Jump to content

Shit on bands here


Recommended Posts

This is a terrible sentiment, luckily it was just a kiss, and not a grope. People forget how bad things are when they don't happen to you. What if your daughter or wife or mother was the one to be violated onstage? I doubt anyone would stand to just let that happen. I've heard of a time where someone kissed Shannon from Hunx and his Punx/Shannon and the Clams and she punched him in the face, I used to think it wasn't that big of a deal. But when I see young girls crowdsurfing and getting groped by dudes , it pisses me off. I understand a lot of social justice is kind of a pissing contest to see which one is more stupid, but rape culture is not one of them. 

 

I understand where you're going with this, but please try to stay away from the "what if it was your daughter/wife/mother" argument. It insinuates that men can only care about the well being of a women, if they have some sort of connection with her. I know that's obviously not what you were going for, but it's important to understand! 

 

 

 

 

 

actually that is a very apt statement.  Of course a person will personalize, take greater investment when it is someone so close.  i find it hard to believe that if this happened to your daughter/wife/mother you would not be much more outraged. That is not to not take away any outrage you may have towards this incident, but it's natural it would be greater if it involved someone close to you.  and when someone appears to trivialize the whole incident (as a couple posts here have), I can't help but see how making them think about whether it was someone close to them as opposed to a stranger, a person might actually have a different (more concerned) attitude from the seemingly flippant ones they have posted here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually that is a very apt statement.  Of course a person will personalize, take greater investment when it is someone so close.  i find it hard to believe that if this happened to your daughter/wife/mother you would not be much more outraged. That is not to not take away any outrage you may have towards this incident, but it's natural it would be greater if it involved someone close to you.  and when someone appears to trivialize the whole incident (as a couple posts here have), I can't help but see how making them think about whether it was someone close to them as opposed to a stranger, a person might actually have a different (more concerned) attitude from the seemingly flippant ones they have posted here.

 

There's actually a bunch of really great articles about why mother/wife/daughter/sister should be avoided when talking about these issues. This one is probably my favorite, http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/anne-theriault-/steubenville-rape_b_2909859.html. I doubt anyone will read the whole thing and it is about a completely different (and more violent) scenario, but it pertains to everything. I was going to post an excerpt from it, but it's all so brilliant. 

 

Some key points: 

 

"Framing the issue this way for rape apologists can seem useful. I totally get that. It feels like you're humanizing the victim and making the event more relatable, more sympathetic to the person you're arguing with.

You know what, though? Saying these things is not helpful; in fact, it's not even helping to humanize the victim. What you are actually doing is perpetuating rape culture by advancing the idea that a woman is only valuable in so much as she is loved or valued by a man."

"For one thing, what does it say about the women who aren't anyone's wife, mother or daughter? .... That they deserve to be raped? That they are not worthy of protection? That they are not deserving of sympathy, empathy or love?"

"And when we frame all women as being someone's wife, mother or daughter, what are we teaching young girls?

We are teaching them that in order to have the law on their side, they need to be loved by men. That they need to make themselves attractive and appealing to men in order to be worthy of protection. That their lives and their bodily integrity are valueless except for how they relate to the men they know."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's actually a bunch of really great articles about why mother/wife/daughter/sister should be avoided when talking about these issues. This one is probably my favorite, http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/anne-theriault-/steubenville-rape_b_2909859.html. I doubt anyone will read the whole thing and it is about a completely different (and more violent) scenario, but it pertains to everything. I was going to post an excerpt from it, but it's all so brilliant. 

 

Some key points: 

 

"Framing the issue this way for rape apologists can seem useful. I totally get that. It feels like you're humanizing the victim and making the event more relatable, more sympathetic to the person you're arguing with.

You know what, though? Saying these things is not helpful; in fact, it's not even helping to humanize the victim. What you are actually doing is perpetuating rape culture by advancing the idea that a woman is only valuable in so much as she is loved or valued by a man."

"For one thing, what does it say about the women who aren't anyone's wife, mother or daughter? .... That they deserve to be raped? That they are not worthy of protection? That they are not deserving of sympathy, empathy or love?"

"And when we frame all women as being someone's wife, mother or daughter, what are we teaching young girls?

We are teaching them that in order to have the law on their side, they need to be loved by men. That they need to make themselves attractive and appealing to men in order to be worthy of protection. That their lives and their bodily integrity are valueless except for how they relate to the men they know."

 

I see where you're coming from, but this is also applicable to men not only women, I've heard soldiers dying being compared to your father, your brother, your son. Just as an example, other situations have been related to that as well. But regardless of gender, I feel like the sentiment the writer was trying to put out came out really terribly. No one is implying any of these things. This is not a fallback for rape apologists. It's not an invention of the patriarchy. Who said only men were allowed to have daughters or mothers? I still stand by my opinion that for those who simply don't see the seriousness of these crimes, comparing victims to a loved one is a way to make people understand. Because the fact is, if my mothers life is weighed against that of some stranger halfway across the world, I will pick my mother every time. I'm not going to mention my father because I haven't seen him since I was 8. I understand humans should be valued no matter their place, but nothing will compare a stranger to a loved one.  I kind of resent that author for beginning to rant about foster children. Like that is on such a self-serving tangent that I can't fathom how she thought of that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, of course anyone will take the side of a relative they're close with. It was really just some food for thought. I think she makes some great points and she never once said that it can't be said for men.

 

As someone pointed out earlier, it all comes down the #notallmen to the #yesallwomen epidemic. 

Not all men are bad. All women experience men who are bad.

We should just start looking at humans as humans, regardless of gender. That's what it's about at the end of the day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the difference is because she was asked about other famous musicians who have passed and then said "lol yeah i wish i was dead." That's why Francis Cobain spoke up, that's super disrespectful to the family of those who have passed away. 

 

Lana also is veryyyyyyyyyyyy known for romanticizing things that should not be romanticized, so yes, it absolutely sends a bad message to her audience. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if you want to use the slippery slope argument one way, doesn't it also work the other? If kissing a girl on the lips is this heinous action that should be derided by all people who are pro woman's rights and equality, would you respond the same way if he kissed her cheek? Hugged her? Held her hand? Stood within one foot of her?

Where's the dividing line between a woman's rights violation and dude just being an ass?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if you want to use the slippery slope argument one way, doesn't it also work the other? If kissing a girl on the lips is this heinous action that should be derided by all people who are pro woman's rights and equality, would you respond the same way if he kissed her cheek? Hugged her? Held her hand? Stood within one foot of her?

Where's the dividing line between a woman's rights violation and dude just being an ass?

Don't touch someone who doesn't want to be touched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he kissed her cheek, hugged her, grabbed her hand etc. without permission...then yes, it's a violation of ANYONE'S space. I'm sure a guy would be just as uncomfortable if someone he didn't know just grabbed his hand without any sort of indication/consent. 

 

I think we moved past this whole aspect of it though. Everyone agrees its a shitty thing that happened. Not everyone agrees that it should be talked about...but it is being talked about. That's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×

AdBlock Detected

spacer.png

We noticed that you're using an adBlocker

Yes, I'll whitelist