**Trigger Warning for statutory rape, sexual assault, rape culture**

It seems that if the victim is under-age, even The Daily Mail will speak out about victim-blaming. Draw your own conclusions about the article itself, but at least there isn’t the victim-blaming of The New York Times [Trigger warning on link for sexual violence, victim-blaming, and rape apology].

The Daily Mail gives an in-depth interview with the victim, almost laughing off the ouch-my-career bullshit of the perpetrators, and encouraging the reader to believe the victim’s story. Despite mentioning that one victim lied about her age and arranged to meet the perpetrators, it never once suggests that the assault was brought on or condoned by the victim.

Tabloid cesspit it may be, but the Daily Mail didn’t do too badly here.

[image: a long-haired person in army uniform behind a fence, sandbags and shipping containers in background]. motherjones: Invisible Women: The Military’s Not-So-Secret Gender Problem Yesterday, we posted a link to a jarring GOOD magazine infographic with the title “Female soldiers more likely to be raped by their own troops than killed by enemy fire.” The response was huge…and it got us thinking.
Pop-upView Separately

[image: a long-haired person in army uniform behind a fence, sandbags and shipping containers in background].

motherjones:

Invisible Women: The Military’s Not-So-Secret Gender Problem

Yesterday, we posted a link to a jarring GOOD magazine infographic with the title “Female soldiers more likely to be raped by their own troops than killed by enemy fire.” The response was huge…and it got us thinking.

**Trigger warning for rape culture** Tory MEP reignites row over Kenneth Clare Rape Remarks

socialisimo:

Tory MEP reignites row over Kenneth Clarke rape remarks

A Tory MEP has reignited the controversy about degrees of severity inrape, suggesting that some rape victims shared responsibility for thecrime.

Writing on his blog, Roger Helmer weighed in behind the justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, who last week suggested some forms of rape were more serious than others.

Helmer described a “classic stranger rape” scenario, where a “masked individual emerges from the bushes, hits his victim over the head with a blunt instrument, drags her into the undergrowth and rapes her, and then leaves her unconscious, careless whether she lives or dies”.

He then described “date rape” as being when a woman “voluntarily goes to her boyfriend’s apartment, voluntarily goes into the bedroom, voluntarily undresses and gets into bed, perhaps anticipating sex, or naively expecting merely a cuddle.

“But at the last minute she gets cold feet and says ‘Stop!’ The young man, in the heat of the moment, is unable to restrain himself and carries on.

“In both cases an offence has been committed, and the perpetrators deserve to be convicted and punished.

“But whereas in the first case, I’d again be quite happy to hang the guy, I think that most right-thinking people would expect a much lighter sentence in the second case. Rape is always wrong, but not always equally culpable.”

(via bitemebeautiful)

Source: socialisimo

Even though I did not march under the banner of ‘sluthood’, I marched to mark the unceded territory of women’s bodies. I marched because language is a weapon yielded against the powerless. I marched because rapists causes rape and sexual assault can never be justified. I marched to end the policing of women by other women. I marched because that day, though understandable, I happened to be tired of the Left ruthlessly eating itself alive. I marched in defiance of right-wing pundits like Margaret Wente to make visible the staggering reality of rape and violence against all women in so-called civilized countries like Canada.

SlutWalk - To March or not to March

(via jaded16india)

Last one I promise.

**Trigger warning for rape culture**


People need to realize that being ‘scantily clad’ is not the only patriarchal excuse that victimizes women. Sexual assaults against Muslim women are often minimized in our society because Muslim women are perceived as repressed, and therefore in need of sexual emancipation. I would much rather have attended a ‘Do Not Rape’ Walk.

SlutWalk - To March or not to March

(via jaded16india)

Source: peopleofcolororganize.com

**Trigger warning for rape culture**

I don’t know whether Julian Assange is guilty of the sex crimes that two Swedish women say he has committed. If he had sexual intercourse without a condom with a woman who was asleep, that’s a serious business, and one which the Swedish law classifies as rape. But I’m pretty sure that sex with someone you had sex with earlier, and who was probably planning to have sex with you again, when you’re on a date, and lying naked in bed next to them, without violence, is not as serious as forced sex with a stranger.

Christina Patterson: It’s Miliband, not Clarke, who should be ashamed

Here we have The Independent making exactly the same mistake as Clarke. The author is suggesting that knowing the rapist and dating them makes the rape less serious, which is a huge rape culture assumption.

It’s an article laden with whimsical trivialisations of rape actually.

Source: independent.co.uk

  • 40 Plays
  • Chants and Songs!Exeter Reclaim the Night

Here are my recordings from Exeter Reclaim the Night, the women’s safety march against rape culture. There’ll be a photo spam when images become available but until then, enjoy some radical, righteous ambience :)

TRANSCRIPT:

Chant: “Whatever we wear, wherever we go, yes means yes and no means no!”

Andy: I hope they don’t interview me.

