more cynical politicking from the obama administration....
expect a lot of empty statements and stale rhetoric - with absolutely no meaningful action.
i hope he proves me wrong, though.
in fact, i dare him to.
convince me there's something to this...
yeah. i just took a look at the report and it's focusing on four things.
1) ending "extreme behaviour". i'm going to sidestep the debate: abstinence-based approaches are usually unsuccessful. but there's an analog to "safe(r) sex" that should be pushed hard through public education. it has to be stated though that this is kind of making the error of connecting rape to drinking, which is a false one. and, despite the rhetoric, it's dangerously close to the right-wing perspective. kids are going to get drunk, but, before they do, they should know things they need to do to be safe when they're drunk.
2) bystander prevention. this is messy. the supreme court has continually rejected this kind of thinking. when it's possible, sure, but it's going to be difficult to shift the legal system to assign that kind of responsibility to people - because it's been explicitly rejected. repeatedly. it's also ignoring the facts, which are that rapes usually happen in situations of trust without bystanders. this is really just rhetoric.
3) the psas. these strike me as useless for any purpose other than party messaging.
4) increased funding for crisis centres - which is needed, and probably the most substantial part of this. but it doesn't address the problem or take steps to prevent it.
i don't really know what the white house can do, besides aggressively push the "safe drinking" perspective and try to foster a level of peer pressure coercion against rape. i could argue it's not a total solution, but who would ever think that it is? there's such a complex interplay between defining culture from the top down and erecting it from the bottom up that it's hard to predict how successful it could or might be.
i'm skeptical. but i think it has to be stated that it has to be tried to determine if it's mostly successful and requires minor adjustments (which will become more clear if it is mostly successful), partially successful and require major adjustments or not successful at all. but i'm leaning towards the middle option as a best case.
we'll have to see how the money gets spent when it's in the hands of university administrators. that's probably going to be a defining point. so, if you're in a university, here's your chance to get involved and make sure they don't fuck it up....
the culture of male dominance is something that starts in the home, when boys are very young. often, mothers do as much to foster it as fathers do. every aspect of our culture enforces, upholds and shapes it. you get all this warped thinking about entitlement and ownership in men, and equally warped thinking about submission to dominance in women. that's really at the root of the problem. these are all band-aid solutions rooted in a confused understanding of the issue, and a bit of warped logic regarding what drives people...
i should note the "extreme behaviour" part wasn't in the report, but was an approach suggested by a third party. i initially misread that.
V Whitaker
Exactly!
(deleted response)
deathtokoalas
i don't delete all of the comments that disagree with me, and the ones i do delete are not deleted due to disagreement. i merely expect a respectful level of discourse, and a moderate level of understanding of the topic at hand. note that a lot of the missing comments in threads i'm involved with are actually removed due to account deletion, as when a participant shuts down their account, their responses disappear. of the posts i have deleted, they fit one or more of the following characteristics:
1) a personal insult. even if you provide a long argument, an insult will get you blocked. i have a zero tolerance policy. if you will not conform to that, i am not interested in debating with you.
2) oppressive bullshit. again, i don't care about the rest of the argument. if there's racist, sexist, homophobic bullshit in there, it's gone. i won't tolerate this.
3) stupidity. it happens a lot, actually. i don't suffer idiots well, i'm sorry, and i don't feel obligated to reply to or engage with everybody that decides to reply to one of my comments. i've blocked people that agree with me because they're using bad technique. that just comes down to a personal choice to avoid certain people.
i'm not a politician, i'm a reclusive artist. i hate almost everybody. i have no prerogative towards or interest in building coalitions of people. it's really of no concern to me if you're blocked or not.
but if you don't want me to block you, simply don't insult me or reply to my posts with oppressive bullshit.....and try not to sound like you flunked out of grade school.
