Pigtails and Pedophiles December 6, 2013 Jill Yes, that’s the actual name of a party hosted at Drake University by a fraternity there. Because child rape is hilarious, right? Thanks to Feministe reader, Drake student and writer Madeline Cramer for sounding the alarm.
Yeah, this is why I can get on board with getting rid of the whole Greek system in Universities/Colleges. There is a pernicious perception of entitlement within that system of offensive, discriminatory and abusive group think that will only go away by getting rid of it entirely.
Offensiveness aside, this theme is in very poor taste. I guess I fail to see the humor, but then again, I tended to avoid frat boys like the plague when I was in school. It’s the culture that bothers me more than this stupidity. When a teaching aide in a high school, a teacher wanted to throw a party based on a theme that was racially insensitive. Some of the students wanted to throw a “Ghetto Party” and wear gang colors, while consuming chicken and waffles. Fortunately, the principal overruled the teacher’s decision, but it was made with no discretion whatsoever and no understanding of the potential repercussions.
Kevin, that’s not “racially insensitive,” it’s racist. To not call it racist is to cooperate in a mainstream narrative that makes the accusation of racism unthinkable, and makes it impossible to call out racism. If I call it racist, and you call it racist, we make space for the next teacher’s aide to say, “that’s racist, and we shouldn’t do it, and if you do, I won’t have anything to do with it.”
Let’s exploit the narratives of sexual abuse victims in order to get a good hearty laugh because those jokes are so shocking and horrible that they’re hilarious.
“Frats” can refer to the members of fraternities, or to the houses they live in. Which meaning are you using here? — surely there’s no reason to torch perfectly good housing when there are so many homeless people we could move into it.
People are inherently good. We all deserve a second chance. We deserve an opportunity to learn from our mistakes. We must practice forgiveness. We must teach. I disagree with these statements completely. It doesn’t make any sense to say that people are inherently good or evil – only character and actions can be criteria for determining whether someone is good or evil. If one assumes that people are inherently good, then one is forced to assume that all people who are perpetuating rape culture in any way are just poor, misguided people making “honest mistakes,” which is nonsense. By contrast, if one assumes that people are inherently evil, then then one is forced to assume that opposing rape culture is a fruitless endeavor and that rape culture is a permanent aspect of society. Either way, that assumption only makes it more difficult to oppose rape culture. And no, we don’t have to practice forgiveness – it’s a nice thing for sure, but the acceptance of that proposition implies that rape victims are actually obligated forgive their rapists. Imposing forgiveness as a moral obligation (as opposed to just considering it virtuous) is a way to oppress victims.
I think my favouritest thing about “practicing forgiveness” is how any pain, bitterness, sorrow or, heaven forbid, anger immediately become a Failure to Practice Forgiveness rather than the natural consequence of, you know, being trampled on and treated like shit. We’re just not practicing hard enough! Practice harder! Forgive more! (And, of course, how this structure supports the creation of ever more things to forgive.) No thanks. I didn’t stop starving my body to fit societal notions of physical health just to start starving my heart to fit societal notions of emotional health.
I didn’t stop starving my body to fit societal notions of physical health just to start starving my heart to fit societal notions of emotional health. Beautifully said, mac, and applicable to so many things.
I think my favouritest thing about “practicing forgiveness” is how any pain, bitterness, sorrow or, heaven forbid, anger immediately become a Failure to Practice Forgiveness rather than the natural consequence of, you know, being trampled on and treated like shit. We’re just not practicing hard enough! Practice harder! Forgive more! A++ Telling people they need to forgive and forget, and/or lecture someone on how they should feel about a person or situation makes me see red. How dare you tell someone what they’re “supposed” to feel?
Yes. People imploring me to “practice forgiveness” are, to my way of thinking, asking me to convert to their spiritual belief system. Those are not my beliefs, end of discussion.
We’ve had this discussion here before, and I — as well as others — have pointed out how fundamentally Christian-centric it is to assume that the concepts of mandatory forgiveness; forgiveness is good for the soul; anger and hatred are bad for the soul; etc. are universally applicable.
This especially irks me when, as so often happens, these concepts come up in the context of “why haven’t you people gotten over the Holocaust yet — it was 70 years ago!” (often with an undercurrent of, it’s a “Holocaust industry” and we’re in it for the money. Of course!) Especially when such sentiments are voiced by people belonging to a religion many of whose adherents still hold us responsible for something our ancestors didn’t even do — to one person — 2000 years ago.
I’ll say anger is bad for me physically, but that’s mostly because I don’t usually have acceptable ways to drive it back in the faces of those who cause it. I instead fantasize about coming down on them, their kith and kine with fire and sword. The Christian virtues argument for one-sided forgiveness is bankrupt.
We’ve had this discussion here before, and I — as well as others — have pointed out how fundamentally Christian-centric it is to assume that the concepts of mandatory forgiveness; forgiveness is good for the soul; anger and hatred are bad for the soul; etc. are universally applicable. I have never been a Christian and I don’t believe in God or a soul, but I’ve never got anything positive out of anger or hatred. I’ve never seen anyone who has.
…I’ve never got anything positive out of anger or hatred. I’ve never seen anyone who has. I couldn’t disagree with you more strongly. My history of violence and trauma makes it difficult for me to experience anger, which I consider a perfectly healthy emotion. Angry can be used to effect positive change. For example, Martin Luther King and the concept of righteous indignation: “A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. … A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, “This is not just.” It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of South America and say, “This is not just.” The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.” ― Martin Luther King Jr.
Steve, in case there’s any doubt (which there shouldn’t be), I very agree with EG and Trees. Wholly apart from the subject I mentioned above, I have always had an extraordinarily difficult time in my own life experiencing or directing anger outwards, rather than inwards at myself. When I’m able to do that, it’s actually very beneficial to me.
Sometimes, anger and hatred take a toll on my mental well-being because, as someone who grew up watching her mother being abused, I often find conflict to be frightening. I also feel awful about having the ability to yell as loudly as my father because of hearing him yell at me and others so often throughout my childhood. But anger and hatred can still be helpful to me. Anger can be a powerful motivator for positive change – either internally or externally. My hatred for the men who have abused my mother (note that my father isn’t the only one who hurt her) has strengthened my bond with her. I have been even closer to her ever since the two of us sat down and talked about how much we hate the abusive people in our lives. Anger has also helped me cope with the abuse I still get from my father – it helps get rid of the self-doubt that makes me apologetic about what he does to me. And I feel validated when others share the anger I have towards people who have hurt me.
Ok, I assumed the reason such a term as ‘righteous indignation’ exists is to differentiate it from anger or hatred. I don’t define those two items as the same. I would probably define anger or hatred as un-righteous indignation. So we are not on the same page and it’s a bit silly to have a No True Scotsman argument. I notice that no one here is saying they have felt value from being the victim of someone else’s anger or hatred…maybe my definition of hatred and anger is based on the perspective of the target of that anger or hatred. Having said that. I think this fundamental disagreement in terms will prevent us from having a meaningful discussion on this topic- so probably best to move on, rather than cause a derail.
I couldn’t disagree with you more strongly. My history of violence and trauma makes it difficult for me to experience anger, which I consider a perfectly healthy emotion. Angry can be used to effect positive change. For example, Martin Luther King and the concept of righteous indignation: “A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. … A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, “This is not just.” It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of South America and say, “This is not just.” The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.” ― Martin Luther King Jr. And I would disagree with you just as strongly that Dr. King’s life was improved by hatred.
have always had an extraordinarily difficult time in my own life experiencing or directing anger outwards, rather than inwards at myself. When I’m able to do that, it’s actually very beneficial to me. So people like me, who just let things go, choosing to neither be angry at myself or others, we’re just wrong? We don’t exist? I don’t get this either or.
Why put anger and hatred together, Steve? They’re not the same thing at all. One can feel anger without hatred, though I imagine one can’t feel hatred without anger. Don’t gross injustices or cruelty make you angry? That’s the sort of anger that can be very positive, if it prompts someone to work for justice – in other words, the righteous indignation Dr King described. I’m a little wary of anyone who doesn’t, or won’t, get angry about such things as child rape. It reminds me of the “compassion for all” line I was fed in a Buddhist meditation class once. Maybe they’d stuffed it up or oversimplified it, but it came across just like this “forgive everyone” stuff: ignoring the victims in favour of getting gooey over the criminals.
So people like me, who just let things go, choosing to neither be angry at myself or others, we’re just wrong? We don’t exist? I don’t get this either or. No, Steve, it’s not erasing you: it’s your original statement that’s problematical: I’ve never got anything positive out of anger or hatred. I’ve never seen anyone who has. If by “seen” you mean people you know, that’s one thing, but it’s easy to infer that you’re speaking more broadly and that, and making a blanket “anger and hatred are never positive for anyone” statement. Which, as several people have shown, isn’t true.
If by “seen” you mean people you know, that’s one thing, I would only presume to speak about people I had direct knowledge of.
I’m a little wary of anyone who doesn’t, or won’t, get angry about such things as child rape. It reminds me of the “compassion for all” line I was fed in a Buddhist meditation class once. Maybe they’d stuffed it up or oversimplified it, but it came across just like this “forgive everyone” stuff: ignoring the victims in favour of getting gooey over the criminals. Surely getting angry is ignoring the victims too. I assume you’re not getting angry at the victims.
I don’t calibrate my emotions based on their usefulness to other people. If the targets of my anger or hatred don’t get anything positive out of it…that’s their problem.
Surely getting angry is ignoring the victims too. I assume you’re not getting angry at the victims. Don’t be bloody silly, Steve. Are you really just out to irritate everyone at the moment?
Don’t be bloody silly, Steve. Are you really just out to irritate everyone at the moment? No, but considering the times I’ve been beaten up and/or abused by someone acting out of anger and the fact that my mother’s family was practically wiped out due to hatred, I don’t really care if I irritate people who want to defend hatred and anger as positive forces.
Frankly, Steve, I think that equating my hatred for the bully of my high school who tried to run me over with his car with the hatred motivating the Nazis is arguing in supreme bad faith, and is an indefensible position. And that is exactly why I find blanket statements about the worth of anger or the desirability of love to be pointless. It depends on who is feeling it, why, and what they do with it. Plenty of people with narcissistic or borderline personality disorders, for instance, can and do abuse out of feelings of love. Caesar was magnanimous in victory, and look what happened to him.
And actually, given the context of this thread, Steve, equating the hatred survivors of child sexual abuse feel for their abusers and people like their abusers, with Nazi anti-semitism is pretty horrible. Why the fuck would you do something like that?
Frankly, Steve, I think that equating my hatred for the bully of my high school who tried to run me over with his car with the hatred motivating the Nazis is arguing in supreme bad faith, and is an indefensible position. I’m not equating the things, merely telling you why your terminology upsets me. What is so wrong with disliking a term based on past association?
And actually, given the context of this thread, Steve, equating the hatred survivors of child sexual abuse feel for their abusers and people like their abusers, with Nazi anti-semitism is pretty horrible. NO I DO NOT EQUATE THEM! That is why I object to them being referred to by the same term. Maybe I’m being stupid, but that’s my rationale.
So people like me, who just let things go, choosing to neither be angry at myself or others, we’re just wrong? We don’t exist? I don’t get this either or. No, you’re not “wrong.” If you don’t think anger and hatred are good for you to have, that’s fine. What folks here are objecting to is the fact that you’re being judgmental towards people who do find anger and hatred to be helpful in some ways.
Steve, you know perfectly well I never said you were “wrong” in your own feelings. You can feel however you want. What I was objecting to (along with just about everyone else) was your universalization of your feelings, and your incredibly dismissive comments about the possibility that anger — and hatred — can be positive, useful emotions for others. You have refused to recognize that other people can validly hold different views from yours, and can’t possibly be so naive as not to realize that saying you’ve “never seen” something implies that you don’t believe it exists. the fact that my mother’s family was practically wiped out due to hatred, So was mine; her family was virtually destroyed, with its remnants scattered to the four corners of the earth, and she was robbed of anything truly resembling a childhood. And simply because what happened was motivated in part by hatred — although it’s obvious that not everyone involved was motivated by hatred; many simply viewed Jews and Roma not merely as racial inferiors but as subhuman vermin to be eradicated, and didn’t hate them any more than exterminators necessarily hate the insects they exterminate — why should that preclude me from hating the people responsible? The two should not be tied together (let alone equated) in any way. I cannot go back in history and change what happened. What I can do is always remember it, always continue to learn about it, and always despise the perpetrators. It allows me to deal with it.
