unreal

[boogieshoes]

ok, i have ginmar on my friend's list, and usually, when i read her, i'm a feminist. she makes a lot of good points about society, and she clarifies a lot of my own thinking. BUT. she crossed the line, here. and this post is why, if anything does, i might dropkick her off my flist.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/ginmar/513870.html

the guy referred to here is lj user = mzmadmike, who has posted in *his* journal about this stuff.

this is my reply to gin's post:

> all right. i usually don't comment on anyone's
> journal, cause, well - mostly cause i hate lj in
> general. but i have to say this. ginmar, you're being
> a twit. *you* are the one who told *him* he was lying
> about his rape. *you* are the one who told *him* his
> rape didn't matter. *you* are the one who told *him*,
> without knowing thing one about him, that he couldn't
> possibly understand anything about rape and the
> experiences victims have.
>
> i read all his posts. he did not blame victims. i read
> your posts in reply - and *you* blamed *him* for
> enabling rapists.
>
> and the end result is *you* are the one enforcing the
> code of silence that hurts *all* rape victims. not
> just female vics, not just kids. *ALL VICTIMS*.
>
> the last sexual abuse stats i heard wrt kids was 1 in
> 3 girls, 1 in 5 guys, by the time they were 18. does
> *20%* of the male population sound like it's *rare*
> for men to be victims of sexual abuse?
>
> let's multiply this out. the last census i heard had
> us at 270 million people. divide by half, for men only
> = 135 million. multiply by .20 for percentage of abuse
> vics by the time they're 18 = *27 million* male
> victims. let's go further. 135 * .33 = 45 million
> female vics. so... what's the percentage of total
> victims of sexual abuse who are male? (27/(45+27))*100
> = *37.5%*.
>
> i understand you're pissed and outraged at a society
> that encourages rape, and discourages reporting. i
> understand that you hate being treated like a second
> class citizen. BUT. you are *not* helping your cause.
> what you *are* doing, is coming off like a complete,
> cold-ass bitch with the world's biggest chip on her
> shoulder. stop REACTING, and *START THINKING*.
>
> because when *you*, GINMAR, actually take the time out
> to *THINK* instead of *REACT*, you, GINMAR, are
> actually pretty damn smart and make pretty damn good
> points. but you're shooting yourself in the gut, here
> and now, and it's time for you to sit up and take
> notice.
>
> ::irritated and disgusted::
> -boogieshoes


now, mmike is a good friend of mine, but even if he weren't, i'd feel completely justified coming down like a ton of bricks on ginmar. her attitudes are hurting *all rape victims*, *all* victims of sexual abuse, by encouraging a code of silence on just one sector. who was it who said 'if even one man is oppressed, none of us is free'?

wanting to stop and reduce rapes is a laudable goal, and one i share. but without fact-based discussion, we won't get anywhere.

my friend buddykat pointed out that ginmar seems to think rape is about sex, instead of power. it's exactly that sort of misunderstanding of motivations that encourage our society to protect rapists and accuse and ridicule victims to the point of silence. oddly enough, i had a conversation roughly a year or more ago with John Ringo where he said the same thing, that rape was about sex, not power. John's a great story-teller, but one of the more conservative male republicans i've met in my day. makes me wonder - just who is enabling who, here?

-bs

Comments

One of the reasons I stopped reading Ginmar

[chuckles48.livejournal.com]

Is that, despite the fact that she does write well and eloquently, she operates under the principle of "don't bother me with facts, I've made up my mind". I've had run-ins with her before over, ultimately, those particular issues.

PS - Note that she deleted your response. How very ginmar.

Re: One of the reasons I stopped reading Ginmar

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

yeah... i'm not surprised. i'm dropping her from my flist. it's rediculous. i'm saddened by it, but i don't regret the decision.

Re: One of the reasons I stopped reading Ginmar

[chuckles48.livejournal.com]

You're right, she didn't delete it. So I went and read the followups. Miss "don't bother me with facts" seems to be operating true to form - "If you don't agree with me, you're a simplistic a**hole who doesn't understand complex issues."

I'd be ROFL right now, if it weren't for the rather pathetic problem that there seem to be a lot of people who take what she says as gospel.

BTW - remember her sojurn on the bar? She left. Her reasons, as I recall, boiled down to (a) "you're all mean!" (she was playing in Politics, aka the full-contact section), and (b) "you're all conservative f*ckhats who won't agree with me and keep citing these 'fact' thingies."

[luke-jaywalker.livejournal.com]

Never was on my friends list or anything - hell, I never understood why she's so popular in the first place, there's a million bloggers with more insight - but she sure as hell won't be now.

