Wow, sort of upsetting story. California has no law requiring victims to testify, yet the DA simply insisted that she be required and that was enough to lock her up for 25 days and then put an ankle bracelet monitor on her. She’s also a part of the foster care system, so she didn’t even have the privilege of an advocate to fight on her behalf.
Is it justice if you manipulate those with the least means to act as a mere means to your end as oppose to treating them with the respect you give any other victim?
Our community, much like society-at-large, needs a paradigm shift as it relates to our sexual assault prevention efforts. For so long all of our energy has been directed at women, teaching them to be more “ladylike” and to not be “promiscuous” to not drink too much or to not wear a skirt. Newsflash: men don’t decide to become rapists because they spot a woman dressed like a video vixen or because a girl has been sexually assertive.
How about we teach young men when a woman says stop, they stop? How about we teach young men that when a woman has too much to drink that they should not have sex with her, if for no other reason but to protect themselves from being accused of a crime? How about we teach young men that when they see their friends doing something inappropriate to intervene or to stop being friends? The culture that allows men to violate women will continue to flourish so long as there is no great social consequence for men who do so.
— Zerlina Maxwell’s Ebony.com piece “Stop Telling Women How to Not Get Raped.”
DescriptionWiyabi is Assiniboine for, “Women”. This project was created in response to the overwhelming and frightening statistics of violence towards Native American Women.
*1 out of 3 Native women will be raped and 3 out of 4 will be physically assaulted.
*88 percent of the violence is perpetrated by non-Native men, and Tribal courts have zero authority to prosecute them.
*The murder rates is 10 times the national average.
*Native women are more likely than any race/ethnicity per capita in the U.S. to be victims of violence.
*Native women are more likely to be stalked than any other group of women.
*Between 2005-2009, U.S. attorneys declined to prosecute 50% of all Indian country matters referred to them, 67% of which involved sexual abuse and related matters.
In addition to promoting awareness to the pandemic of interpersonal violence, the Save Wiyabi Project highlights legislation that is beneficial to reservations and empowers Native women.
The Re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act and the SAVE Native Women Act are two pieces of legislation that would greatly aid reservations and Native women who are victims of sexual and domestic violence. Please contact your Senators and encourage them to support both.
Was not expecting to see this, but I’m glad it exists. I really hope this meme sticks around for a while, so many perspectives are using it as a medium to explain their daily lived experiences.
Watch and discuss
ASCOSA: A UK-based organization for adult male survivors of child sexual abuse
Male Survivor: A comprehensive site on male victimization, including a message board and healing weekends of recovery
Menweb: Male child sexual abuse
Survivors Manchester: Supporting male survivors of sexual abuse and rape
Further resources
Helplines:
If you are in crisis and need someone to talk to, or if you need advice, then the following helplines may be useful:
UK:
Male Rape Support Association: 07932 898274
AMSOSA: 0845 4309371
Childline (Under 18): 0800 1111
Men’s Advice Line - 0808 801 0327 (For men in abusive relationship)
USA:
RAINN: 1-800-656-HOPE (4673) (for male and female survivors)
Domestic Violence Helpline: 1-888-7HELPLINE (for men and women)
Australia:
Mensline: 1300789978
Men’s Domestic Violence Helpline: 08 9223 1199
Other helplines can be found here.
— One of my male friends on twitter. My faith In humanity is slowing being restored…
transient-dreamer submitted:
I think this would definitely be worth your time to look at. “Social effects” being a euphemism for behaviors perceived to be opposed to traditional conservative sensibilities.
The original opinion piece:
The female studens’ response:
That is ridiculous… yoga pants and leggings all the time and its NOT even that serious. I can garuntee no one can see my VAGINA when I wear yoga PANTS this ignorant asshole is just trying to get a pass for staring at people’s vaginas…
My favorite line of his:
Yoga pants make butts look good, and I can’t truly blame you yoga-pant wearers for wanting to flaunt. Part of me is, at heart, a yoga pants fan.
But the rest of me stubbornly objects. I can’t help but feel that women who wear yoga pants have a false modesty that says, “I want to show off my body, but I am too embarrassed to be overtly sexual, so I will just wear skin-tight, curve-revealing clothing to satisfy my exhibitionist desires in socially acceptable means.”