Another specific example of anger being useful to me, even though it’s something I strenuously avoid mentioning, for the most part: it took me more than 30 years to stop feeling shame and embarrassment, and stop blaming myself, for being sexually abused by a doctor over a number of years beginning when I was 11. I still sometimes wonder if I’m really entitled to think of it as sexual abuse, since it mostly involved his photographing me naked and asking me to do certain things with my genitals (which, at 11, I didn’t know how to do and couldn’t even do yet), rather than his actually touching me, until later on. And I still sometimes wonder how I could have been so naive as not to realize that he wasn’t entitled to do what he did), and never told my mother. But finally being able to acknowledge what happened and begin to be angry at the man who did it — and even to feel relieved when he died a few years ago, at a monstrously unjust and peaceful old age, praised by everyone for his stellar achievements — has, I think, been very healthy for me. Among other things, it helped me realize why I spent all those decades having something approaching a panic attack every time a doctor asked me to take my clothes off, and stop blaming myself for that too. That doesn’t even happen anymore. Why in the world should I ever forgive him, or stop being angry? I think I kind of owe that anger to the intimidated child who actually went through it without being able to be angry, or really understand what happened.
I’m not equating the things, merely telling you why your terminology upsets me. What is so wrong with disliking a term based on past association? Because you don’t single-handedly get to redefine a common word for everybody else. Nazis don’t get to own hatred. Abusers don’t get to own anger. Just as abusers who hang their abuse on being jealous of their partners don’t get to own “love.” This incredibly narrow definition of “anger” or “hatred” is your idiosyncrasy, and you don’t get to make blanket statements using it without qualifications and caveats, just as I don’t get to randomly narrow “writing” to mean “metered poetry” and then say “No writing can be effective without carefully chosen line-breaks.” NO I DO NOT EQUATE THEM! That is why I object to them being referred to by the same term. Maybe I’m being stupid, but that’s my rationale. Do you also object to using the term “triumph” to refer both to wars and me beating my father in Scrabble? Words have many and varied meanings. Sometimes they even contain opposite meanings. You don’t get redefine them by fiat.
DonnaL said: But finally being able to acknowledge what happened and begin to be angry at the man who did it — and even to feel relieved when he died a few years ago, at a monstrously unjust and peaceful old age, praised by everyone for his stellar achievements — has, I think, been very healthy for me. … Why in the world should I ever forgive him, or stop being angry? I think I kind of owe that anger to the intimidated child who actually went through it without being able to be angry, or really understand what happened. This very much this. This is why it is so very important that people be allowed access (without guilt and shame) to the full range of human emotions during the healing process.
I’ve never got anything positive out of anger or hatred. I’ve never seen anyone who has. And since you’ve met literally every single person on the planet except for the five of us disagreeing here, of course your opinion is the more relevant one. How remiss of me that I didn’t consult Fat Steve’s Universal Experience before making a personal statement! Also, I apologise for feeling any anger or hatred, which apparently literally makes me as bad as the Nazis. BRB invading Poland.
Also, I apologise for feeling any anger or hatred, which apparently literally makes me as bad as the Nazis. BRB invading Poland. mac, could you stop off in Czechoslovakia and pick up some potato dumplings on the way? I’m all out.
Everyone gets angry, Steve. Just like everyone hates at some point in their lives. The key thing is what they do with it. I have always told my daughter that she can’t control what she feels, but she can control how she expresses it. She can slam her door, punch pillows, sulk, but she isn’t allowed to be violent to a person or animal, or resort to slurs. I’ve been FURIOUS with her, I’ve made that abundantly clear, but my rules for her apply to me as well. And I honestly think if I tried to pretend I wasn’t angry with her, it would be detrimental to our relationship, just like I want her to be able to be angry with me. She just can’t be an insulting shit at me to my face about it. And revolutions happen because people are PISSED, and have HAD IT. I would argue that without people being angry about the status quo, the status quo would never, ever change. Malaise, ennui, sadness, they don’t cut it. You need anger, and, depending on how entrenched the injustice is, some flat out rage.
And since you’ve met literally every single person on the planet except for the five of us disagreeing here, of course your opinion is the more relevant one. How remiss of me that I didn’t consult Fat Steve’s Universal Experience before making a personal statement! Where in that quote did I command you to do anything or to universalize my experience. I don’t word things accidentally so when I say “I’ve never got anything positive out of anger or hatred. I’ve never seen anyone who has,” I am merely giving you insight to my personal feelings and why those words bother me. If you don’t care why the words hatred and anger bother me, that’s fine, but stop acting like I’m outrageous and calling everybody Nazis when those are my closets associations with anger and hatred. I’m not saying my upbringing was perfect and maybe there was significant paranoia about hatred of the Jews in the overall community which caused me to associate that word with one type of hate.
Also, I apologise for feeling any anger or hatred, which apparently literally makes me as bad as the Nazis. BRB invading Poland. I’m not sure what makes you think it’s appropriate to make this joke at the expense of someone who knows all too well how ‘bad’ the Nazis were.
