dangerous grace

AAARRGHHHH!!!

This is totally unfeminist related but needed to vent because I am quietly seething and need to go to bed but need to get it out to avoid even weirder dreams than inevitable.

Almost a year ago I was in a road traffic accident and my first car, my little green Ka, Beryl, was written off.  I was so sad because we’d been through a lot Beryl and me - 2 broken speedo cables, brakes wearing out, exhausts dropping off, calipers seazing, heating breaking twice, windscreen broken by the Ford people - so when I am accused of trying to over take someone while they are turning right - ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE of them, I get very sad because I did not WANT Beryl to be written off.  I did not WANT to get to my training day any quicker than the natural flow of traffic would carry me.  I did not WANT to stand shaking talking to the AA people in front of a block of flats.  I did not WANT to have two kind maintenance men point out to me that a piece of metal was very close to piercing my tyre (which they kindly sorted out for me with a metal bar).

I

AM NOT

A RECKLESS *OR* SUICIDAL CHAV RACER

Even that kind of person would not over take someone on the right hand side while they were turned right, because there would be a convenient gap TO THE LEFT OF THEM!!

What I AM is a driver who saw someone reverse from parked position and slowed down.  Then as this someone didn’t move or indicate, I carried on. I did not flash.  IF she was trying to turn to the right, then she was parked on double yellow lines, those that run opposite the junction, and IF she had an ounce of sense she would just admit that she didn’t see me.

Instead I get my insurance company telling my mum that if it went to court I COULD GET INTO SERIOUS TROUBLE which to me means that she will try and do me for dangerous driving, so they are going to try and settle out of court.  I don’t want to go to court, I just want someone official to say that they believe me.

We both remained neutral at the scene - would you really do that if you thought someone had done something that stupid?

I can’t think of anyone I have ever met or seen pass by me through the criminal justice system who would think that it is a good idea to over take someone on the right when they are turning right

Well.  That didn’t make me feel better.

can you be an online activist?

Seriously, I would like an answer to this question.

the little poetry writer

Ani Difranco, the “little folksinger” as she is dubbed by her website, reads ‘Reprieve’ and talks briefly about feminism:

Yes I love her and I’m not ashamed to say it!  There are also tons of other good Ani videos on YouTube, including one where she recites ‘Coming Up’ on Def Poetry (and Mos Def is also good for the most part, apart from questionable collaborations with bitch-n-ho rappers).

Matthews says ‘tolerance zones don’t work’ and more

I wasn’t sure whether to bother posting about this, because I know that prostitution is a contentious topic even within feminism but in the end I decided to because this guy, Roger Matthews, seems to know what he’s talking about, and if Julie Bindel sees fit to interview him then I see fit to blog about him.  Especially as his view is that prostitutes should be decriminalised, that punters should be treated more harshly, and that really only a small percentage of women in the sex trade are really there out of their own choice*, which is pretty much in line with my own views.  Also, he said this which had to be posted:

What of the arguments that often crop up, that prostitution is a necessary trade, that individual men need an outlet for their sex drive? “We know relatively little about men who pay for sex,” says Matthews, “but the available research suggests that most of them are married or have steady partners, and that they are not driven by an irrepressible biological need. In fact, the available research indicates that the motivation of many men is relatively low, and that in the vast majority of cases it would not take much to deter them from paying for sex.”

[emphasis added]

*by ‘own choice’ I don’t mean a ‘choice’ that has been informed by the P media and society, I mean a choice that has been informed by a real knowledge of the risks, that was made without external or internal pressures to conform or meet needs (not counting sexual drive as a need, because surely it’s more of a want).

Promise I’ll go back to having blogger’s block soon.  I know that I am not the most well read on this subject so if you feel the need to rebut please don’t tear me to shreds (not that I actually said anything, just posted what someone else said!).

I will not post any ‘it’s the oldest trade, it will never go away so stop wasting your breath’, or ‘if there weren’t prostitutes more women would get raped’ comments, because prostitutes are women and they also get raped, read the article.