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

well, with the 'flies, she was popular for a while because here was a strong, woman hero, anti-ing up and kickin' in in iraq. she wasn't whining or complaining about her lot in life at that point, she was just doing what she had to do, and was proud of it. and, frankly, we *all* needed someone to point to like that, who's a hero on the ground because s/he isn't complaining about a hard, bloody, dirty, nasty job. plus, she is a very good writer. that's always a plus :).

but this is just... insane. completely and utterly so. she called me a troll and a dipshit who just didn't get it today. prolly because i used *gasp* numbers on her... or maybe just because i called her a twit.

-bs

[ginmar.livejournal.com]

No, dipshit, I called you a dipshit because anybody who thinks it's okay for a man to call rape victims whiners and frothing man haters deserves nothing better. My, my, my, how did you ever forget that part?

Mikey boy revealed his true colors. So did you. Ta ta. You're no loss.

[chuckles48.livejournal.com]

Never mind that one of your own crowd pointed out where your read was wrong, and you utterly ignored it. BTW, nice to see that you're still as tolerant of dissent as you used to be.

[ginmar.livejournal.com]

Oh, sweetie, he's one of your dear Mikey's friends. Anybody who's a friend of the Swift Boat Veterans for Lies is not a frined of mine.

I don't have a problem with dissent. I have a problem with assholes. Learn the difference---but you won't if you hang around this bunch here.

friend vs. crowd

[atomicsappertom.livejournal.com]

Well, this is fun.

First time reading this LJ and whaddayaknow, I'm being talked about.

I would hesitate to call myself a member of Ginmar's "crowd" although we're on each other's F-list. Since she's personally disavowed me (see above) I will say that I've been a regular reader/commenter there since she was in Iraq and someone at Baen's Bar referenced her LJ.

I'm not upset at the disavowal, I'm not part of the echo-chamber portion of her LJ commenteriat. We disagree, often, about politics and ideology. Usually I have the good sense to stay out of some of the more feminist-charged threads.

As for being one of "your dear Mikey's friends," well, while I've got nothing personally against the guy, we've never even met, although we have had a few online exchanges in LJ and at Baen's Bar. I've purchased and read exactly one of his books: Freehold.

What that has to do with the Swift Vets I don't really know.

But since they were brought up, why is it that the word of _one_ vet, the former Dem presidential candidate, outweighs that of so many officers and enlisted men with whom he served? What's the beef _against_ the Swift Vets?

I'm none too crazy with how the two campaigns (invasion campaign and occupation/reconstruction campaign) in Iraq have been planned, resourced, and executed. So if there had been a Dem presidential candidate who intended to _right_ those wrongs, rather than simply withdraw/surrender, he/she could have had my vote. But what really sealed it for me was when I saw Kerry standing in front of that large screen backdrop of his Vietnam war movies.

War movies. I read somewhere (anyone know where?) that Kerry would take his Swiftboat crew back out the scenes of their firefights and film re-enactments of the action. Does anyone know if that's true?

For me, that behavior linked him in my mind with a certain THT team-leader who would take his entire team convoy off to places not having anything to do with missions and take pictures. Just happy snaps. Him at war, out in the field. He was working on his book at the time also, so far not published, I think. His team members told me how much they hated it, and him.

So seeing that Vietnam-era footage being used to paint that ex-Navy lieutenant as a war hero . . . was a bit too much for me.

Re: friend vs. crowd

[ginmar.livejournal.com]

Did you read anything about the credibilty of the Swift Boat Veterans or do you just just go for numbers? If a guy gets enough liars to lie for him, they're still liars, whereas one man who speaks the truth....

And if you thnk that's 'personally disavowing' you because I demand you not accept and defend sexist bullshit, well....I guess that speaks volumes. I made it really clear Mikey's bullshit is not tolerated. You want to tolerate it and excuse it. Then again, you don't have to live with it. Priorities, huh?

Re: friend vs. crowd

[atomicsappertom.livejournal.com]

Your words: "Oh, sweetie, he's one of your dear Mikey's friends. Anybody who's a friend of the Swift Boat Veterans for Lies is not a frined of mine."

I'm still not sure why you mentioned the Swift Boat Vets in the first place, at least in having any connection with me. They were a bit before my time.

We've been around and round on this and I still think you're putting words in MzMadMike's mouth and misinterpreting/spinning what he actually said/wrote. Re-read the posts; a difference of opinion is one thing, but mis-recollecting and mis-restating observable truths from your own LJ is frankly mystifying to me, especially after I've called your attention to the actual comments themselves.

This is what I told MzMadMike on Oct. 1 about his "whiner" remark: "I still don't think it was very nice of you to call the commenters at her LJ 'whiners' "

Priorities? Yessssss, everyone has them. Everyone performs their own daily personal triage or they go mad. Worrying about everyone's sexual politics is pretty far down my personal list of things to do.

Re: friend vs. crowd

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

i feel i should insert a warning here, lest you - or anyone else - thinks they are winning any points when i don't reply to every post on my lj:

silence to me does not mean assent. it usually means i'm giving you enough rope to hang yourself with. and ginmar, you're doing a pretty good job of swinging in the breeze, just now.

-bs

[mzmadmike.livejournal.com]

Well, gee, you not only can't read what I wrote, even when corrected by others (I'm told), but you feel free to kick people out of your yard and then come play in theirs. You're making all kinds of points in style, class and good taste. I'm still amazed you're an adult, because I've met teenagers in therapy with more manners, sophistication and maturity.

In fact, I'm amazed you've survived in the military. If you can call someone like me sexist, I wonder how you can even exist in the same world as many of the infantrymen I know, who seem to barely tolerate women as anything other than whores. Well done.

BTW:
The one that struck me as a whiner was the "because some men rape all men are guilty scumbags" twit. I never mentioned any victims. You are welcome to quote the part where I did. I even copied our discussion to my site. But of course, we both know facts are not your strong suit.

And not being a loss to you is a compliment. I thank you. I hope Boogie does, too. We are known not only by the company we keep, but by the company we avoid. Feel free to rant all you want.

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

i believe my final comment in her lj was that i thanked her clarifying that i'd probably never self-label as a feminist again, just so i wouldn't be associated with self-important twits like her.

i much prefer to be associated with people who utilize their *brains* as well as their emotions on a regular basis.

-bs

edited link

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

it should be noted that ginmar didn't, actually, delete my comment - that was my fault based on not quite the right link. hopefully, the one above should work fairly, now.

Re: edited link

[ginmar.livejournal.com]

I like how you left out dear MIkey's calling rape victims whiners and frothing man haters. But, hey, go ahead.

[thearmsman.livejournal.com]

I used to read her fairly regularly. Then, the tone and content started to change; I left.

At one point, she did have some really good items to consider.

[ginmar.livejournal.com]

my friend buddykat pointed out that ginmar seems to think rape is about sex, instead of power. it's exactly that sort of misunderstanding of motivations that encourage our society to protect rapists and accuse and ridicule victims to the point of silence. oddly enough, i had a conversation roughly a year or more ago with John Ringo where he said the same thing, that rape was about sex, not power. John's a great story-teller, but one of the more conservative male republicans i've met in my day. makes me wonder - just who is enabling who, here?

Your buddy can read my mind and tell me what I'm thinking? And I am to blame for the silencing of rape victims, not gits like you, who stand beside men who insult rape victims and call them names.

Yeah. That makes so much sense.

[mightyix.livejournal.com]

Rape is rape whether it's done to a man, woman, boy, girl, or goat. To minimize or ridicule that experience, is absurd and harmful.

I've read your livejournal on and off for a while and tried to have a reasonable discussion with you on other issues, and listen to your arguments (The Swift Boat Veterans For Truth) being one of them.

On this issue and on all the other ones in the past you argue from a position of absolute moral superiority, utilize straw man arguments and ad hominem attacks, dismiss facts, and deign to condescend to the disgusting level of listening to your opponent's arguments. You don't listen to what someone is trying to say and try and understand their point of view. Instead you look for things that don't seem to agree with you and go on the attack. You use your livejournal to cultivate people who agree with you, using them as an audience to "prove" your rightness.

You, essentially, have a religion about your point of views. Don't bother you with facts or other opinions, because you have an unwavering faith that you're right and they're not only not right, but damned wrong unbelievers.

You don't discuss, you don't have reasoned discourse, you have raging tirades, and it seems that some people are finding out the same thing I figured out a LONG time ago.

They figured out that you aren't worth listening to.

You normally wouldn't even be worth my time to respond to, but you have viciously denigrated and assaulted my friends with your responses for things that they did say that didn't agree with you.

I hope that your open-minded, accepting of opinion differences, compassionate world view brings you peace during both sleeping and waking hours. I know that mine does.

Nathan

sex v. power

[atomicsappertom.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that part about you thinking rape is about sex rather than power is way off. Quite the opposite, if anything.

I agree with you 100%!

[(Anonymous)]

I agree, as I said! Rape IS about power and humiliation! I don't blame you for coming down like a ton of Bricks. T_Stormcrowe

Re: I agree with you 100%!

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

:-) welcome! blog's really only a couple weeks old, but feel free to hang around. i'm still trolling for comments on my 'dreams' post... (hint, hint, *brick*)

-bs