Also: ‘Shut Up, Because Rape’

 http://theothermccain.com/2014/12/23/also-shut-up-because-rape/

Ace of Spades:

You may wonder why feminists never stop writing about rape.
The answer is simple: Minus rape, feminism stands exposed as a trivial lists of complaints — women not “empowered” enough in TV shows, Liz Lemon selling out the sisterhood on 30 Rock, Negative Body Image You Guys in the media, etc.
Minus rape, feminism is rather too obviously a list of trivial complaints by comfortable yet hysterical semi-affluent white women.

 

That quote is so good, I’m tempted to let it stand without further comment, but having spent the past six months up to my neck in radical feminism, naturally I must add more. To understand what is happening — what is driving the feminist “rape culture” mania — we must go back to the “SlutWalk” movement. That started in Toronto in February 2011, whentwo police officers were giving a presentation on crime prevention at York University. During that presentation, one of the officers, Constable Michael Sanguinetti, made this remark: “I’ve been told I’m not supposed to say this, however, women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized.”

Sanguinetti later apologized for that remark, but by then Toronto’s feminists had already organized the first SlutWalk, a protest that was quickly replicated across the United States, and which has since become an annual event in many cities. The ostensible message of these protests — although the message sometimes gets obscured — is that “no means no,” and that a woman’s behavior (how she dresses, how much she drinks) should never be interpreted to mean she is “asking for it.”

No educated person needs to be told this.

This is what offends conservatives about feminism’s “rape culture” discourse, really. We are educated people — intelligent, civilized, literate, humane — and we therefore resent the implication that, without feminists to tutor us, we’d all be brutally savaging women like the Red Army on its march toward Berlin in 1945. Or like Bill Cosby.

Feminism’s intellectual hegemony within academia, however, protects its young disciples from encountering informed criticism of their belief system, and one of feminism’s core beliefs is that the world is in desperate need of feminist enlightenment. The cult of “consciousness raising” (an idea borrowed from Communist Party doctrine, thanks to “Red Diaper babies” Anne Forer and Kathie Amatniek) means that every college sophomore who has taken a couple of Women’s Studies classes believes she possesses a moral and intellectual superiority that qualifies her to tutor us about how women are oppressed by the patriarchy.

This attitude of arrogant condescension, this presumption that feminists possess a sort of gnosis that endows them with superior insight, is what makes them so obnoxious when communicating in their accustomed modes — the Lecture, the Screed and the Rant.

One notices that feminists seldom debate or engage in dialogue with their critics. We may take this as evidence that feminist rhetoric and ideology cannot withstand careful scrutiny. On Nov. 18 (coincidentally, the day before Rolling Stone published its botched UVA rape story) a rare exception to this rule occurred when libertarian Wendy McElroy and feminist Jessica Valenti appeared in a forum at Brown University to debate the question, “How Should Colleges Handle Sexual Assault?”

Unfortunately (but predictably) that event was preceded by angry protests from feminists at Brown University who seem to have the idea that disagreeing with feminism is a hate crime:

President Christina Paxson sent out a community-wide email Friday publicizing her personal disagreement with McElroy’s widely reported assertion that rape culture does not exist in the United States and cannot be used to explain individual incidents of sexual assault. . . .
Some students protested the event or attended alternatives, such as a University-organized presentation by Professor of Psychiatry and Human Behavior Lindsay Orchowski, titled “Research on Rape Culture.”

A quick glance at Professor Orchowski’s faculty page reveals that she received her Ph.D. in 2009 and is a legitimate expert:

