Skip to content
On our opening night this man showed up and was found to be hitting on a group of sixteen year old women. When a few of our women comrades observed this they rounded as many of us together as could be found and made a quick decision that I would quietly ask him to leave and let him know it was a collective decision. I did at which point he just turned away and ignored me.
He also stated that I had caused it and started it because I had become physicaly violent. I asked him how he could have gathered that and he said, "becasue he told me so". I was enraged and asked him why he would beleiev this person whom he'd known only a short while over the rest of us and me. He just repeated what he had previously said (at which point I threatned to kick his ass if he didn't stop lying)
How as anarchist would you deal with it or have dealt with it?
Post_industrial wrote:If it was up to me, I would use violence to deal with the situation. Possibly deadly violence if I felt strongly enough about it.
I have no sympathy for rapists.
Kevin, in pretty much the exact same context wrote:This is such a common attitude amongst men, and honestly I think it stems from their own personal insecurity. "If someone raped (-my female-) X I would kill them."
The first thing I always wonder, "why doesn't she kill him, if that is what she wants done?" Which of course leads to the second question, "does she think it is necessary or worthwhile to kill her attacker?"
I know a number of women who have been raped. So do most guys, though I suspect they are mostly unaware of it themselves. Instead of viewing this as an attack on another individual, a horrible one, the patriarchy around us has made it the "ultimate property violation". And because women are seen as implicitly powerless, it is a violation requiring the "ultimate solution" -carried out by men, of course.
Women are not the property of men, this means that they do not need to be saved by the men around them. What they need is to be viewed as the equals they are, respected as sovereign individuals, so that men stop trying to dominate them and subject them to some school boy fantasy world with masculine heros and violent retribution poised behind every percieved slight.
But, as usual, 90% of the men who read this will not absorb it at all. They will either reject it outright or think something along the lines of "well of course, that is what I meant," while still carrying around this implicit mindset that is in fact a primary source of the problem. And that is the thing they will all agree on immediately, "my way of thinking is not the source of this problem." Times like that make me think that the radical feminists might actually be right, the best thing for a woman wanting to be free is to remove herself from men completely until (if ever) they finally figure out what they are doing to perpetuate the problem.
And I'm not sure given the ambiguity of the statement, but just in case there is any doubt: Yes men are raped by other men, they can also be raped by women, and in both cases the assault upon their bodies is magnified in their mind because of the self-image forced upon them by the society that keeps both genders locked in chains. That few people ever here of this, or worse that most people don't even recognise it when confronted with it, just speaks to the scale of the problem.
Why did you all decided to talk with the man and not the group of sixteen years old?
How was your threat to kick his ass not demonstrative of your becoming physically violent?
Talk to the women?
If it was up to me, I would use violence to deal with the situation. Possibly deadly violence if I felt strongly enough about it. -Post-industrial
I have no sympathy for rapists. -Post-industrial
Anonymous wrote:Because the women of our community wanted him to leave and that is what was asked of us. Him being physicaly violent (bit a young man of 17 ear off a few months earlier for "moving in on his territory" and ripped some other kids dreads out for the same offense. They asked if any of us whom were stronger would be willing to do it because of his violence in past and I'm not afraid of much so I said I would be willing.
What your confusing is the statement about how the accused rapist later told people (my freind included) I HAD physicaly attacked him when I confronted him and asked him to leave. Which was so far removed from the truth it's unbelievable; almost everybody whom formed the core of our collective was watching at a close distance and I doubt none of the people around him knew I was even talking to him it so subtle...untill he started screaming and yelling that is.
I find this a very simplistic answer to a very complex situation and not reflective thereof. Which women are you refering to, would you mind qualifying this statement?
Me either. But this person was only an accused rapist...no definitive proof other that "she said-he said".
Post_industrial wrote:I have no sympathy for rapists.
Din wrote:Post_industrial wrote:I have no sympathy for rapists.
Many perpetrators of sexual abuse have experience in being sexual abused themselves, although obviously not all victims of sexual abuse would end up being an abuser.
Monsters are victims too.
I dont believe in non-violence at all. I like the idea of letting the victims decide what will happen to them rather then adopting a dogmatic code of non-violence even against violent attackers.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests