Feminist infighting escalates over mixed messaging on rape
In 2006 there was huge negative fallout at Duke University for what turned out to be false rape charges made by a black stripper against three white LaCrosse team members.
In a “tragic rush to accuse,” the men’s names were dragged through the mud, their team’s season canceled, and their coach forced to resign. The signs above, “GIVE THEM EQUAL MEASURE,” and “CASTRATE,” were from one of multiple protests held at the Duke campus.
When the allegations were proven false, feminist and black extremist groups that had joined the rush to judgment were left with egg on their faces.
Still, liberal feminists maintained the offensive. Ms. Magazine wrote in 2011:
Do women lie about rape? According to Joanne Archambault, a former sex crimes unit supervisor, the answer is fairly simple: “[False reports] are not a problem. They happen, but they’re not a problem.” Research has shown that only roughly 2 to 8 percent of rape reports are untrue… a pretty small number to justify the climate of fear around false rape reports.
That same year liberal feminists conducted a “Rape is Rape” campaign: If a woman said she was raped, in whatever form that took, she was not to be doubted. Vice President Joe Biden, in typical form, took the mantra a step further, proclaiming, “Look folks, rape is rape is rape.”
In 2012, feminists succeeded in getting the FBI’s antiquated definition of rape changed, with which I don’t have a quibble.
But 2012 turned into a banner year for feminist exploitation of rape, when they were able to successfully seize upon inept rape comments by Republican candidates Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock.
It was also the year feminists began overplaying their hand, by equating transvaginal ultrasounds as “rape” if mandated by the government but averting their eyes if they were mandated by Planned Parenthood.
Recently, feminist conversation and conjecture on rapes has begun breaking down, resulting infighting and confusion.
Inexplicably, abortion apologist Amanda Marcotte set the “rape is rape is rape” movement back a few paces several days ago by excusing a television character for lying that she got an abortion because she was raped. The character went further to publicly name her supposed attacker, about whom she had never filed a complaint decades earlier during their college years - Duke with a twist, now apparently ok with at least one notable feminist.
On the flip side, feminist Emily Matchar has gotten herself in trouble after writing a piece in the New Republic on February 26 about the Men’s Rights Movement, the group behind the poster, right, which is taking on the issue of false reporting.
In her story Matchar reported on a survey in which college students themselves believe half of all rape complaints are made up. She added:
But to totally ignore the issues that they raise does not further a productive conversation. Unfortunately, it’s difficult to talk about these issues in progressive or feminist circles, where discussions of sexual assault prevention can quickly degenerate into angry hyperbole and name-calling.
… a self-fulfilling prophecy…
https://twitter.com/EmilyMatchar/status/439054618400534528
Flash from the serious to the sophomoric, in which RH Reality Check editor-in-chief Jodi Jacobson had to apologize for retweeting this offensive rape ditty:
RT @Fossphate: #TeaPartyValentines roses are red, violets are blue, enjoy your rape baby, it's gods gift to you.
— JodiJacobson 🇺🇦 🩸🦷 @jljacobson@mastodon.social (@jljacobson) February 14, 2013
A responder to that tweet poignantly noted a reality that is apparently beyond the comprehension of liberal feminists who put politics above people. Pulling together a series of her tweets:
The poem is catchy, BUT… Some ? choose to carry their pregnancies to term, and some so conceived… are reading.
Just an appeal to consider how the language looks to those actually affected.
I am 100% pro-choice. And affected by the issue in question. The wording is hurtful.
Please consider how you’d feel if you or your child were called the term in that tweet.
What I’m saying is there are other pro-choice people with this conception history, who chafe at that terminology.
Feminists now find themselves in a circular firing-squad for taking the rape issue too far, too lightly, too realistically, and too unrealistically.
And I note this is but one of several fights – another current biggie is with African-American feminists – beleaguering the liberal feminist movement.
I don’t observe this infighting with any joy; the topics are tragic.
But perhaps in all this a way can be cleared for authentic egalitarians to effect positive change.
The fact that there are pro-choicers who were conceived in rape, know it, and still support a movement that treats them like poster children for abortion, boggles my mind. You have to have serious self-esteem issues. (I feel the same way about abortion advocates who were adopted.)
15 likes
The men’s rights movement is mostly whiny divorced guys who resent paying child support and alimony. Oh, and there are the men who are just bitter no woman has been interested in them so they hate all women. But not all of them, I’ve met a couple who have genuine concerns that they want addressed (fair custody practices, help for male sexual assault and domestic violence victims, working on men’s mental health issues like the ridiculously high suicide rate, etc).
