#damn this post is actually an essay atp

[shirkers2018dirsanditan]

in a spiral of looking up statistics and analysis of men's experiences of ipv and sexual violence and it is legitimately amazing the sheer amount of impact that the pair of studies that found female perpetration was more common back in like 2016 (the first was talked about in hannah rosin's slate piece "when men are raped" and then both were talked about in 'how often do women rape men?' in the atlantic). and i think that this is pretty par for the course, but it cannot be removed from what we also know about the media’s tendency to sensationalize female perpetrators of violence and greater media bias regarding women as perpetrators of violence, in which female perpetrators are given an outsized focus compared to male perpetrators. also in which the femaleness of a perpetrator of violence is treated as notable, while the sex of male perpetrators is treated as incidental.

but beyond that, the narrative here does represent one in which many people are seeking out information in search of a problem. these came out right before #MeToo, but in the midst of the 2016 presidential election in which sexual violence against women became a flashpoint after the release of the access hollywood tape and the general knowledge of donald trump's several accusations of sexual assault or impropriety (as well as hillary clinton's husband, former president bill clinton's own accusations of sexual violence and impropriety against him, which were weaponized by donald trump in at least one debate explicity, where he brought some of clinton's 'alleged' victims and had them sit in the front row). and since the decline of 2010s consent feminism and its focus on rape culture (which imo peaked in the mainstream with the obama presidency initiative "it's on us," somewhat ironically helmed by joe biden, to address on campus sexual assault, there has been a pivot in discourse on sexual violence, with an explicit and repeated desire to abandon the gendered framework in which we understand sexual and domestic violence.

some of this is good. i think it is worthwhile to talk about men's experienced of sexual and domestic violence, as well as the intersections between homophobia, biphobia, and sexual and domestic violence. this impulse, for example, has produced greater scrutiny on sexual assault of men in the military, as well as a more nuanced understanding of how men and boys are victimized in armed conflict. but even as reports on studies that find a greater prevalence of female perpetration of sexual (and domestic) violence acknowledge that such results rely on redefining and vastly broadening the definition of sexual assault, in particular, they do not consider the implications of this on how we understand women's victimization. if "nagging or begging" someone into having sex with you can constitute sexual assault - as it does in one particular study cited in semple's work - then women's experience of sexual assault is like even more vastly underreported than we understand it to be currently. but regarding this specifically, it is strange to see this posited as a uniquely male experience of sexual violence and a uniquely female form of perpetration when such cultural concepts such as "blue balls" and the "tease" exist. also in the light of the increased prevalence of the idea of heterosexual dating as inherently transactional - that women who allow men to pay for a date then owe them sex or sexual favors in kind. there is also the popular discourse on male loneliness, adult virginity, and sexual inactivity, which portray men not having sex as a societal crisis stemming, in part, from women's refusal to have sex with them, or from women's own sexual and romantic preferences. then there is also the fact that rape within a relationship, overwhelmingly male on female, is rarely prosecuted, and the history of marital rape, which was only recently regarded as a crime in most countries. there are still many in which is still not considered as such.

this post is already way longer than i intended but the ironic thing about this discourse and this academic impulse, which in many ways has come to dominate popular research on sexual and domestic violence, is that the vast majority of data we do have suggests that de-gendering our understanding of sexual and domestic violence is of little use to male victims anyway. for one, though popular discourse suggests that it is some nebulous feminist bias that prevents men from seeing themselves as and reporting themselves as victims of sexual violence, most significant studies on male victims of violence illustrate that men's own attitudes about masculinity and about male victimhood are the largest predictors of their likelihood to see themselves as victims. one study found that men with lower levels of empathy for male victims of sexual violence are less likely to come forward about their own experiences of sexual violence (don't have the link on hand, i'll add it later). study after study also shows that men are far more likely than women to disbelieve male victims, even those that claim feminists are biased against men (though we may question why crisis centers run by women for women are accosted over wanting to prioritize their very limited resources for female victims, and also why the understanding of rape as a tool of male domination is treated as a bias against men rather than a political analysis of violence - which it is). homophobic men are also likely to believe gay men are not as affected by sexual assault as straight men.