If you don’t care why the words hatred and anger bother me, that’s fine, but stop acting like I’m outrageous and calling everybody Nazis when those are my closets associations with anger and hatred. Great, that’s your association. If you can’t get your head out your ass long enough to see that people who’ve been sexually abused might find some constructive (and other destructive – because, le gasp, all emotions are a double-edged sword!) uses for anger and hatred, and you claim it’s because you’ve been hurt by Nazis and that’s your association with it, where the everloving hell do you assume we’re all going? I’m not sure what makes you think it’s appropriate to make this joke Presumably it’s appropriate in the same universe it’s appropriate for you to walk in and tsk at several female survivors of CSA for feeling how they feel, and saying that our emotions remind you of Nazis’ emotions because we, heavens forfuckingbid, dared to not constantly beam sunshine out our asses for having been abused and assaulted. How dare you.
mac, could you stop off in Czechoslovakia and pick up some potato dumplings on the way? I’m all out. Remember our recent conversation about being flippant? I don’t remember you saying it’s acceptable to be flippant about the murder of someone’s family.
I notice you don’t stop being flippant or ‘splainy however often you’re called on it, or it’s not welcome, Steve. Call it a taste of your own medicine. Also, how the hell do you know I don’t have family who suffered in WWII, hmm? You’re the one who brought the mention of Nazis into a thread about child abuse and scumbag frats making a joke of it. That’s after starting off with a very ambiguous and out-of-place comment about pedophilia being a psychiatric disorder, which you then had to backtrack to clarify. (Is it SO hard to make your point clearly in the first place, rather than dropping obscure comments that regularly get people’s backs up?) You’re going on about how bad it is to feel hatred or anger, and directing this at survivors of child abuse. I seriously don’t think you’ve got any claim to high moral ground or the wounded tone or anything else here. You’re derailing it into the All About Steve thread.
Presumably it’s appropriate in the same universe it’s appropriate for you to walk in and tsk at several female survivors of CSA for feeling how they feel, and saying that our emotions remind you of Nazis’ emotions because we, heavens forfuckingbid, dared to not constantly beam sunshine out our asses for having been abused and assaulted. How dare you. That is demonstrably untrue just by scrolling up and seeing my initial response which you hated so much was a response to Thomas’s comments about forgiveness and not a response to female survivors saying how they feel. That said, I wish I had given more time to reading Donna and Ally’s posts rather than justifying myself to the whole ‘what did you mean by x?’ brigade. That was definitely selfish on my part, as Donna and Ally’s posts are the kind of things which could change my opinion on the subject, yet I was hung up on proving that my emotions did not come from a vacuum. So, I apologize to them for that.
That is demonstrably untrue just by scrolling up and seeing my initial response which you hated so much was a response to Thomas’s comments about forgiveness and not a response to female survivors saying how they feel. Christ on a cracker, is it SO HARD for you to extrapolate to “Mac maybe read the whole thread and responded to it generally”? That said, I wish I had given more time to reading Donna and Ally’s posts Yes, well, why would you want to break your long, long record of not really reading what women have to say before bumbling all over a thread like a puppy halfway through potty training?
Christ on a cracker, is it SO HARD for you to extrapolate to “Mac maybe read the whole thread and responded to it generally”? OK, that’s perfectly true. And you don’t have to apologize for making an (admittedly innocuous) Nazi joke after I mentioned my mother’s grandparents are killed by the Nazis, but I don’t think it would make your argument against me any less effective, and I would greatly appreciate it if you did, because you are someone for whom I have a great deal of respect.
That’s fair. I’m sorry I was flip about Nazis; my pissy over being indirectly equated with them didn’t justify making light of a horrible event in your family’s past.
That’s fair. I’m sorry I was flip about Nazis; my pissy over being indirectly equated with them didn’t justify making light of a horrible event in your family’s past. WIth that, it’s time for me to shut the hell up. See y’all on another thread.
“I don’t believe in God or a soul, but I’ve never got anything positive out of anger or hatred. I’ve never seen anyone who has.” I agree 110%!
Oh for pity’s sake, Steve – that makes about as much sense as saying it’s wrong to use the word “red” to refer both to scarlet and crimson. Hatred and anger are emotions, the terms don’t refer to who’s feeling them or who they’re directed at.