I get the sense that women wear yoga pants to feel sexy without getting judged as a slut, yet I see something demeaning in women wearing yoga pants and parading around their half-silhouetted vaginas all day.
That’s funny, because I get the sense that this is a thinly veild “I was staring at someone’s body who happened to be wearing Yoga pants and i’m angry that their body turned me on but i’m not ENTITLED to have sex with you on demand. How dare you wear comfortable clothing that turns me on but then you wont allow me to actually treat you like a sex object. ITS NOT FAIR, if you’re not going to sleep with me you’re NOT allowed to wear something that I find attractive!” And then he argues that it affects social culture? umm obviously the culture is fine because everyone fucking wears Yoga pants/leggings - your perverted ass is just hot and bothered and wants to make a big fucking deal about it.
NOT BUYING IT. College dudes have the most disgusting case of sexual entitlement I’ve ever fucking seen. And college publications have the most ridiculous wanna-be controversial opinion pieces written in them JUST for fucks sake.
and the response was great - an exerpt:
It’s not about yoga pants. It’s about the implications you, the author, don’t even know you made. Even something as simple as the construction of your article is offensive. You begin with the notion that Roger Williams University has less than rigorous academics. You then cite a specific example of a woman who you believe embodies that notion. Finally, you make an assumption about how these women, who are apparently dumb and get easy grades, think and feel. You imply that we should dress differently because it’s in your best interest. You tell us that we “don’t know how to express our sexuality” and you criticize us for the fact that your own eyes wander. Here’s a thought: Maybe women don’t dress the way they do to please men. Maybe they do it to feel comfortable, or sexy, or pretty. But, we are not going to make that assumption because we don’t know why individual women dress the way they do and neither do you.
in a slightly related note: I’ve recently decided to stop buying jeans altogether and ONLY buy leggings/yoga pants. Shits cheaper, more comfortable, and don’t tear when my thighs rub together :| #thickgirlproblems
I hate how we make statistics say just about anything in the interest of having concise headlines. People pay more attention to headlines than the actual story these days…
From the article:
One of the more startling statistics in the report, which analyzed prescription claims data from 2.5 million insured Americans from 2001 to 2010, is that one in four women is dispensed medication for a mental health condition, compared to just 15 percent of men.
There is a SIGNIFICANT difference between ALL americans and INSURED Americans. Systemically, you’re leaving out large chunks of the population that doesn’t have access to insurance in the first place to even get counted in the study. I understand that this is a study done through a specific angle - and it was disclosed that the sample group was done on people who are insured - but we all can see how the headline “1 in 4 women are on psych meds” is misleading and false.
I’m explaining this because, well 1) because i’m bored and have nothing else to do, but also b/c 2) it needs to be pointed out the random ways we erase so many groups and experiences every single day - We take facts like this and apply it to all women and never think to wonder about the groups we NEVER FAIL to always some how leave out. I can tell you right now, I bet a study done on all Americans who AREN’T insured would reveal a hell of a lot. Its not bad that they do a study on people who just happen to have access to medicine, but we use the results as though those are the only people who actually matter - and never go the next step to understand how the exclusion of certain groups without the same access is negatively affected by the systemic ways in which we consistently leave them out of the discussion.
ok someone asked me about this the other day and it finally came on my dashboard…
this is almost too stupid to even respond to. If someone was bitter enough to make this pathetic ass article… well that’s their life…
*flips hair*
Probably the most interesting article i’ve seen on the subject.
Let me make this clear, because unfortunately, many of us may be going there already-this is not some diatribe to suggest that white men should not date black men. What it is, is an invitation for both white men and black men, to further explore our relationships with each other and the the historic social, spiritual pain and eroticization that exists between us.
What it is, is an opportunity for us to understand that patterns of sexual exploitation are not so rapidly dissolved, and maybe ponder, that the consumption of black male bodies by white men and white culture is not only almost always exploitative, it is, in a male context, almost always homo-erotic; it is an expression of the white male unconscious desire for the black male body, a body which has had a construct of “raw masculinity” projected upon it; a masculinity that in America, is deemed highly desirable no matter what your sexual orientation.
—
Everyone practices “no snitching” it’s just that some institutions can do it and remain protected by their institution’s unlimited resources…