lastly, even efforts to redefine sexual assault to include more male victims can fail to gain traction specifically among these men - namely, the idea of "made to penetrate" sexual assault (or MTP) (i think this is included in the slate piece by hannah rosin; i can't remember where i saw it). personally, i think this issue here may be that such terminology is just....not relevant to majority of self-identified male victims of sexual violence, and that many men who may have experienced MTP assault simply do not consider themselves victims of sexual violence. in the studies we do have about sexual violence experienced by men, the overwhelming majority of men report forced penetration or forced touching, or having oral sex forcibly performed on them (see also the intercept piece of sexual assault in the military). expanded understanding of sexual violence against men that has seen traction is the inclusion of being made to rape others - usually during armed conflict - as a form of sexual violence against men and boys (see above link about armed conflict and sexual violence). like, this is definitely a complicated issue, but approaching men’s sexual victimization with the purpose of rejecting feminist theories of violence, of gender neutralizing sexual and domestic violence, and of trying to prove “women are just as bad as men,” is not going to benefit men or women because violence against men occurs in the same larger social context as violence against women - it largely exists as a form of domination, humiliation, and a representation of male sexual entitlement. men make up the vast majority of people who empathize with perpetrators over victims, who don’t believe victims, or believe victims have invited sexual violence - whether the victims are male or female. because men’s attitudes about sexual violence, including against men, have been developed in a society in which sexual violence is cornerstone of patriarchal political violence, as well as homophobic and racial violence. you can’t focus on trying to fit a round peg into a square hole because it’s trendy of convenient. and if you are going to meaningfully challenge feminist theories of violence, you are going to actually have to do that. you can’t just keep pretending the existence of feminist hegemony

[sortagaysortahigh]

Lex, I have a question: what’re your full thoughts on Rudy’s gf? My sister and I were trying to have a convo about this... yesterday, I believe? And I felt like we were beating around the bush about everything in general.

Sorry, I just need an educated opinion on this.😅

Hi bby! Honestly speaking I don’t care for the girl, not even off any “im jealous bc i STAN RUDY” shit bc i truly dont care for him-much like i dont care for the rest of the cast bc i dont rlly like to idolize celebrities, esp when you hardly know anything sbout them. But i do think the company you keep says a lot about you and in terms of rudy that speaks for itself.

When it comes to her Im just like, youve had multiple problems in the past-on different occassions-where you were racist, prejudice, ignorant, and a cultural appropriator. Like this wasn’t a one time thing and atp thats well known in the fandom-people have seen he rhalf asses instagram story apologies for her past actions and shit but in my personal opinion it was very obvious-much like it is when anhone w an ounce of clout’s past comes up that if the shit wasn’t brought up then she would’ve never cared enough to clarify things in the manner that she did and she wouldn’t have spent any time or paid the problems with her ignorant mindset (past or present) any mind.

I feel like people only shit on the girl because they stan rudy and want him to rail them or some shit-they dont actually give a fuck about her or her past and the bullshit that she’s done. It’s the whole preformative activist mindset-people only care when theres either an opportunity for clout or when they already have attention and want to keep it. Because those same people who are just now acknowledging the shit shes done and labeling it as a problem still stan other people who’ve done the same, if not worse shit. Like people ar elike “i fucking hate elaine because she’s dating rudy and wearing his clothes and shes a pick me and she just always posts him yadda yadda” and im like so lmao no one cares ab the whole racism and cultural appropriation thing???? No one?? Knock knock bitch yall have been saying how pro blm you are but dont care when the white boy of the month’s gf still has a fuck ton of “growing” to do.

Which ofc brings me to the next thing, i feel like yes everyone does have room to learn and grow-but using the growth mindset as a way to excuse someones ignorant past-esp when they were already adults-it’s kinda like...what the fuck? Using the excuse of “they were young!” Is such bullshit to me bc as someone who grew up around racism within my own family and outside of it I know damn well the N word and negative racial stereotypes isn’t just some akikiki haha funny moment. Nor is blatant cultural appropriation with some lame ass excuse of “its an xyz costume”-and im sorry but in my opinion if you can legally drive in America then you can open up google and do ten minutes worth of research to understand why certain shit isnt acceptable. I think people do deserve second chances, however at some point the whole “growth mindset” shit is repetitive, superficial, and overall bullshit. Its like the people who fucking stan jeffree star in 2020...like this man is a raging racist and has made like two shitty apology videos and yall just accepted them.

I feel like this is an essay omg but that transitions into my final point. People need to understand that they cannot accept apologies that are not for them. Stop brushing shit under the rug just because someone apologized-a half assed instagram story with some bullshit explanation proves nothing. Literally nothing. I truly don’t care about her because honestly theres nothing redeemable about her character to me which is probably bc shes not really in the public eye like her boyfriend or other actors, sure she might have good traits or whatever but tbat shit isnt rlly showing. Plus the fact that there are screenshots of her being rude snd bitching at fans on instagram-mind you i dont know the context of said screenshots entirely but its like as a 20-sum year old woman you know damn well there are certain ways to go about things, and cussing ppl out-esp younger fans isnt helping your case.