16 Days: “She Probably Agreed”
Today’s the last day of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence and it’s also International Human Rights Day. I’ve made posts on a couple of issues: widespread rape in Congo; the 200 lashes + jail time punishment of the female rape victim, the suspension of her lawyer’s license, and the 90 lashes for the male rape victim in Saudi Arabia; the 1989 Montreal Massacre; and (on a much brighter note) Devildoll’s interview with girl-wonder.org. All these posts can be found under the 16 Days tag.
I wasn’t sure how I was going to close off my 16 Days blogging. I almost wrote a post on why I blog, why I care about feminism, and why I haven’t just given up and shut up in response to the endless, depressing barrage of outrageous violence against women. I trawled the NYT, the blogs I read, and other sites, collected links, began a draft, and then got stuck, because I couldn’t figure out a conclusion. As I reread the links and articles, I felt like Sisyphus with his rock. I wondered, why do I care? It would be so much easier to stop thinking about feminism, stop paying attention to the news articles on violence against women, and stop caring. It would be less depressing for sure.
And then I saw this article from Australia’s Herald Sun. Six boys, aged 14-16, and three men over the age of consent, aged 17, 18, and 26, gang-raped a ten-year-old girl and the judge said, “The girl involved was not forced and she probably agreed to have sex with all of you.”
Judge Bradley also said, apparently without giving herself an aneurysm from the incredibly contradictory thoughts in her brain,
“All of you have pleaded guilty to having sex with a 10-year-old girl and (one of the juveniles) has pleaded guilty to having sex with another young girl as well.
“All of you have to understand that you cannot have sex with a girl under 16.
16 Days: Montreal Massacre, 1989
Via Lamardeuse and Justice is a Woman with a Sword: 18 years ago today [1].
Justice is a Woman with a Sword has a very good post discussing the murders within a larger context of indifference toward violence against women:
It’s completely unacceptable that this sort of attitude and behaviour is still tolerated in 21st century Canada. It has to stop. This is why feminism exists. This is why women’s fight to be treated as equals both under the law and in our day-to-day dealings with one another, must continue until the day women will really be respected and valued – and not despised, feared or hated – by men.
The Gazette article ends, “Six-hundred and sixty-four women have been murdered in Quebec since Lepine’s rampage, the speakers noted.”
Go read the post and the article and remember.
—-
[1] Bruemmer, René, The Gazette. Montreal massacre remembered, 2007/12/06
16 Days: DevilDoll on Girl-Wonder.org
Just a quick note on DevilDoll’s recent interview at girl-wonder.org. Devildoll is active in comics fandom and last May, she made a post about an officially licensed Mary Jane figure that showed a barefoot, sexed-up MJ in pearls, ripped jeans, and a high-riding thong leaning over and washing Spiderman’s suit in a bucket. There was quite an uproar after the post, with hundreds of comments either expressing disgust at the statuette or saying that the statuette was hot and Devildoll should be raped, presumably for calling a spade a spade (or a disgusting, sexist figurine a disgusting, sexist figurine). The post eventually made the news at MSNBC, Fox, and EW.com. The interview is an interesting read about Devildoll’s experience in comics fandom, which tends to be male-dominated; her experience with female communities in comics fandom; and the reaction to her post. I’m clipping some of the bits that popped out at me.
Girl-Wonder.org: Talk about the response your post got. (Any hilarious trolls you want to share?)
“Well, the charming fellow who suggested some nice anal rape would straighten me out was one to remember.
“While the threats and the insults were by no means pleasant, I couldn’t have asked for the trolls to prove my point any more thoroughly than they did. “Degrading and sexist images are not harmful! They don’t have any affect on society as a whole! And to prove it, I will make degrading and sexist statements about you! Wherever could I have learned that’s acceptable behavior?”
Why it’s important to point out that sexist, racist, homophobic, and otherwise offensive comments are, in fact, offensive:
Girl-Wonder.org: Has it affected your view of fandom?
“It’s reinforced my belief that a fuss needs to be made. The images we see and the things we read do make a difference, and they definitely influence how we see the world around us, and the way we treat the people we share it with. I don’t think anyone can look at the things that were said to me in that post and deny that. [emphasis mine]
Even if those offensive comments, jokes, etc. are passed off as ‘just a joke’ or ‘for laughs,’ which has to be the most overused excuse (hear that, man at the farmers’ market last weekend?):
“I personally have a hard time taking enjoyment from something that I know offends or demeans a specific group of people. I don’t think the status of something as entertainment gives it a pass on offensiveness.
The majority of our entertainment is geared toward the white, heterosexual male gaze. It’s so pervasive, and has been like this for so long, that most of us don’t even realize it. I didn’t realize it for years, and I can completely understand why someone wouldn’t notice the bias–it’s what we’re taught to like and identify with from the time we’re young children. I don’t blame someone for not realizing it, if it’s never been pointed out to them.