Oh for pity’s sake, Steve – that makes about as much sense as saying it’s wrong to use the word “red” to refer both to scarlet and crimson. Hatred and anger are emotions, the terms don’t refer to who’s feeling them or who they’re directed at. I understand what you’re saying and it sounds like you understand what I’m saying. So why can’t we disagree on this wording issue without implying my point of view is somehow more sympathetic to bullies or child molesters?
Who’s implying you sympathise with them, except your opening gambit of “but psychiatric disorder!” But it’s what Donna said: you’re universalising your feelings on the matter and erasing everyone else’s. You’re demanding your definition of anger and hatred be accepted, but not accepting that others don’t give a blanket meaning to them. You’re using the example of what was done to your family as if it’s the one true definition of the words, and they can’t be used in any other way, or ever be positive. You’re talking as if people here, several of whom are victims of crimes against them, and/or from families that suffered as yours did, have less right to define their own feelings and experiences than you do.
So why can’t we disagree on this wording issue without implying my point of view is somehow more sympathetic to bullies or child molesters? The problem lies in the application of your personal definitions to the thinking of others. Ok, I assumed the reason such a term as ‘righteous indignation’ exists is to differentiate it from anger or hatred. I don’t define those two items as the same. I would probably define anger or hatred as un-righteous indignation. So we are not on the same page and it’s a bit silly to have a No True Scotsman argument. Not everyone, including MLK, thinks anger is inherently bad.
That forgiveness schtick in the OP had my skin crawling, too. Forgiveness is not something that can be demanded. It’s also not for anyone but the victim(s) to decide whether it’s appropriate. Plus, if we’re going to go the faux-Christian path, what about repentance? What about actual recognition of the wrong done, and changes of behaviour, in the perpertrators? That goes before forgiveness can even be considered, as far as I’m concerned.
Plus, if we’re going to go the faux-Christian path, what about repentance? What about actual recognition of the wrong done, and changes of behaviour, in the perpertrators? I don’t think you understand how Christianity works.
This reminds me of the colloquial use of “incest” to refer to “sex or relationships among those on the same floor/in the same dormitory.” That was a big buzzword when I was in a dorm and led to some interesting party names. Child sex abuse should not be joked about. Our frats and sororities around here are much better known for their frequently racist parties. I also live across the street from one and file noise complaints literally every time they have parties, because I just cannot BELIEVE how loud they think they can be in a residential area. I never realized so much entitlement and insensitivity and -isms could be so concentrated in one space. The only good thing I see about Greek life is that it helps take the party culture out of the dorms.
Don’t even read the comments on that page. They’re as ugh and [ableist term redacted] as one would expect.
Obviously the party title was in the poorest of taste, but: Is a ‘pedophile’ necessarily the same as a ‘child rapist’? Isn’t a ‘pedophile’ just someone who suffers from a psychiatric disorder?
It’s not much use splitting hairs over whether a pedophile has necessarily commited rape or not. It’s the generally understood term, and do you think the scum who named the party meant “Men with an unfortunate psychiatric disorder and the children they don’t actually harm with their sexual fantasies” or that they just thought the idea of raping little girls is funny?
o you think the scum who named the party meant “Men with an unfortunate psychiatric disorder and the children they don’t actually harm with their sexual fantasies” or that they just thought the idea of raping little girls is funny? No, I definitely don’t. They’re [ableist term redacted].
I am really sick and tired of the fact that the “but pedophilia is a medical condition and we should have compassion” contingent always seems to come out of the woodwork whenever child sex abuse comes up. This is the first time I’ve seen it here, but I see it all over non-feminist sites. Isn’t sadism also a medical condition? Am I supposed to feel sorry that some sadist has resorted to torturing abducted women because he couldn’t get medical help or figure out what BDSM is?
I am really sick and tired of the fact that the “but pedophilia is a medical condition and we should have compassion” contingent always seems to come out of the woodwork whenever child sex abuse comes up. This is the first time I’ve seen it here, but I see it all over non-feminist sites. Nobody (well, nobody here) is arguing we should be sympathetic for people who sexually abuse children. The distinction that’s being made is between pedophiles and child molesters. The former is a blanket term for everyone who is sexually attracted to children; the latter are people who actually act on those attractions. I think it’s appropriate to have sympathy for people who (often due to their own trauma) have terrible impulses and choose not to act on them, whether they be attracted to children or inflicting non-consensual pain or whatever. In fact, this is actually the perspective that puts more blame on child molesters; just like being attracted to men doesn’t mean you are inexorably compelled to sexually assault every man that crosses your path, being sexually attracted to children doesn’t mean you are forced to molest children. It’s a choice to do either. You almost never hear this argument being made, because it’s so easy to twist around into sympathy for child molesters (like you just did, presumably because you don’t know the difference between a pedophile and a child molester- neither do most people). But that’s not the truth of it.
