fight back if they were being raped, because then the rapist might kill them as well.
I'm glad someone finally said it.
Well, the problem is, a rapist is not a fire extinguisher. There are different kinds of rapists, but there's been so little study of the most common type of rapist---the acquaintance rapist---that no one really knows if those sub types apply to them, too. In fact, if you fight back with the wrong type of guy, he'll kill you. Of course, if you do fight back, he'll kill you, too. The only thing that always works is this: if you have some guy trying to get you into his car, no matter what kind of weapon he's got, run, because you will die if you get in that vehicle.
There's some information; it helps if you look beyond those exact words. Googling "red flags" (for potential dates and other acquaintances) tends to bring up a number of pages talking, at least, about early detection of such types, if not so much what to do once you're in the thick of an attack. Here's one
of the shorter ones: (from a college campus guide, I believe, but useful in other situations as well)
http://www.umt.edu/SA/CHC/index.cfm/page/2120
Another here:
http://tinyurl.com/oo9c3
The four factors that are most important in detecting pre-rape behavior and/or abuse among dates andacquaintances are:
1. SEXUAL ENTITLEMENT
A. Touching another person with no regard for their wishes
B. Sexualizing relationships that are appropriately non-sexual
C. Using conversation that is inappropriately intimate
D. Telling sexual jokes at inappropriate times or places
E. Making inappropriate comments about people's bodies, sexuality, etc.
2.
POWER AND CONTROL
A. Interrupting people, especially women
B. Being a bad loser
C. Exhibiting inappropriate competitiveness
D. Using intimidating body language
E. Game playing
3.
HOSTILITY AND ANGER
A. Showing a quick temper
B. Blaming others when things go wrong
C. Tending to transform other emotions into anger
4.
ACCEPTANCE OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE
A. Using threats in displays of anger
B. Using violence in borderline situations
C. Approving observed violence
D. Justifying violence
From Acquaintance Rape: The Hidden Crime, edited by Andrea Parrot and Laurie Bechhofer, 1991, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
***
Here's a link for an outfit styling itself Women's Self-Defense Institute; apparently they sell some DIY videos called "Rape Escape." I might check them out, although I think live instruction is always better, as a general rule. I did take some basic self defense classes a while back, wherein we did talk about ways in which to assess the specific situation/attacker (including acquaintance situations), among other useful tips.
link:
http://www.rapeescape.com/
...I like the Hollaback site, very much, but some of the accounts do worry me a bit. Stuff like "and then he followed me home, and only went away after I gave him a hug." I wish they had a basic street smarts section up on there (for instance: someone's following you, *don't* go home; retrace and go somewhere public and brightly lit, preferably where you can get a hold of the police if need be).
...from the rapescape sie: a good article on the pre-attack "interview" and how one woman "failed" (or "passed," I'd say)--that is, averted a probably attack.
http://www.rapeescape.com/interview.htm
(sorry for the multiple postage, but I felt compelled to add):
Not that any of the prevention stuff means "do this, and you'll be safe, guaranteed!" or that men's awareness of the problem isn't totally important as well. It doesn't and it is. I do find stuff like the self-defense seminars helpful, though. Sometimes it can be difficult to walk that fine line between being cheerfully oblivious and being hyper-vigilant.
Ginmar: a rapist is not a fire extinguisher, but in the analogy, the fire extinguisher stands for women confronting their harrassers. The rapist is the stove fire.
Belledame: I agree--I saw the one about "he only left when I gave him a hug" and thought "Yikes! you hugged a creepy-ass stalker!?"
OTOH, it worked, and it's always possible that she was exercising her careful and considered jugement about what would best get her safely out of that situation, based on circumstances not apparent to those of us not present. Obviously not something to recommend in general, but I've started to get vary wary of saying things like "You did WHAT in a dangerous situation?" around rape, because it starts to feel like one more way of disempowering women around the issue of rape. Maybe something more along the lines of "Wow. I wouldn't think hugging him would work (which it did, and that's worth respecting). How did you know that was the right thing to do?"
Because if it hadn't worked, the "you did WWHAT?!" reaction could translate as "Boy, that was a stupid thing to do--no wonder you got raped!"
and Kat- " police advised women not to fight back "
Aaaagh! I can't believe they're still doing that. While I can understand the reasoning (not just the underlying patriarchy reasoning but the well-intentioned just-trying-to-take-care-of-a-fellow-human-being reasoning) couldn't they at least present it as an option? Like, "If you are being sexually assaulted, you have to chose between resisting and not resisting--these are the advantages and disadvantages of each, and these are the statistics that describe the likely results of each."
Or would that be treating women like people who could make adult, rational choices about their sexuality?
Yeah, I hear you, RJ. I was actually less jolted by the "gave him a hug" than "he followed me home." I guess if it's late and you're in the middle of nowhere it may not always be possible to go somewhere other than home, or go for help, or confront the guy--it's just always been of those Big Number One Safety Tips for me: if at all possible don't let them know where you live. It's a lot easier when you're blogging about it than when you're actually in it, obviously.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home