I am a car, or a wallet, or possibly a house.

Delurking to say this:

When rape apologists, in the process of victim-blaming, compare the crime of sexual assault to theft or robbery or burglary – when they refer to how a survivor was dressed or behaved with allusions to unlocked car doors or open wallets or un-alarmed doors and windows – what they are saying is this:

That bodies are property. That the violation of someone’s bodily autonomy is akin to the theft of property. That someone’s right to sexual freedom and consent is nothing more than property.

In effect, then, we are to constantly erase or invisibilise our bodies from the public sphere. That is what they mean.

And that’s why it is so disingenuous a comparison. Because no one argues with the right of your car or wallet or house to exist, but our bodies must be taken out of the equation.

– M. We.

What NOT to do for #Japan.

All these things are insensitive and inappropriate.

– not everyone can send money due to not having any, someone else controlling their bank account, or the sheer red tape of donations or even not having enough spoons to walk down to the bank and transfer money. some people with disabilities can’t use phones either so phone donations are sometimes out of the question.
– not everyone’s God is the Abrahamaic God, so laughing at the “illogic” of praying is ridiculous. sometimes prayer is the only thing someone can manage, that does not lessen their capacity for action. assuming that people are stopping ~all action~ to pray, why, you think they can’t pray AND act by helping in shelters or something?

– saying people only get hit by natural disasters because they don’t believe in the Abrahamaic God is preposterous and by extension trying to proselytise on that basis is not only hurtful to the people affected, it’s also against the bits of your holy book that remind you about humanitarian needs.

– using a natural disaster that is still affecting people as a backdrop for a story/fanfic/whatever… SO MUCH NO.

– citing a country’s history as reasons why you should not be compassionate makes you… well you guessed it, a shitty excuse for a human being. because no matter how you look at that… it’s just fucking racist.

– citing a country’s present actions [e.g. whaling] is racist too, just fyi.

because if your ends were that noble, you wouldn’t need to co-opt human suffering to achieve them.

Cross-posted from Tumblr.

Frivolity! NOT.

by Wednesday.

In today’s Straits Times, an article, ‘Magistrate’s complaints on the rise’:

Examples of frivolous complaints [emphasis mine] seen by lawyers included one filed by a parent upset with another after their teenage sons fought, and another by a woman harassed by a former boyfriend’s numerous calls.

Then, there was the case of a man harassed by his girlfriend’s suitor, who sent him obscene messages.

The court spokesman said many simply see the process as a means of settling their grievances.

Can we get this straight?

It is not frivolous to expect legal protection from harassment.

It is not frivolous because, oh, ‘they had a relationship and lovers’ tiffs are lovers’ tiffs’.

It is an egregious ignoring of real and valid societal concerns, such as protecting real, valid, actual human beings (ergo, women) from abusive behaviour.

This must be an act of supreme cognitive dissonance for the author to use the word harassed without thinking that harassment means a disturbing, discomforting, threatening act or series of acts, and instead using the adjective —

what was it?

— right. Frivolous.

Rape is about power. Abuse is about power. Harassment is a form of abuse.

Also, if one’s former partner is harassing one’s current partner, as in the second example cited, then yes, that too is not frivolous. It describes a dangerous individual who claims ownership of his ex-girlfriend, dehumanising her, and behaving violently towards her current partner.

These are Things That Are Not Frivolous, brought to you by the letter F.

Saturday Morning Rage

Trigger warning for assault/abuse.

In today’s news, the trial of a teacher accused of raping his student is sidetracked by the ‘revelation’ that they were ‘having a relationship’, because, you know, she had texted him saying so and she was a slut anyway (predatory grooming and abuse does not exist, maybe?); an article is published where molestation in nightclubs is blamed on women ‘trying to be like men’ and going drinking and getting drunk and making false reports and come on he was drunk too you can’t blame him; and Amy Chua’s article was republished without commentary.

Just another day in my SG life.

Just like that book by Nabokov

by Wednesday.

Trigger warning for rape/sexual assault.

Oh, lovely. I’m so glad to know that victim-blaming is well and alive in our population.

Newsflash: A twelve-year-old cannot meaningfully consent to sexual activity. A twelve-year-old cannot meaningfully consent to sexual activity with an adult. A twelve-year-old cannot meaningfully consent to sexual activity with an adult in a position of authority over them.

Cut for triggering content.