The false rape accusation thing, though, is not the huge inequity they are pretending it is. Sure, it happens. Not often though. And what I’m really afraid of what’s happening, is what I’ve observed, that people take “not enough evidence” as ‘the victim must be lying” which isn’t how the justice system works, and is definitely not fair to the victim(s). And most people get away with rape because it’s inherently a crime often with little evidence besides “s/he says, s/he says” so I really doubt there’s a million men languishing in jail over this. The justice system isn’t perfect but I don’t think that many men have been screwed over by false rape allegations. I think if they are worried about the reputations of innocent men (and women, women can be sex offenders too) being tarnished, they should advocate to change the laws allowing the alleged offenders name to be released to the press unless s/he’s convicted.
And it’s true enough that discussions on rape within feminist circles unless you agree 100% with what people are saying end up just name-calling and anger. I mean, even pretty mild things like “I think male victims deserve more attention than they get’ (I was once accused of wanting to make it “all about men” by saying that. We were talking about prison rape! That’s mostly male victims!). And people say absolutely disgusting stuff about babies conceived in rape, even to people who have children or are children conceived in rape. It’s pretty disgusting.
11 likes
I personally know a few people who had been wrongly accused of rape. It happens more often than you think, Jack. And it is absolutely degrading, traumatic, and unjust. The accusations were never escalated, for obvious reasons. I certainly do not want rape victims to not be taken seriously or to be doubted, but the women who make false claims ought to ashamed. Not only to cry wolf and undermine real victims, but to victimize the men in a life-changing way. In two such cases that I am unfortunately familiar with, sex did not even occur. I don’t know the answer, but always taking the woman’s word as truth can’t be it.
5 likes
Always taking the victim’s (not woman’s there are plenty of male victims) words doesn’t happen legally. It’s near impossible to get a conviction on someone’s word alone for any crime, particularly rape. Getting falsely accused of rape is surely horrible, but they are fighting a battle that’s doesn’t exist. These things get caught at the investigation stage usually, it’s a rare guy (usually a black guy, sadly) who actually is legally punished for a rape he didn’t commit. When they talk about the social repercussions of getting accused of rape, that’s a bit different, which is why I think I’d be okay with accused offender’s names being protected from being released to the media, because it’s not fair to ruin someone’s life socially if you can’t prove they committed a crime.
How do you know the accused were innocent? My father was “innocent” according to him, though I never pressed charges.
7 likes
Well, yes, Jack, in the legal arena, that’s very true. My concern is on the social level, even smaller scale than what you mentioned. In two cases the women eventually told the truth, under no duress might I add. So I suppose it worked out. ?!
Some people are confused and lonely, and some are downright nasty and deceitful. Or all of the above. We are so broken.
A friend of an accuser told me “She just wants to let by-gones be by-gones.” ??
It’s probably true that these false allegations are not common relative to the true ones, and even versus the true cases that cannot be substantiated. I guess these poor schmucks just get to be the collateral damage.
2 likes
And now the woman who accused to Duke U. students is in prison for assaulting her boyfriend (sorry I can’t remember the source. It was in the news a few months ago).
I know both victims of rape and men who have been falsely accused. We have a serious culture problem.
4 likes
Ever heard of circumstantial evidence Jack. Unfortunately more of that is taken into account than you seem to think…
1 likes
Circumstantial evidence simply means “evidence of circumstances”, Thomas. Of course it is taken into account. The fact remains very few people are convicted of rape compared to the estimate numbers of rapes.
I’m simply not going to socially side with accused rapists, simply can’t do it. If you’d ever been blamed or accused of lying about being assaulted then you might get it. It certainly causes as much damage as being accused and not convicted of a sex crime. There’s no real way to fix it, police have to investigate all rape claims or they aren’t doing their jobs, most false accusations are caught at this stage.
6 likes
“What I’m saying is there are other pro-choice people with this conception history, who chafe at that terminology.”
I appreciate this person enlightening JJ. However, the implication that it matters because even “pro-choice people” are conceived in this way and find her label offensive is so telling. As if the fact that pro-life people conceived in this way may be offended wouldn’t be a compelling enough argument. Or how about just people? Human beings.
5 likes
The men’s rights movement is mostly whiny divorced guys who resent paying child support and alimony.