I can see this backfiring (no pun intended)

Found this on Evil Genius Chronicles via Dee:

In America now (soon to be in the UK?  Hopefully weaponry laws will prevent it) women are holding ‘Taser parties’.  More than a replacement for the defunct Tupperware event, these parties gather groups of women together so that they can purchase tasers in order to protect themselves from rape.  The writer of the article critiques this idea in a number of ways:

1) the vast majority of rapes and sexual assaults (same thing?) occur in or near the victim’s home, and are perpetrated by someone they know (the stats of this are different, either mine are wrong or the stats are more skewed towards stranger-rape in the US)

2) tasers are just weapons that can be turned on the victim just like any other weapon

3) they really aren’t a practical way to attempt to stop a physical attack due to the time needed to operate one

4) it is highly likely that give point 1) you won’t have your taser to hand unless you decided to constantly live in fear and have it permanently strapped to your person

I would like to add another point here:  What do you suppose the chances are that having successful zapped an attacker the victim will then be changed for assault with a weapon?  Or worse, what if the rapist has a heart condition and dies?  Manslaughter, accidental death with intent to cause serious physical harm.

If a woman is walking home holding the pretty, pink (pink! ffs!) dooicky in her hand, because as Griffith points out, it’s hardly practical to try and fumble for it in your hand bag while adrenaline and fear are quickly taking over your faculties, she is practically looking for an attacker to zap isn’t she?  That’s how it will look anyway.  I am beyond being surprised that victims are being convicted as a result of reporting their ordeal to the authorities.

Griffith points out the usefulness of self-defense, and importantly of trusting your instincts.  Why are we women in need of weapons to defend ourselves when we have our mental agility and the use of knees, elbows, feet, fists, to fight for ourselves?  In my view this is just another way of preventing women from becoming aware of their own personal strength and of forcing them to rely on gimicky products in order to prevent rape.  Only potential rapists can prevent rape.

This product is about as useful as the anti-rape condom for preventing rape (another product you must always keep on you just in case).

BNP - 0 Feminazis - 1

BNP second favourite Nick Erikson has been fired after what I can only describe as a misogynist diatribe beyond any that I have previously had the misfortune to read, was publicised.

TRIGGER WARNING - Nick Erikson not only advocates domestic abuse, but trivialises rape beyond belief.  If you do not wish to read the bullshit surrounding the complete lie that rape is less of an inconvenience than having your purse snatched, please do not read on.

“a shocking twist”

[Thanks to Stormy for informing us non-Londoners about this]

In the Wimbledon Local Guardian this story was presented.

A 24 year old woman was gang raped by two 16 year old boys and one 14 year old boy after being drugged.  She didn’t report it out of fear because they threatened her.

The video appeared on YouTube a few months later -a friend found it and told her - 600 people watched it before it was taken down. The woman’s partner encouraged her to report it so she did.  The video showed the three males having sex with her apparently unconscious body and laughing into the camera.

The boys were questioned.  Now she is in danger of being convicted for perverting the course of justice and having sex with a minor - the 14 year old.

So, there was video evidence, seen by 600 people.  It was obvious that she was unconscious at the time, and there is nothing about any evidence to suggest that she was in any way culpable (i.e. willingly involved in, what? Creating YouTube rape porn while her young children cried in the background? Yes, likely…like how it is likely that the sky will turn green in the next ten minutes).

Her children are now on the child protection register.

What is right about this?  How is this being allowed?

Well, she’s a woman.  That means nothing she says can be trusted even when there is video evidence.

call it hate crime, that is what it is

As regular readers will know, I read a lot about crime for my job, so I like to think that this post will actually hold some credence as I know a little about the subject.

A long time ago I saw something that I considered to be a gender related hate crime, it possibly wasn’t but that it is not the point.  The point is that when I went to report it online (for fear that actually calling the police would lend me to a tirade of abuse - ‘you’re wasting our time’ etc.), there was no such thing as a gender related hate crime.  What I actually saw was sexual harassment/assault, but why couldn’t that be committed out of hatred?