  • Orchowski, L.M., Untied, A.S. & Gidycz, C.A. (2013). Social reactions to disclosure of sexual victimization and adjustment among survivors of sexual assault. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28 (10), 2005-2023.
  • Shronbrun, Y.C., Orchowski, L.M & Spillane, N. (2013). Intimate partner violence and use of alcohol and drug treatment services among a national sample. Addictive Disorders & Their Treatment, 12(2), 58-66.
  • Orchowski, L.M., Mastroleo, N.R., & Borsari, B. (2012). Correlates of alcohol-related regretted sex among college students. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 26, 782-790.
  • Orchowski, L. M., United, A.S., Gidycz, C. A. (2012). Reducing risk for sexual victimization: An analysis of the perceived socio-emotional consequences of self-protective behaviors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27 (9), 1733-1752.
  • Orchowski, L.M., Creech, S., Reddi, M., Capezza, N., & Ratcliff, T. (2012). College women’s perceived risk to experience sexual victimization: A prospective analysis. Violence and Victims, 27 (2), 194-214.
  • Orchowski, L.M. & Gidycz, C.A. (2012). To whom do college women confide following sexual assault? A prospective study of predictors of sexual assault disclosure and social reactions. Violence Against Women, 18 (3), 264-288.
  • Orchowski, L.M. & Johnston, J. (2012). Efficacy of group treatments for alcohol use disorders. Current Drug Abuse Reviews, 5 (2), 148-157.
  • Orchowski, L.M., & Barnett, N.P. (2012). Alcohol related sexual consequences during the transition from high school to college. Addictive Behaviors, 37 (3), 256-263.
  • Gidycz, C.A., Orchowski, L.M., & Berkowitz, A. (2011). An evaluation of a social norms and bystander intervention to prevent sexual aggression among college men. Violence Against Women, 17 (6), 720-742.
  • Orchowski, L.M., Castelino, P., Ng, H.M., Cosio, D. & Heaton, J.A. (2011). Design and implementation of a Counselor-in-Residence program. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 25, 1-18.
  • Gidycz, C.A., Warkentin, J.B. Orchowski, L.M., & Edwards, K. (2011). College men’s perceived likelihood to perpetrate sexual aggression. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma, 20, 1-20.
  • Orchowski, L.M. Meyer, D.H, & Gidycz, C.A. (2009). College women’s likelihood to report unwanted sexual victimization to campus agencies: Trends and correlates. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 18 (8), 839-858.
  • Orchowski, L.M., Uhlin, B., Probst, D.R., Edwards, K., & Anderson, T.M. (2009). An assimilation analysis of clinician-assisted emotional disclosure therapy with survivors of intimate partner sexual assault. Psychotherapy Research, 19(3), 293-311.
  • Gidycz, C.A., Orchowski, L.M., King, C. & Rich, C. (2008). Sexual victimization and health-risk behaviors: A prospective analysis of college women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(6), 744-763.
  • Orchowski, L.M., Gidycz, C.A., & Raffle, H. (2008). Evaluation of a sexual assault risk reduction and self-defense program: A prospective analysis of a revised protocol. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32(2), 204-218.
  • Gidycz, C.A., Warkentin, J.B., Orchowski, L.M. (2007). Predictors of perpetration of physical, verbal and sexual violence: A prospective analysis of college men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 8(2), 79-94.
  • Gidycz, C.A., Rich, C.L., Orchowski, L.M., King, C. Miller, A. (2006). The evaluation of a sexual assault self-defense and risk-reduction program for college women: A prospective study. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30(2), 173-186.

Stipulating her expertise on sexual assault among college students, what does Professor Orchowski have to teach us about “rape culture”?

 

Lecturing to about 70 community members Tuesday afternoon, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Human Behavior Lindsay Orchowski discussed the prevalence of a rape culture perpetuated by popular media. Jokes, graphic images and advertisements all “make (sexual assault) seem normal,” she said. “People believe rape is inevitable.” . . .
Research on assault characteristics has revealed that about half of reported incidents involve alcohol, Orchowski said. Many sexual assault perpetrators are repeat offenders — though perpetrators comprise a “heterogeneous group,” they are often angry, “hypermasculine” and see acquiring sexual partners “as a game,” she said, adding research also shows that victims often know their offenders, and victims tell others about assaults about half of the time.
Orchowski said only about 20 percent of sexual assault victims correctly labeled their assaults as “rape,” often reporting them as results of miscommunication or bad dates.
Only about 1 percent of assaults are reported to the police, which means researchers may be working with statistics that do not accurately reflect the prevalence of assault, she said. . . .
“Rape myths,” such as blaming alcohol or the victim for assaults, often contribute to perpetrators not considering themselves to be rapists, Orchowski said. “There is a misperception that false accusation is common,” she added. Across studies, only 5 to 7 percent of accusations are false, Orchowski said.

 

 

You can read the rest of that, but perhaps you already see how Professor Orchowski’s data contradict her own rhetoric. If (a) half of reported sexual assaults involve alcohol, and (b) many assaults are perpetrated by repeat offenders, it logically follows that the prevalence of rape on campus can be reduced by (c) measures targeted at reducing underage alcohol use — because a substantial majority of college students are under age 21 — and (d) the criminal prosecution of rapists, because it is likely that the unprosecuted rapist will repeat his crimes.

This is exactly what conservatives keep saying: Sexual assault on college campuses — while not the “epidemic” feminists claim — is more common than it would be if administrators were willing to get serious about stopping the binge drinking and promiscuous “hookup culture” that provide the context within which these incidents typically occur. Most importantly, there must be an end to the common practice of university administrators treating rape as a violation of campus disciplinary procedures rather than prosecuting rape as a felony.