Seriously, Jack? That has to be one of the most disgustingly sexist and stereotypical things I’ve ever heard you say. How on earth could you possibly know such a thing? What if I said the stay-at-home dad movement is mostly lazy guys who want to lay around all day and not have a job? Just because I know some lazy stay at home dads doesn’t mean their group is made up primarily of guys like that.
The pendulum certainly has swung the other way, hasn’t it? It’s perfectly okay, I guess, to bash men who want to be fathers to their kids. Hey, the pro-abort movement does it to men when their kids aren’t even born yet, so that must make it okay after the kids are born.
3 likes
I agree Kel. It hurts men in general when such views are displayed publicly and any legitimacy is challenged or dismissed. I can’t even bring myself to exclaim what type of men comprise this movement because I simply don’t know. I guess some people have crystal balls. What a shame…
0 likes
Right, Jack. I don’t disagree with you. Allegations must be respected and investigated. But where legal recourse is not pursued, can we then be suspicious of claims? Where the accused has not the option to set the record straight?
The issue I have revolves around the idea of negative evidence. Has the legal system (and/or individuals) “disproved” something or just failed to prove it? And what then do we think of the victim? The accused? I’m glad you have faith in the system. Perhaps I don’t. I don’t even know my real point, just that this is messy and ugly. Things sure get messed up when we cease to follow God’s rules.
1 likes
My point is that there should be no “of course” in considering circumstantial evidence when it comes to rape charges Jack.
0 likes
Kel do me a favor and go peruse “A Voice for Men” and “Men Going Their Own Way” and the other websites tied to the MRM. They are considered hate groups for a reason. Their leaders are people like Warren Farrell, who defended incest and says turning a guy down is “dating fraud”, Paul Elam who quite literally hates you and all other women and claims you’re all kind of stupid and greedy. Seriously just read a few articles and comments and come back and say I’m being unfair. The movement is seriously rotten. That doesn’t mean all men who think men don’t get a legal fair shake are bad, but the MRM has a serious problem with hatig women, abandoning their children, among other things.
Why in the world would you think I of all people would be against men who want to father their kids? Me? Seriously? The father’s rights people are a bit removed from the main MRM and tend to hate women quite a bit less.
6 likes
Great point LifeJoy, you should check out the original Twitter responses, another person was arguing with Emily, saying that he will continue to personally denigrate anyone conceived in rape until prolifers give up on abortion. If they are willing to kill a baby, it’s not a far step for them to be willing to dehumanize others to use them as political tools.
3 likes
“Ican’t even bring myself to exclaim what type of men comprise this movement because I simply don’t know. I guess some people have crystal balls. ”
No crystal ball. My opinions come from actively talking to and engaging with the people involved in the MRM and seeing what they support and how they go about it. The sad part is some of their complaints are legitimate, but they seem to be incapable for hatred while trying to get their goals met.
One of their main complaints is that if women can abort why can’t men just walk away from their children? After all, we get no say in whether the baby comes to term so why can’t men automatically legally abandon their children? They call it a “financial abortion”. Seriously, that’s not “father’s rights” that’s “let’s punish all women and their children because abortion laws suck and I can’t keep it in my pants” . Really, I’m not joking. Go look at what they actually support and advocate for before you think I’m being “sexist”. Opposing the MRM is no more sexist than opposing radical feminism.
Here’s a great article from Paul Elam on domestic violence. He deleted it after backlash but it’s just a beautiful example of how they take actual serious issues (men being battered by their wives) and turn them into jokes that no one will take seriously because of the violent and disturbing rhetoric. Warning, profanity and disturbing content: http://web.archive.org/web/20110702180031/http://www.avoiceformen.com/2010/10/22/if-you-see-jezebel-in-the-road-run-the-bitch-down/
4 likes
“My point is that there should be no “of course” in considering circumstantial evidence when it comes to rape charges Jack. ”
So you want to change the entire way the court system works in regards to evidence, just for rape cases? Okay then. Do you even know what circumstantial evidence is? DNA evidence, fingerprints, and blood analysis are all circumstantial evidence. Do you ever want anyone to ever get convicted of rape ever again? Because if you throw out circumstantial evidence you’re left with almost nothing besides testimony.
4 likes
“But where legal recourse is not pursued, can we then be suspicious of claims? Where the accused has not the option to set the record straight?”
Depends. If the charges aren’t pursued because the alleged victim admitted to lying or fabricating the claim, sure. If it’s just “s/he said, s/he said” and there’s no way to prove who is telling the truth (the vast majority of both real rapes and false accusations) I personally would err on the side of the victim socially. You should do what you think is right.
