Many women who are meet Polanskis on their roads are often too afraid to punch the agressor in the face or better, kick his balls in a very nasty way.

WOMEN SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT

The “Hollywood clique” recognizes rape as rape ONLY if women are ready to risk everything, even death, to avoid being raped.

In all other circumstances, this is not a “rape-rape”. Just spicy sex.

These people have shown how much they respect freedom.

Another good reason to despise the Hollywood clique.

And a good reason to send girls to kickboxing or karate schools.

You are NOT entitled to lash out at people who hurt you with their ignorance, and you are NOT entitled to making a learning space hostile because someone said something offensive. Two offensive statements do not cancel each other out.

“Not to be militant, but how is that my fucking problem?”

Julie is going to keep on keeping on, and so is Fat Steve. It’s your problem because you get offended by it.

Being patronizing does absolutely nothing except increase hatred and disparity between the two groups concerned

Not to be militant, but how is that my fucking problem? I like the idea of social change, I really do, but I’m not going to sit and take abuse. I’m not going to have my life experience treated as an analogy for supporting child rape, or as a synonym for “anything I object to.” More importantly, when I encounter people who are so careless with my basic humanity, I’m not always going to have it in me to don the kid gloves and say to myself “well, maybe I can convince them they’ve been hurtful.” When I have it in me to do that, then I will, but if not I will not be quiet. I will not be silent. I will demand recognition of my experience and I will express my offense. If someone doesn’t like they way I did that, then I refuse to somehow feel guilty because they didn’t like the way in which they were corrected.

If you don’t want to help change social norms constructively, then get the hell out of my way.

I’m not just a little engine of social change but a human being. I do want to change norms constructively, but I’m also a human being with a limited amount of patience and energy. Sometimes I get angry, sometimes I’m just sick of having to explain something basic for the hundredth time. Sometimes I’m not in the mood to listen to the endless string of privileged “buts” and correct them point by point. When those times kick in, I seek to silence those who are being ignorant because then at least I don’t have to hear them. I’m not going to apologize for defending myself nor will I be shamed or scolded for doing so.

It’s also not your responsibility to be a jerk to people you know don’t know better either.

Nah, thats a service I offer for free when people are hateful and I’m tired.

That’s not to say don’t take a stand: do it, we (read: all of humanity but especially all marginalized people) need it. But don’t set me (or anyone else) back.

I have to say, the implication there makes me a little ill. Are you really suggesting that the only acceptable options for an oppressed person faced with hate and anger are to take the high road and try to educate their oppressors or to just shut the fuck up and take it so they don’t reduce the chance of someone in the future managing to educate the oppressor? Are you really saying that expressing anger, that being forward and aggressive rather than coddling is unacceptable? Are you really saying that if an oppressor says something patronizing and compounds their previous ignorance that we ought to take the path of “if you can’t say something nice don’t say anything at all?”

I remember from all those times in history when the oppressors suddenly realized what they were doing was wrong and stopped it and that’s how most of the world stopped picking on the Jews and schools got integrated and so on. That’s why this site is mostly run by men who acknowledge the impact of sexism, because these men, like many before it, realized the onus was on them to change a wrong.

Being patronizing does absolutely nothing except increase hatred and disparity between the two groups concerned. If you don’t want to help change social norms constructively, then get the hell out of my way.

It’s also not your responsibility to be a jerk to people you know don’t know better either. At least the education route has a positive goal.

Your life is hard; it happens. My niece has Down’s and I twitch everytime someone says “retard.” I had a LENGTHY discussion with my shrink today about what I am petrified are hallucinations. But I also know where I’ve been, where I am, and where I’d like to be. If life hadn’t helped get me here, I could easily be one of those people saying one of those things, completely unaware that words aren’t always just words.

That’s not to say don’t take a stand: do it, we (read: all of humanity but especially all marginalized people) need it. But don’t set me (or anyone else) back.

Is there a way to correct without being patronizing?