You almost never hear this argument being made, because it’s so easy to twist around into sympathy for child molesters (like you just did, presumably because you don’t know the difference between a pedophile and a child molester- neither do most people). I’m actually aware of the distinction, which is why I said I’m sick and tired of people bring it up at inappropriate times. Look, I’m not going to argue that maybe there is a medical, genetic, or other “outside of my control” reason for why people just can’t help being attracted to children or wanting to hurt women or whatever else you find out there, I just think it’s inappropriate to bring it up in a contexts in which we are obviously not talking about that.
I think it’s appropriate to have sympathy for people who (often due to their own trauma) have terrible impulses and choose not to act on them, whether they be attracted to children or inflicting non-consensual pain or whatever. You do you, I guess. I have more sympathy for cockroaches. I’m a survivor and with all the troubles and suffering on the planet, I have no empathy to give to pedophiles.
What Miranda said. How about getting off your high horse about “presumably you don’t know the difference”? The distinction is irrelevant in this context. It’s about a fucking frat party that was obviously “hur hur child rape is funny”.
You do you, I guess. I have more sympathy for cockroaches. I’m a survivor and with all the troubles and suffering on the planet, I have no empathy to give to pedophiles. Did you read my post? I don’t think you did. The people I would compare to cockroaches are the people who actually hurt others, not those who have the urge to, but restrain themselves.
The distinction is irrelevant in this context. It’s about a fucking frat party that was obviously “hur hur child rape is funny”. Oh yeah, that’s unconscionable. I don’t agree with Fat Steve. I was responding only to the post that suggesting people who pushed back against conflating pedophilia and child molesters were tacitly condoning/defending the latter.
Did you read my post? I don’t think you did. The people I would compare to cockroaches are the people who actually hurt others, not those who have the urge to, but restrain themselves. Did you read my response? I don’t think you did. You do you.
In order to be diagnosable there (AFAIK) there needs to be a component of distress or diminished functioning because of the paraphilia. It could be concurrent with another psychological disorder that makes such distinction moot (like antisocial personality disorder), but not everyone who’s aroused by sadism is in the SSD boat.
@Miranda: I don’t know what current psychological practice is, but sadism shouldn’t be a disorder. It merely refers to the capacity to be sexually aroused by the pain of others. I’m sure the vast majority of sadists are perfectly satisfied with consensual sexual encounters. The difference between sadism and pedophilia is that pedophilia cannot be satisfied within a consensual context. (Age play aside)
Guys, I know, I cut my teeth on sex positivity in the SM community. What I’m trying to say is that I don’t know why I should be feel sorry for someone who fulfills their SM fantasies by abducting random women, because “oh the poor honey just didn’t know about SM because it’s soooo stigmatized.” I’ll concede that maybe it’s a bad analogy, but welcome to Random 34584584 of “Mention something snarky about BDSM, people come out of woodwork to start lecturing me.” I dated a sadist. I’ve heard every justification for it that one can give.
Sorry, Round 3458etc. What I’m trying to say that I spent a considerable amount of time in the SM community (wish I hadn’t, but that’s another story), I’ve heard it all, thank you very much, and I was trying to make a point about whether or not I should feel sorry for people who harm others in pursuing their “sexual needs.” I concede that my crankiness is inhibiting my ability to write clearly. Sorry, all.
I was trying to make a point about whether or not I should feel sorry for people who harm others in pursuing their “sexual needs.” I think we’re all agreeing, here. Seriously- I don’t think anyone is saying you (or anyone else) should feel sorry for those people.
Fair. I just didn’t see anyone on this thread arguing that we should sympathize with people who abuse children.