I don’t have faith in the system but it’s pretty well studied that rapists rarely go to jail.
4 likes
Why in the world would you think I of all people would be against men who want to father their kids? Me? Seriously? The father’s rights people are a bit removed from the main MRM and tend to hate women quite a bit less.
I don’t think you’re against men who want to father your kids, and that is why I was so stunned by what you said.
You mentioned the men’s rights movement. Not a particular organization in your post, but the entire movement. Are some guys jerks? Obviously. Are some women less than upstanding as well? Yes.
But to paint the father’s rights movement as a bunch of guys with grudges against women is just wrong. As for the angry ones, honestly, if your S.O. took off with your kid and wouldn’t let you see him/her, I think you’d have every reason to be upset about it. Maybe you were speaking of a different movement – “men’s rights” vs. “father’s rights.” I don’t know. But I think you may be painting with a broad brush. And I would also hope that you wouldn’t agree with the anti-male stance of a large portion of liberal feminism today.
As a person who grew up with the complete opposite experience – totally absent father who never even asked for shared custody or visitation – I would think we should want to encourage men who have been denied their rights to access to their children.
1 likes
I think who I would err on the side of would be determined case-by-case or not at all. It’s probably 90/10. So your odds are good, Jack.
“It’s pretty well studied that rapists rarely go to jail.”
Are you saying even when convicted? Such crap. On one hand, I don’t want innocent men to be falsely accused and suffer even socially, and on the other hand feel we should resort to mob justice at times. Did someone mention a crystal ball?
0 likes
“You mentioned the men’s rights movement. Not a particular organization in your post, but the entire movement. Are some guys jerks? Obviously. Are some women less than upstanding as well? Yes. ”
Yes, but the MRM is basically a clone of radical feminism, gender-flipped. It’s not really deniable that radical feminism (not ALL feminists, of course, there are plenty of pro-life and rational feminists who are great people who are truly egalitarian) is taken over by some serious man-haters, just go look at their websites and what they support. It’s the same thing for the main thrust of the MRM. I won’t support them.
“But to paint the father’s rights movement as a bunch of guys with grudges against women is just wrong. ”
I wasn’t talking about the father’s rights movement. That’s a different movement, somewhat related, than the MRM and they have different goals and a whole lot less hatred towards women in general. And like I said, a lot of the MRM is a lot less “I want joint custody of my child” and a lot more “I don’t want to pay child support OR have custody, I want to walk away”. Google financial abortion, it’s disturbing.
And of course I agree that feminism has got a strong anti-male streak. You should have heard what my “feminist” “friends” had to say about my abusive wife lol. That doesn’t mean the MRM is a good thing, hate breeds more hate, it doesn’t fix it.
“if your S.O. took off with your kid and wouldn’t let you see him/her, I think you’d have every reason to be upset about it. ”
My ex took off with my kids for two days right before I filed for divorce and I had no idea where they were. Of course being upset about those kind of things is perfectly valid, especially if she ends up with full custody and interferes with your visitation (which didn’t happen to me, thankfully, but has happened to guys plenty). But there’s simply no call for the generalization of all women as “greedy c**ts” and talking about setting their exes on fire, and other things I’ve seen in the MRM (not the father’s rights movement, that’s different). And remember, a lot of the MRM complaints aren’t not seeing their children, it’s the child support and alimony they don’t like.
4 likes
“Are you saying even when convicted?”
What? No. Convicted rapists usually go to jail (sometimes for a whole five years!). What I’m talking about is cases where it’s impossible to get evidence, those rapists get away with it (and of course, a small minority were actually innocent). And a whole lot of victims who have evidence don’t even report too. That’s what I was talking about. I’m not saying people should be convicted if the burden of proof isn’t met, of course not, we have the presumption of innocence and beyond a reasonable doubt standards for a reason. I’m not talking about doing away with that. I’m just not going to think to myself “oh well, s/he wasn’t convicted so probably there was no rape” because I don’t think that’s true, at all.
7 likes
Lol here’s another lovely article by Elam. Women are literally begging to be raped, don’t you know? Warning for more profanity and super disturbing content.
http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/false-rape-culture/challenging-the-etiology-of-rape/
Because you know, if you have ever, in your life, flirted with a man you didn’t intend to have sex with, gotten drunk, made out with a guy, let a guy buy you drinks or even (gasp) were promiscuous, you had a sign on your head saying “rape me” (that’s almost exactly a quote from the article) .
