TBT: Trolled


This was originally posted in 2009, when I first started talking about rape online despite having studied it in college, and when I first discovered what happens when you do talk about rape. The more things change, eh?

Gosh, apparently talking about rape is controversial, particularly when one doesn’t argue that only inhuman monsters rape. I haven’t been trolled this hard since talking about…huh, equal pay. Let me count the ways.

  • Apparently, I was both bragging and claiming victimhood.
  • Talking about a personal experience made the whole thread all about me, narcissist that I am.
  • I got diminutivized.
  • I was told what my point was.
  • I set out on a slippery slope.
  • Saying nasty things.
  • And ended up a anti-male bigot.
  • With no point.
  • And then the name-calling started.

Interestingly enough, our troll declined to interact with Greg in any way, except to say, “Oh, I’ll be busy for the next few days. By the way, we have something in common. Nice to meet you,” when Greg put up citations. Charming little transparent creep.

Comments

  1. BrainyOne says

    Right. Way to insulate yourself from any reasoned criticism of your positions, because obviously anyone who disagrees with you simply doesn’t want to talk about rape and doesn’t want anyone else talking about it either. I read the thread you linked to and a lot of unnecessary incendiary language was used in the OP and later on in some of the posts merely to make the point that rape is much more prevalent in wartime.

    Specifically, this paragraph is completely vacuous:

    Men, by and large, have a rape switch. All men are capable of rape. Most men are enculturated in a way that reduces rape, and in some societies it is probably true that most violent rape is carried out by individuals who are reasonably labeled as pathological. In other societies, this is not so true. In post war societies such as those described in some of these links, or any society in a state of war, rape becomes routine. The rape switch is flipped to the on position as a matter of course. Most men who were in combat in Viet Nam raped.

    and posters were right to call Greg Laden on it. He’s just playing word games and adding no explanatory information. Why is the incidence of rape much higher in some societies than others? Well, uh, because, you see, men’s “rape switch” is turned on. What’s their “rape switch”? That which makes them much more likely to rape. Just like the philosphers of old: what makes water water: its essence? What’s its essence? That which makes water water.

  2. geekgirlsrule says

    Having had many of these discussions in the past, it doesn’t matter how non-“incendiary” your language is, you get all the same hate, bile and bullshit. Even if all you do is post links to the DoJ stats. Trust me on this one. I’ve been putting up with the bullshit for years.

  3. geekgirlsrule says

    And no, a lot of people DON’T want to talk about rape. They want to pretend they know exactly what it is, and that everyone agrees equally that it’s bad and it’s a non-issues. Or they want to tell you how much women lie about it. Or they want to tell you that they knew a guy who… well actually, their college room-mate’s cousin’s Vet’s sister-in-law’s brother who was TOTALLY FALSELY ACCUSED AND IT RUINED HIS LIFE AND TOOK AWAY HIS BIRTHDAY AND PILLAGED THE LANDSCAPE!!!!!!

  4. says

    Oh, no, “BrainyOne”. Someone created and defined a term for ease of use in a larger discussion. That never happens.

    And even if that were some kind of extraordinary occurrence, which it isn’t, how the fuck does that make any of the things listed in this post even arguments?

  5. BrainyOne says

    Well yes, he definitely created the term, but never clearly defined it, at least not in a non-tautological manner which could actually add extra information. Tell me, what extra information does “there is more rape in wartime because men’s ‘rape switch’ is turned on” actually provide when the definition of “rape switch” is “that which makes men more likely to rape”. It’s none, and Greg is intelligent enough to know it’s none. So are you.

    Yet, for whatever reason, you defend this on that thread and wonder why you are held up to ridicule, and then blame everyone else for “not wanting to talk about rape”. That’s not to say I agree with all the psychoanalysis done by that poster. He could be right or he could be wrong, from where I’m sitting. I know neither you nor your motives. But, you know what, if you want to blame everyone else for not talking about rape then why don’t you do so yourself, rather than just playing word games.

  6. throwaway says

    I thought it was rather easy to substitute “rape-switch” for “a threshold whereupon reached would allow the person to feel justified in, or obligated to, raping, when the opportunity presented itself.” So yeah, thank you for the shorthand from those of us who don’t confuse pedantic define-every-word-for-me protests for intelligent rebuttals.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>