I don’t think my point here was clear. I was acknowledging that these frat boys don’t take child rape seriously, but ALSO pointing out that they are ridiculing a psychiatric disorder. That’s two strikes against them, not a mitigation for either one.
they are ridiculing a psychiatric disorder And you’re missing mine. I’m saying it’s very…”what about the pedophilez”…to bring up the “BUT IT’S ACTUALLY A PSYCHIATRIC CONDITION!” whenever pedophilia comes up in a child sex abuse context. Honestly, I don’t care if child abusers’ psychiatric condition gets made fun of. Or at least, I won’t start caring until people start caring about child abuse victims as much as they seem to care about reminding us all that pedophilia is an uncomfortable medical condition and men must have their needs met, after all. –Former child abuse victim
And you’re missing mine. I’m saying it’s very…”what about the pedophilez”…to bring up the “BUT IT’S ACTUALLY A PSYCHIATRIC CONDITION!” whenever pedophilia comes up in a child sex abuse context. I totally agree and I’m glad I didn’t do that. All I did was point how the frat boys didn’t differentiate between pedophiles and pedophile rapists. I would never in a million years argue that pedophilia’s status as a psychiatric disorder justifies child rape even in the tiniest of ways. I would say that anyone who rapes a child, whether or not they suffer from the disorder, deserves to be locked up for ever. You can be assured of that.
All I did was point how the frat boys didn’t differentiate between pedophiles and pedophile rapists. I’m going to back off after this, but I think you’re being a jerk. “Pedophiles and pigtails,” as everyone else has pointed out here, is obviously a reference to rapists, and I find your decision right here, right now, to remind us that “pedophiles and pedophile rapists” are different, and those frat boys are baddies for failing to distinguish is…questionable at best. It takes attention off the real victims herre, who are women and children. It’s like when someone say “Men are rapists” and some asshole needs to barge in and be like “Well let’s remember not all men are rapists!,” diverting where the attention should really be going in a thread. I mean, you have a pattern of coming off as disrespectfully flippant on serious issues, which is why I’m disinclined to give you more of the benefit of the doubt here.
It’s like when someone say “Men are rapists” and some asshole needs to barge in and be like “Well let’s remember not all men are rapists!,” diverting where the attention should really be going in a thread. ‘ I (speaking as a woman) would argue that in that situation, the former person is being the asshole.
I’m going to back off after this, but I think you’re being a jerk. “Pedophiles and pigtails,” as everyone else has pointed out here, is obviously a reference to rapists, and I find your decision right here, right now, to remind us that “pedophiles and pedophile rapists” are different, and those frat boys are baddies for failing to distinguish is…questionable at best. It takes attention off the real victims herre, who are women and children. It’s like when someone say “Men are rapists” and some asshole needs to barge in and be like “Well let’s remember not all men are rapists!,” diverting where the attention should really be going in a thread. I mean, you have a pattern of coming off as disrespectfully flippant on serious issues, which is why I’m disinclined to give you more of the benefit of the doubt here. I’m sorry I upset you Miranda. I really am. I was trying to lead to a serious and not at all flippant point, and I totally forget where I was going when someone challenges me, and I get all defensive, so I understand your reaction. What I never got around to saying was that when I thought of what costume a frat boy would use to dress as a pedophile, I imagined one of three things 1) a nerdy dorky type 2) a priest or 3) Michael Jackson, whereas if it was a real representation of pedophiles 90% would have to be wearing their normal clothes.
OTOH, this gets the vultures totally out in the open. It’s an instant “Don’t Date/Marry These” list, with the added benefit of making an instant suspect list for law enforcement. Open assholery is usually preferable to the hidden variety, if only to keep info available. When Christianity decides to forgive women for the alleged sin of Eve, blacks for Ham’s reputed misdeed, and the imperfectly born for not staying fetal, then I might be inclined to take their garbage seriously. As written, it appears to apply mainly to thieves, thereby encouraging them and creating a marketplace for fences. Exuberantly seconding the fun of targeting trolls. It’s far more fun than hunting Bambi, but they are just too darned foul to eat.
It’s sad what lengths some fraternities will go to to demean girls and women, and try to raise themselves up by putting others down. They are trying to create a sense of male superiority by doing this. But really they’re doing the opposite. They’re creating themselves as sub-human.
This is completely horrific, and I am ashamed that it is happening down the street from me. I am, however, in no way surprised.
I joined a fraternity pre-transition. I gained a lot of valuable traits from my fraternity, and I try to live by the ritual, etc, etc, etc… But frankly, I’ve had enough. I haven’t seen enough work done to change the widespread culture in the Greek System. Institutionalised misogyny, racism, homophobia, transphobia, classism… They just don’t seem to be getting any better. Too few Greek members seem to live by their own ritual promises which almost always include platitudes about being decent fucking human beings. So I’d like to know why, with all this solemn ritualised promising about being decent human beings, the fuck so few Greeks seem to be able to do it? Even I’m getting to the point where I’m read to tear the whole system down, and I feel powerless to reform the system as an alumni.