But once someone points it out, well, that’s your cue to pick up the ball and run with it. Take an honest look, ask yourself some hard questions, consider what it might feel like to be on the other side. [emphasis mine]
When you’re called out as racist, sexist, homophobic, and otherwise offensive:
I’ve been in that position, too, and still find myself there. Just because I’m a woman doesn’t mean I’m exempt from perpetuating sexism, and I can be just as thick-headed about spotting racism and homophobia as the next straight, white person. So don’t think I don’t know how it feels to have to accept an ugly truth about something you enjoy–I have to deal with it, too. It’s hard, and it sucks, and it means you have to face unpleasant things about yourself and about the things you like, and I absolutely respect anyone who has done it, because I know how difficult it is.
I don’t always agree with accusations of sexism or racism or any other ism, but I always do consider them, and if I disagree, I take an extra second to think about why I’m reacting the way I am, and ask myself some questions.
1) Am I just being cranky because someone criticized something I like?
2) Do I feel like I’m being called a sexist/racist/homophobe because I like something that has sexist/racist/homophobic overtones?
If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then I know I’ve got my head up my ass and I need to remove it.
And sometimes… well, sometimes I know the complaints are valid, and I have to suck it up and deal with the reality of that.
Here’s what I know: liking things that other people find offensive doesn’t automatically make you a bad person. Threatening to rape or kill someone just because they don’t like those same things? Makes you a very bad person. [emphasis mine]
Well said, DD.
16 Days: Radio Silence
[up for revision]
What’s that old phrase? I remember using it as a closing tag for emphasizing dropped arguments back in my debating days. Oh, that’s right: Silence is acquiescence. Now, for the purposes of policy debate, the phrase is more of a rhetorical tag than anything else. When it comes to refusing to condemn the punishment of a gang rape victim, however, it’s true.
According to an article on CNN.com today [1], Bush claims that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia “knows our position loud and clear” on the sentence of 200 lashes and six months of jail time for a gang rape victim and the suspension of her lawyer’s license. I’ll grant you that the Bush administration’s position is clear, but the loud, not so much. After all, while silence is perfectly clear, it’s not very loud. Bush says, “I talked to King Abdullah about the Middle Eastern peace. I don’t remember if that subject came up. … He knows our position loud and clear.” Translation: “I didn’t condemn the sentence and I probably didn’t mention it.” (On a side note, what’s with the memory lapses in this administration? Gonzales, Scooter Libby, Tenet, and Bush–is there something in the water?) I suppose I should cut him some slack, since he claims, “And our opinions were expressed by [White House press secretary] Dana Perino from the podium.” If anyone finds Perino’s statement, please send me the link. Additionally, [a] state department spokesman on Tuesday [11/20] called the verdict “astonishing”, but said it was not its place to call for the ruling to be changed [2]. According to State Department spokesman Sean McCormack [3], “These kinds of decisions are going to have to be decisions that the people of that country — in this case, Saudi Arabia — are going to have to take for themselves.”
Calling the sentence “astonishing.” Saying that someone else said something about it. Saying that the Saudis have to make up their own minds and it’s not the U.S. role to advocate for human rights (just like the U.S. let Chile make up its own mind [4] about its elected government or let Iraq settle its own affairs, for that matter). Saying that your position is “loud and clear” but that you didn’t actually mention it while you were chatting with the king, come to think of it. That’s not taking a stand. That’s not condemning the sentence as a violation of human rights, as a punishment against a woman for speaking out against injustice and violent misogyny. Here are some examples of how to make your position “loud and clear”:
“In 1995, I went to Beijing and said, ‘It is time for us to say here in Beijing, and for the world to hear, that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women’s rights as separate from human rights.’ We have made some progress since then. But we have not made enough. The latest example is the punishment of 200 lashes that a Saudi Arabian court has given to a victim — the victim — of a gang rape. This is an outrage. The Bush administration has refused to condemn the sentence and said it will not protest an internal Saudi decision. I urge President Bush to call on King Abdullah to cancel the ruling and drop all charges against this woman.” – Hillary Clinton [5]
Today’s news that a Saudi Arabian court has chosen to punish the victim of a gang rape is an appalling breach of the most fundamental human rights. I am outraged that President Bush has refused to condemn the sentence. John Edwards [6]
In a letter to Rice, Barack Obama wrote, “That the victim was sentenced at all is unjust, but that the court doubled the sentence because of efforts to call attention to the ruling is beyond unjust … I strongly urge the Department of State to condemn this ruling.” [3] Joe Biden, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, said, “I’m outraged by the decision of a Saudi Arabian court to punish the victim of a brutal gang-rape … I call on King Abdullah to exercise his powers and overturn this sentence if the Saudi courts do not reverse their decision immediately. … I also would urge him to undertake reforms to prevent similar miscarriages of justice in the future.” [3]
16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence
16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence is an international campaign, begun in 1991 by the first Women’s Global Leadership Institute, which was sponsored by the Center for Women’s Global Leadership. 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence 2007 runs from November 25, International Day Against Violence Against Women, to December 10, International Human Rights Day. The 2007 theme is Demanding Implentation, Challenging Obstacles: End Violence Against Women.