(Notice how she says “only 5 to 7 percent of accusations are false”? As though a 1-in-14 chance of an innocent man being falsely accused of rape were a trivial possibility we can safely ignore?)

Yet we see that Professor Orchowski, while ignoring the implications of her own research data in terms of actually preventing rape on campus, ventures into the mystic realm of feminist gnosis. How is it that “popular media” foster “rape culture”? Assuming that all students are exposed to these jokes and images, why is it that most males do not become rapists and most females do not become rape victims? Maybe this was explained by Professor Orchowski during her lecture and the Brown Daily Heraldreporter omitted the explanation. Also, it would have been nice if someone would have asked Professor Orchowski to explain this:

“Orchowski said only about 20 percent of
sexual assault victims correctly labeled
their assaults as ‘rape,’ often reporting them
as results of miscommunication or bad dates.”

Having re-read that sentence several times, I can scarcely believe that a Ph.D. would actually contend that 80 percent of rape victims don’t even realize that they have been raped. In other words, the expert is substituting her definition of “rape” for the victim’s description of her own experience. Without knowledge of the specific circumstance of any particular incident, it’s impossible to know why Professor Orchowski would justify this definitional substitution.

What this appears to show, however, is how feminists are using this “rape culture” discourse as a way to re-define rape, to create an elastic definition of “sexual assault” that could include any form of male sexual behavior to which any female objects. This project should frighten everyone who cares about the rule of law, as it betrays a reckless disregard for truth as well as a contempt for due process rights that has fostered a climate of anti-male witch-hunting on campus. Ultimately, as I perceived when I covered the 2013 D.C. “SlutWalk” protest, this is about silencing feminism’s critics: Shut up, because rape.”

Feminists have spent more than four decades acquiring power — institutional authority — within elite culture and have become arrogantly contemptuous of opposition to their anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology. We are not ignorant of their rhetorical methods.

“From prehistoric times to the present, I believe, rape has played a critical function. It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keepall women in a state of fear. . . .
“Women are trained to be rape victims. To simply learn the word ‘rape’ is to take instruction in the power relationship between males and females. . . .
Red Riding Hood is a parable of rape. There are frightening male figures abroad in the woods . . . and females are helpless before them. . . .
“There is good reason for men to hold tenaciously to the notion that ‘All women want to be raped.’ Because rape is an act that men do in the name of their masculinity, it is in their interest to believe that women also want rape done, in the name of femininity. . . . This belief is more than arrogant insensitivity; it is a belief in the supreme rightness of male power.”
— Susan BrownmillerAgainst Our Will: Men, Women and Rape (1975)

Does anyone really believe this? Does Professor Orchowski believe it?

If we don’t believe this — if we doubt that rape is a sort of collective terrorism practiced on behalf of all men against all women, as an expression of “the supreme rightness of male power” — are we permitted to express our disagreement? No, we are not — not on any university campus in America in the 21st century.

Susan Brownmiller’s claims about rape have been accepted as gospel among feminists for the past four decades, and it is now impossible for anyone to contest her claims without being accused of misogyny andbranded a “rape apologist.” The excerpts of Against Our Will quoted above were actually quoted from The Essential Feminist Reader, edited by Professor Estelle B. Freedman. (“She has taught at Stanford University since 1976 and is a co-founder of the Program in Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies.”) Professor Freedman’s anthology is often assigned as a principal textbook or supplementary text in introductory Women’s Studies courses, so that Brownmiller’s rape doctrine can be said to enjoy the status of Official Feminist Truth, and feminists are fanatically committed to the defense of this ideology.

There is a good reason, you see, why Wendy McElroy’s appearance on the Brown University campus inspired the university’s president to issue a “community-wide email . . . publicizing her personal disagreement” with McElroy. Universities in 21st-century America are committed to upholding feminist ideology, which is defended by such totalitarian tactics as demonizing critics, disrupting lectures or, most commonly, by preventing critics of feminism from speaking anywhere on campus. You may wonder, exactly what is Wendy McElroy’s thoughtcrime?

McElroy used personal experience to lay the groundwork for an argument that places more emphasis on individual, rather than cultural, explanations of rape.
“I was raped and brutally so . . . I did not blame society. I did not blame the culture. I blamed the man who raped me,” McElroy said. . . .
McElroy said rape culture exists in places like parts of Afghanistan where “women are married against their will” and “murdered for men’s honor” but not in North America, where “rape is a crime that’s severely punished.”
What’s more, those who politicize rape and assert the existence of rape culture imply that all men are guilty or that the accused do not deserve due process, McElroy said.
It is unacceptable that men can now be disciplined for rape through college hearings based on a preponderance of evidence rather than the traditional criminal justice standard of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. “Let’s not build justice for women on injustice for men,” McElroy said, closing her talk.