Me: They shouldn’t interview us, they should interview Caitlin. Caitlin knows everything. I’m writing an article about this [for the University paper].

Chant: “Whatever we wear, wherever we go, yes means yes and no means no!”

Chant: “Hey (hey) Mister (mister) get your hands off my sister!”

Chant: “2-4-6-8 stop the violence, stop the rape!”

Chant: “Whatever we wear, wherever we go, yes means yes and no means no!”

Chant: “Say it once! Say it again! No excuse for violent men!”

Chant: “Hey (hey) Ho (ho) sexual violence got to go!”

Song to the tune of When the Saints Go Marching in:

“Oh when we fight
Oh when we fight
Oh when we fight for women’s rights
We’re gonna start a revolution
Oh when we fight for women’s rights”

Me: We’re so incapable of going slowly, we just either stop or go fast…

Song outside strip club: “2-4-6-8, can’t you get a proper date?”

Megaphone: Turn around!

Lindsay: We get to do it again!

One of the reasons I didn’t chant much was that it needed to be women’s voices chanting, something which was also a success.

Well done to everyone involved in Reclaim the Night which, if you were there, was blatantly a massive success. Special thanks to Caitlin and the Reclaim the Night organising crew!

*Trigger warning for discussion of circumstances of rape** The enthusiastic consent model makes the person who initiates physical contact responsible, regardless of gender, for fighting against the culture of victim blaming. Under this model, the person initiating contact is required to take account of and not exploit a relationship, the other person’s intoxicated state, or the power of peer pressure or social conditioning. No matter what the type of contact, the initiating party must get genuine consent. This article talks about Enthusiastic Consent as a way of fighting rape culture in similar fashion to Jaclyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti’s “Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape”. The idea behind enthusiastic consent is that it is not just giving in, it is not just consent for the sake of pleasing others. It is an active expression of intention to engage in sexual activity that is totally unambiguous. FACT 1: **THE OPPOSITE OF NO IS ENTHUSIASTIC YES**. It is estimated that 1 in 3 women have given consent to sex that they didn’t want. Why would this be? Researchers from the University of Buffalo asked women their reasons, which included feeling obliged to satisfy their partner, having already given implicit consent by physical contact, or actually being pressured into it. There is no such thing as implicit consent by being in a certain place, by wearing certain clothes, by taking certain actions. Consent is not given unless it is clear. In order to defeat rape culture, in a similar way to “Yes Means Yes”, female sexual agency must be restored and sex should not be the result of a grounding down of defences but of enthusiastic, willing participation. FACT 2: **CONSENT CAN BE WITHDRAWN**. Perhaps most relevant to the Assange accusations, it is possible for consent to be removed at any time. Since we have started from a position of enthusiastic consent, it is a fact that consent was given beforehand. However, for any reason a person can have a change of heart. They do not need a ‘good reason’, to prove their thought process, or to justify themselves. When consent is withdrawn, sexual contact must cease immediately. This is where it’s very important. Continuing when consent has been withdrawn, either because the withdrawal isn’t believed or it is assumed consent can be regained. From that point it becomes rape. There is no mitigation of that fact. When consent is no longer given, it is rape. Therefore, withdrawal of consent should be taken absolutely seriously. FACT 3: **CONSENT CANNOT ALWAYS BE GIVEN**. An intoxicated person can act like they consent to sex, they may even verbally express this intention. However, due to their inability to make decisions with full control of their mental faculties, they cannot give INFORMED CONSENT. This is also the reason why sex with people under the age of consent is illegal. Though it could be said that some individuals are capable of making decisions before this time, it provides a rough guide to protect those who cannot. The same goes, of course, for people with mental disabilities that prevent informed decision-making. As was made clear in the opening quote, it should be up to the initiator of sexual contact to ensure all parties are ENTHUSIASTIC on a CONTINUOUS BASIS and are ABLE TO MAKE THAT CHOICE. Consent really isn’t much more complicated than that. Click for more Lighthouse Feminism. NEW! Join The Lighthouse on Facebook and Twitter.
Pop-upView Separately

*Trigger warning for discussion of circumstances of rape**

The enthusiastic consent model makes the person who initiates physical contact responsible, regardless of gender, for fighting against the culture of victim blaming. Under this model, the person initiating contact is required to take account of and not exploit a relationship, the other person’s intoxicated state, or the power of peer pressure or social conditioning. No matter what the type of contact, the initiating party must get genuine consent.

This article talks about Enthusiastic Consent as a way of fighting rape culture in similar fashion to Jaclyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti’s “Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape”. The idea behind enthusiastic consent is that it is not just giving in, it is not just consent for the sake of pleasing others. It is an active expression of intention to engage in sexual activity that is totally unambiguous.

FACT 1: **THE OPPOSITE OF NO IS ENTHUSIASTIC YES**. It is estimated that 1 in 3 women have given consent to sex that they didn’t want. Why would this be? Researchers from the University of Buffalo asked women their reasons, which included feeling obliged to satisfy their partner, having already given implicit consent by physical contact, or actually being pressured into it.