Probably, but given the proximity to Julie’s comment (who proved she knew better and went ahead and called someone a retard anyway), I really couldn’t be bothered.

Life is a learning process. Traversing the minefields of colloquialized language isn’t easy. That’s not to say we shouldn’t correct people who make these errors, but there has to be a better way of doing it than saying, “How…cute.”

You’re right, I’m sure there is a better way. The thing is, as both a clinician and as a mad person, I pick my battles. Sometimes I am gentle and try very hard to make sure I educate, others I could give a shit and just want someone to stop being an asshole. This thread was one of the later. It isn’t the responsibility of oppressed people to look out for the fee fees of oppressors. Sure, its nice when we have the energy, but I’m not going to be lectured to for being too exhausted to go through yet another round of ableism 101. Thats doubly true when we’re not talking about disability but when people are tossing the language of disability around disparagingly to criticize child rape advocates.

I’m fairly confident that Julie and Fat Steve made mistakes and not intentional judgments against the peoples concerned in their comments.

I heard a 20-something hipster on the train a few days ago drop the N-word to one of his friends on the phone. He did it as a greeting and it was clear that he was being ironic and colloquial. I think it would have been difficult to have inferred any intentional malice or ill-intent from his use of the word. At the same time, he deserved the “you better watch your goddamn mouth” response he got from someone who had a very different response to hearing that word come out of a white man’s mouth in any context. Why? Because the intention of a privileged group doesn’t matter. This isn’t about them.

Help them learn.

Not my responsibility. When I have the energy, fine, I’ll take it on. I do not, however, have any obligation to help anyone learn anything. That is doubly true when we’re talking about oppressors and the oppressed. The onus is not on the oppressed person to educate the oppressor. The onus is on the oppressor to not oppress.

Given the DSM-IV reference, I’m sure you’re familiar with the studies regarding how difficult it is for learning to take place in environments with aversive stimuli.

This might come as something of a surprise, but not all of us mad folk are desperate for acceptance and a fuzzy round of kumbaya around the campfire. Some of us just don’t want to continue to hear words like “retard” and “insane” tossed around. Some of us aren’t too particular about how those words are excised from the common parlance. Some of us have better things to do than to explain the obvious for the hundredth time. Yeah, I mentioned the DSM (which is something of a problem in itself), but that doesn’t mean I’m here to serve as educator to every lazy, privileged, obnoxious person with an opinion and working vocal chords who can’t quite work out that if saying “retard” is bad then maybe saying “insane” (when you clearly don’t know what the word means) is also bad.

Cut and dry. “It’s not the legal definition either. What you’re referencing is this which doesn’t apply to Woody Allen. Use of ‘insane’ is offensive to individuals with psychotic disorders who are not rapists or rape-enthusiasts.”

I’m fairly confident that Julie and Fat Steve made mistakes and not intentional judgments against the peoples concerned in their comments. Help them learn. Given the DSM-IV reference, I’m sure you’re familiar with the studies regarding how difficult it is for learning to take place in environments with aversive stimuli. Save the maligning for individuals who make these mistakes and demonstrate that they don’t care.

I’m not a lawyer, so correct me if I’m wrong, but I understand that not knowing ‘the difference between right and wrong’ makes one, at least legally, insane.

How…cute. Aside from the fact that its pretty clear you’re neither a lawyer (who, for the record, understand madness only so far as it determines in which cage they should place a given individual) nor a clinician, I find it interesting that so soon after an objection over the word “retard” being used as an insult you not only toss out “insane” but attempt a feeble and fumbling defense of yourself. You decided to draw a line between madness and moral deficit. Most persons judged to be mad are not rapists.

But, since you asked, I’ll correct you. The concept of legal competence (fuzzy though it may be) which you’re crudely referencing isn’t generally the standard used to determine “sanity” (itself a shaky construct primarily aimed at maintaining power over those judged to be mad) in most cases. Even if it was, someone like Woody Allen wouldn’t fit the bill for defending Polanski.