“And all the outraged PC demands to get huffy and point out how nothing justifies or excuses rape won’t change the fact that there are a lot of women who get pummeled and pumped because they are stupid (and often arrogant) enough to walk though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING B***H– PLEASE RAPE ME neon sign glowing above their empty little narcissistic heads.”
Yes. So can y’all see why I find this movement sickening to the core? A Voice for Men is the “main” MRM organization, and Elam is one of the more prominent voices.
8 likes
Ok, I think we were talking about different things. I thought you were referring to the father’s rights movement, Jack. I apologize. I honestly have never heard of the men’s rights movement. Until today, that is.
3 likes
Yeah sorry I should have been clearer about it. The father’s rights movement gets confused with the MRM but they are different movements with different goals. I think that the father’s rights movement is a good thing, especially because they help men with abusive wives gain custody of their children, and help men who want to be involved not get pushed out of the kid’s lives and get fair parenting time. The MRM is another thing, and while they have some valid complaints they just are full of so much hate that the whole movement is basically poisoned.
3 likes
Jack says: “Do you even know what circumstantial evidence is? DNA evidence, fingerprints, and blood analysis are all circumstantial evidence. Do you ever want anyone to ever get convicted of rape ever again? Because if you throw out circumstantial evidence you’re left with almost nothing besides testimony.”
I think you meant to state that the DNA, fingerprints and blood analysis are PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.
Circumstantial evidence would be something to the effect of you seeing me leave her apartment before she reported the rape. In other words circumstantial evidence is the lack of physical evidence tying someone to a crime but nonetheless implicates the person. The burden of proof for circumstantial evidence is less but nonetheless it can convict.
Jack with all do respect, please read up on the difference btw circumstantial and physical crime evidence, otherwise it may appear it is you who does not know what it is.
Circumstantial evidence, again, is what allows for prosecution of charges without any physical evidence… And that is the problem with rape….
I guess two other people need to review info on circumstantial evidence :)
1 likes
Seriously, don’t act like I’m stupid when you’re the one that’s wrong:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence
Circumstantial evidence is DNA evidence, fingerprints, blood spatters, footprints, etc. Direct evidence is stuff like eyewitness testimony that saw someone committing the crime. Both these things are important to a case.
And the burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt” and that’s jury’s discretion. If there’s a preponderance of non-physical evidence a conviction can be obtained, but it’s rare. And it’s exceedingly rare that someone gets convicted of a sex offense when there’s nothing other than his or her word that they were raped.
If you’re going to condescend to me make sure you know what you’re talking about.
5 likes
Like I said before, circumstantial evidence is just evidence about the circumstances (that isn’t direct, like a videotape of the crime). It can be very strong evidence (like DNA evidence, bruises and vaginal or anal lacerations w/DNA evidence is a pretty strong case for rape taking place), or not particularly strong. But “circumstantial” doesn’t mean it’s not evidence or not very important.
4 likes
Jill,
Just a suggestion, but I think it would be a stronger piece without the “Virginia is for psychos” little ad.
0 likes
I got little tiffed Jack because obviously you have no clue that dna and eyewitness testimony often qualify as direct physical evidence. Read sources online that will explain that to you, as I can’t paste links right now but I will. There are many considerations for dna such ax whether it was available time of the crime etc. And whether both types of evidencd carry equal proof is also wdighed on mzny factors as the prosecution has a lot of leeway. Its not as cut and dry as you think but the truth is thatnconvictions have and are obtained solely based on circumtantial evidence many times, msybe rarer but that’s how most SAs function. Sometimes it does not pay to get ahead of yourself……
0 likes
I’m really sorry you don’t understand what words mean Thomas. I explained why physical evidence like that is circumstantial. It’s not my fault you’re incapable of admitting that you’re wrong.
Man you make me mad. I really don’t like it when people treat me like an ignoramus when I’m correct. I’m not playing this game, have a good weekend.
3 likes
The feminist community (the good women who embrace that political vision) are blinded and confused.
They want cheap and easy access to contraception and abortion. They do not realize that these are the very things that have caused the escalation in rape and abuse of women.
This is what we mean by “cognitive dissonance.” Expect them to keep saying strange and irrational things about what they want and don’t want.
1 likes
I’ll get back to you with references Monday as life calls this weekend and maybe than you will understand what I attempting to convey in my above post. Enjoy the weekend as well….
0 likes