There is no such thing as implicit consent by being in a certain place, by wearing certain clothes, by taking certain actions. Consent is not given unless it is clear.

In order to defeat rape culture, in a similar way to “Yes Means Yes”, female sexual agency must be restored and sex should not be the result of a grounding down of defences but of enthusiastic, willing participation.

FACT 2: **CONSENT CAN BE WITHDRAWN**. Perhaps most relevant to the Assange accusations, it is possible for consent to be removed at any time. Since we have started from a position of enthusiastic consent, it is a fact that consent was given beforehand. However, for any reason a person can have a change of heart. They do not need a ‘good reason’, to prove their thought process, or to justify themselves. When consent is withdrawn, sexual contact must cease immediately.

This is where it’s very important. Continuing when consent has been withdrawn, either because the withdrawal isn’t believed or it is assumed consent can be regained. From that point it becomes rape. There is no mitigation of that fact. When consent is no longer given, it is rape. Therefore, withdrawal of consent should be taken absolutely seriously.

FACT 3: **CONSENT CANNOT ALWAYS BE GIVEN**. An intoxicated person can act like they consent to sex, they may even verbally express this intention. However, due to their inability to make decisions with full control of their mental faculties, they cannot give INFORMED CONSENT. This is also the reason why sex with people under the age of consent is illegal. Though it could be said that some individuals are capable of making decisions before this time, it provides a rough guide to protect those who cannot. The same goes, of course, for people with mental disabilities that prevent informed decision-making.

As was made clear in the opening quote, it should be up to the initiator of sexual contact to ensure all parties are ENTHUSIASTIC on a CONTINUOUS BASIS and are ABLE TO MAKE THAT CHOICE.

Consent really isn’t much more complicated than that.

Click for more Lighthouse Feminism.

NEW! Join The Lighthouse on Facebook and Twitter.

I am livid.

Submitted by rhymeswrachel:

Abso-fucking-lutely livid. Today in the common room of my dorm some people were talking about when NFL player Ben Roethlisberger was accused of sexually assaulting a girl in Georgia.  They said that she knew what she was getting into, going into a night club bathroom with him so it’s not really assault. Of course I immediately interjected. In no way does going into a bathroom constitute consent. You can never blame the victim! But just like last time I spoke up for something, no one supported me. I was shocked as everyone muttered in agreement that she was asking for it. I honestly thought that is was a given that you never blame the victim. Again it comes down to the fact that either no one there understands that, or that they just don’t have the nerve to stick up for it.  But they have too. If you don’t speak out for what you believe in, you can sure as hell bet no one else will. I am appalled.

Unfortunately, it is not a given that the victim will never be blamed. It’s not surprising either. What education do young people get on the politics of consent? The best I was taught is that contraception is good for preventing STIs and STDs, and that abortion exists but is usually morally wrong.

Sex education never told me about consent or abortion rights.

I could easily fall into the same victim-blaming attitudes.

Look at the way consent is treated in popular culture. “put your hands up, take it to the floor, you already give me the green light baby,” says Roll Deep, “put your glass up, pour a little more, you already give me the green light”. Now this obviously isn’t talking about sex consent, but the principle is the same: you have already given permission to make a move. “The green lights on it aint gonna turn back”, a band members adds.

The victim blaming stems from this attitude. If you didn’t want anything to happen, you shouldn’t have given him the green light to begin with. You should have been outwardly uninterested, otherwise of course he would assume you were keen.

NO.

Consent is not assumed, consent is not permanent. More importantly, assault is never welcomed. The absolute second she didn’t want to go further, he should have acted with respect. Loss of consent is an extremely serious occurrence, it isn’t a challenge. You shouldn’t continue in the hope the person will change their mind. Consent is transient.

If it isn’t explicit, it isn’t consent.

These are the lessons we were never taught. Few people I know would be on the side of the victim, because it is seen to be her that attracted a ‘bad guy’. When pop act La Roux victim-blamed, she said “I think you attract a certain kind of man by dressing like that. Women wonder why they get beaten up, or having relationships with arsehole men. Because you attracted one, you twat.”

This is the attitude that ‘arsehole men’ are a fact of life, and if you dress provocatively or give the green light, it is YOUR fault if you are assaulted. After all, the arsehole man has no control over himself, it’s not his fault he has no respect for a woman’s consent or boundaries. And, in any case, entering the bathroom with him is absolutely the same as explicit consent(!)

This is a shocking but by no means atypical case. I appreciate you bringing it to my attention.

KEEP DEFENDING THE VICTIM. When people don’t agree with you, educate them on how easily consent can be lost, and that the opposite to no consent is enthusiastic consent.

CONSENT. CANNOT. BE. ASSUMED.

(See also: A related reblog from Genderbitch)

vegetable replied:

This pisses me off because I live in Pittsburgh and actually went to the first game that he was able to play in after that incident. Everyone cheered for him when he came on the field and I was just really offended