A hate crime is an offence committed out of prejudice, typically using violence, but gender is never given as an example.  I would never wish to dilute the importance of tackling racial, homophobic and ablist hatred, and the horrid victimisation that is experienced, but why is gender ignored in this?  We are all supposedly men haters aren’t we?  Surely if an angry, bitter, feminist hurt a man someone would pipe up and call it a hate crime, but all the violence that is perpetrated against women, for being women, out of the prejudiced views of the male perpetrators about women and their place in society, and we can’t experience it as hate?

A crime is supposed to be treated as a hate crime, or to be aggravated by prejudice if the victim perceives it to be that way.  But a woman can not even go online to the police or crimestoppers website to say “I was the victim of a gender related hate crime”, because their is a drop down list, and gender isn’t there.

Anthony Rice murdered Naomi Bryant - and is known to have “developed a contempt for women, and a desire to hurt and control them” (from the independent Home Office/HMiP review).  Sounds like hate to me.  He barely knew his victiim and she had done nothing to make him specifically despise her, let alone feel moved to brutally kill her.  He did it because she was a woman and represented a loathing that could only be quelled by satisfying his desire to kill.

Now I know that Rice isn’t your every day man, it is clear that he is among the seriously disturbed members of this world’s population, but it doesn’t take mental disturbance to hate, to commit a hate crime, to hate women, or to hurt women.  All it takes is prejudice, dogmatic views and power.

“no contact” is the first rule you learn to break

Via F-Word:  ‘I was seen as an object, not a person’

Again, in the ‘women’ section of the Guardian website - because this is only a women’s issue.

This article presents the experiences of a woman who becamse a lap-dancer in order to pay her rent.  Here are some quotes that I think are worth pointing out - to everyone you know:

It wasn’t only the earning potential that led Elena to try lap-dancing - she now believes that she, and women in general, are socialised to see it as an inviting occupation. “I thought, well, I’m a sex object anyway, I might as well have it out on the table. It was as though I felt I couldn’t do anything else. Everywhere I look I’m being told that my main source of power is my sexual power, my body is the best thing I have to offer and so to use those things in your job is empowering. But sexual power isn’t power. It’s meaningless in the real world.“

(my emphasis added)

Lap-dancing is about creating a situation whereby the men feel they are doing you a favour - that’s the way the game is set up, so all the power is with the customer.

Rather than being a lucrative job, in her experience, as soon as a woman starts working at one of the clubs, it costs her money. “You pay ‘rent’ to the club just to be there and if you can persuade someone to buy a dance, you get £20 - about 20% of which the club takes. Then there are the fines - £10 if you miss your turn to pole dance, if you’re late, you’re wearing the wrong shoes or you break the rules

Yet academic research has linked lap-dancing to trafficking, prostitution and an increase in male sexual violence against both the women who work in the clubs and those who live and work in their vicinity

I live in a country with unbelievable levels of rape, where two women die every week because they are murdered by their partners.

Yeah, that’s this one.

Elena doesn’t believe that lap-dancing is about sex, instead, she says,”It fosters sexual violence. It is damaging even if people are doing it voluntarily. I chose it and that’s part of the problem. Even if lap-dancers did make loads of money, it would be irrelevant - paying a lot for something doesn’t make it all right. The point about lap-dancing clubs is to ask what they represent culturally and what they do to all of us, not just women working in them”.

See?  Lap-dancing is not glamourous, and lots of women do not make loads of money out of it, and regulation is a myth!

A neccessary angle

I found this site, it was the last thing linked to on Zee’s blog before her hiatus.

I read these things:

 Us and Them

 I am a woman

The second one made me cry.

These men get it.  Tell more men about this site, then maybe they will get it too.

I can’t believe I’ve actually found a site for men that isn’t all about how to patronise and fuck over women because you’re a bitter abuser who can’t understand why his ex won’t let him see the kids.

Maybe I’m just being overly optimistic about this site and in actual fact there is a cynister underbelly to it all.  But I’m hoping that that doubt is simply illness induced paranoia on my part.