I’d like to write something thoughtful and inspiring, but I don’t have much to say. Violence against women, against transgendered people, against non-gender-conforming people, against anyone who dares to be a woman in a misogynist world or dares to break the bounds of gender roles, is overwhelmingly widespread and brutal. Only the most recent things that I’ve run across:
From the Economist, “A Humanitarian Disaster Unfolds,” November 15, 2007[1]:
The conflict [in Congo] has taken on another dimension of brutality too. Women have been raped on an unprecedented scale, in the thousands. According to experts, rape is being used as a weapon of war. Such are the scale and violence of the attacks in eastern Congo, claims Yakin Erturk, the UN’s special rapporteur on violence against women, that they constitute a war crime. Rape is being carried out by all sides and, worryingly, by civilians too.
Nice listening material for an evening run, eh? Then there’s the Saudi rape case[2]
The 19-year-old [woman], who has not been named, was travelling in a car with a male friend last year, when the car was attacked by a gang of seven men who raped both of them.
…
Four of the men were convicted of kidnapping – but the court also sentenced the woman and her friend to receive 90 lashes each for the crime of “illegal mingling”.
Last week the court increased the woman’s sentence to 200 lashes and six months in prison.
It also banned her lawyer from the courtroom and took away his licence.
According to a BBC article from yesterday[3], the Saudi justice ministry has released a statement that “The charged girl is a married woman who confessed to having an affair with the man she was caught with,” contradicting not only the woman’s testimony
The justice ministry statement is at odds with previous published testimony of the woman, who is a Shia Muslim from the Qatif area.
She has reportedly said she met the car-owner in order to retrieve a photo of them together, having herself recently got married.
but also its own original statement:
The woman was initially to be punished for violating strict gender segregation laws in Saudi Arabia, for riding in the car of a man who was not related to her when they were both attacked.
The intent behind the justice ministry’s more recent statement is clearly to portray the woman as deserving of the punishment. By alleging that the woman was having an affair, they’re trying to divert attention from her protest of their twisted sentencing to her sexual past, implying that her past is relevant to the fact that she was raped and that she deserves the 200 lashes and jail time for <em>something</em>, anything other than the real reason: she fought her sentence in court and called media attention to the injustice of her situation. They’re fabricating smears about her character to damage her credibility and the perceived legitimacy of her actions. Focusing purely on the justice ministry’s actions, it’s clear that the situation is beyond fucked up. Punishing the woman with 90 lashes for being in the presence of a man she’s not related to was shocking; the increase to 200 lashes and six months of jail time is clearly meant to punish her for speaking out against this injustice, particularly given that her lawyer was banned from the courtroom and had his license taken away, effectively preventing the woman from further legal action [2]. As the second article points out, “Her sentence was increased on appeal after judges wanted to punish her for attempting to use the media to influence the case.” The increased punishment is for bringing media attention to a sexist, misogynist ruling and pointing out to the international community that the ruling and the court are indeed sexist and misogynist.
In the meantime, the Bush administration’s response? Tacit condoning:
“The Bush administration has refused to condemn the sentence and said it will not protest against an internal Saudi decision,” [Hillary Clinton] said.
…
A state department spokesman on Tuesday called the verdict “astonishing”, but said it was not its place to call for the ruling to be changed. [2]
The message on all sides is the familiar one: if you’re a woman and you’re raped, it’s your fault. And no one’s going to listen to you if you speak up or demand justice, so you should just shut up now. In fact, if you try to speak up, people will make up slurs against you and say that you’re a slut or a whore, as if that were relevant to the fact that you were raped. So, shut up please. It’s not nice to rail against sexual violence. It’s a common theme in the response to sexual violence against women: it came up in the treatment of Native American victims of sexual violence. For me, 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence is about rejecting that message, about not being blase and accepting each new atrocity as the way things are, about not burying those facts under a soothing babble of House eps, NYT op-eds, cookbooks, and anything else that will mask reality. For me, 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence is about speaking up, about facing the ugly reality of gender violence and refusing to ignore it, refusing to accept that things will always be this way, that in the U.S., one in every six women is a victim of sexual assault and one in every four women experiences domestic violence. Gender-based violence is overwhelming and horrifying and it seems like it’s too much to deal with, but we can face it and fight it. The Center for Women’s Global Leadership has a list of suggactions: 16 suggested actions for 16 days. No. 1 is Educate Yourself; No. 2 is Spread the Word. Let’s start from there and move on, shall we?
Via Cara at Feministe and Justice is a Woman With a Sword
—-
[1] The Economist, “A Humanitarian Disaster Unfolds,” November 15, 2007
[2] BBC, “Saudis back rape victim sentence,” November 22, 2007
[3] BBC, “Saudi rape victim ‘having affair,’” November 26, 2007