 

Obviously, no elite university can permit its students to be exposed to dangerous ideas like individual responsibility.

Feminists don’t want “equality.” They want uncontested power.

 

‘Male Feminist’ Admits Well-Known Truth: ‘Male Feminists’ Are Scum

http://theothermccain.com/2014/12/19/male-feminist-admits-well-known-truth-male-feminists-are-scum/

 

The more any normal person knows about feminism, the less inclined they are to call themselves a feminist. This is obviously true for women —does the name “Joyce Trebilcot” ring a bell? — but is doubly true for males. Sure, everybody sees what’s up when some guy in Hollywood or a powerful Democrat politician ostentatiously panders to feminists. It’snoblesse oblige and also good for business.

However, when a random dude goes out of his way to show what a Heroic Feminist Ally he is, you know he’s some kind of creep. Last year, Professor Hugo Schwarz was exposed as a dangerous psycho. Now a “diversity consultant” named Jamie Utt confronts reality:

The first time a woman told me she distrusted me because I’m a man, she tried to explain that it wasn’t personal, that she’s not been given many reasons to trust me (or any man for that matter). She said she’s especially skeptical of me because I called myself a feminist.
That last part really threw me for a loop. She didn’t even really know me! And I’m a good guy!
Fast-forward a few years and how can I blame her? Male “feminist” allies have a history of abusing women’s trust.
For fear of making the movement look bad, the male “allies” of the Occupy Wall Street movement stood silent when multiple women came forward after having been sexually assaulted by other “Occupiers.”
After being lauded and defended by many (including myself) as a model for how to be a better man, Hugo Schwyzer was exposed to be a racist, abusive liar (as if many women of Color hadn’t been saying so all along).
Charles Clymer has been exposed as abusive and self-serving as he attempts to brand himself a “feminist” hero of some kind. . . .

 

You can read the rest of that. The case of Charles Clymer — a guy I’d never heard of before — is particularly interesting:

 

 

 

A while back I wrote about fake allies — specifically, Charles Clymer, a cis white dude who used to run a popular Facebook page called “Equality for Women” but shut it down amidst accusations that, among other things, he was deleting comments from and banning women who questioned his views or the way he ran the page. And then there was his abusive verbal flaying of Stephanie Kay in a private conversation that went public a year or so ago and revealed the dude beneath the Perfect Feminist Ally act. It didn’t help that when called on that tirade, Clymer basically stood by his remarks and went on to admit — almost proudly — that his goal is to become a professional Feminist Leader. And he dug himself in deeper when, following the many accusations leveled at him directly and via the #StopClymer hashtag (by nearly every woman who had been a moderator at the EFW Facebook page, among others), he tweeted promising to address his “mistakes” with an apology and dropped off the Internet for several weeks. When he reappeared, he deleted the aforementioned tweet and went back to promoting the “Charles Clymer: Feminist Ally” brand.

 

On his Twitter profile, Clymer describes himself as “Army Vet + Feminist + LGBTQ,” and yeah, whatever. The #StopClymer hashtag has been going strong for months, because Clymer is a very predictable kind of douchebag, the progressive male so arrogant as to think the feminist movement needs males for . . . well, anything.

Progressive male thinks he can get “credibility” points by quoting bell hooks on his Twitter profile? Might as well try seppuku.

Any male who believes the feminist movement needs his volunteer assistance should first ask himself, “Do I hate myself enough?”

It takes a profound masochistic tendency for any male to support a movement that regards all men as complicit in rape, and viewsheterosexuality as oppression imposed on females by the patriarchy.

Still, Jamie Utt attempts to reconcile himself to obsolescence:

 

 

If you’ve been socialized in dominant constructions of gender in the US (and many other parts of the “Western” world for that matter), no matter how much you try to be an ally, you’re going to screw up.
This is because it takes tremendous work on self for those socialized into privilege to fight that socialization. . . .
I’ve done the mental backflips necessary to justify my sexist, chauvinist, anti-feminist behavior while calling myself “feminist.” There have been times when I’ve been terrible to women. There are still times when I live more fully in my patriarchal socialization than in my feminist values.
So the work of ending abuse committed by “feminist” men must inevitably mean that I start with myself.

 

You’re embarrassing yourself, dude.

All feminists are insane, but “male feminists” are a special kind of crazy.