Random thoughts thread

[Statto]

For someone who should seemingly know better after so much experience in the field to trivialise the effectiveness this measure could have

That's the point really. It probably won't have any effectiveness and the focus of it is wrong in any case. From the first link:

There is a line between sensible precaution and allowing fear to control my life. It doesn’t feel safe or empowering to imagine a scenario where I’m getting flawless on Friday night and deciding “I better paint on an extra coat, bring it, ya bastards.” If even one woman evades sexual assault because she put on this nail polish, then I will give these dudes a virtual high five, and I certainly don’t blame any woman who uses it or otherwise goes to great lengths to protect herself from risk. But this product does nothing to dismantle a culture of violence against women that demands we constantly become ever more vigilant against those who would do us harm. Undercover Colors, like so many other products, treats rape as an individual incident rather than a systemic and pervasive problem. Despite the never ending stream of prevention products, the statistics haven’t improved.

Instead, the products perpetuate victim blaming by making it easier for others to turn to the victims of assault and ask “Well [product] exists; why didn’t you use it to prevent this from happening?” On their Facebook page, the creators say they “hope to make potential perpetrators afraid to spike a woman’s drink because there’s now a risk that they can get caught.” What about making potential perpetrators afraid to rape a woman because when she tells someone about it, they’ll believe her and seek justice? What about creating cultural shifts so that people don’t become violent assailants at all? Date rape drugs are just a tool, and if would-be rapists find it to be a less effective one, they’ll find another. The issue isn’t date rape drugs; the issue is rape culture.

That's a reasoned response for wider circulation. Stavvers' post is just a "ffs" on her own blog.

You contradicted yourself when partnering the development with the fact these four men have used the platform of awareness to talk about campaigns like "Men Can Stop Rape".

It wasn't a contradiction because the focus is different. See the Audrey Faye quote above.

So are you stuck to your Margaret Thatcher-esque dillattente-ism for sticking to "traditional" feminism, or do you want to break boundaries and let men take part (which is essential personally as lots of women don't have any interest in chemistry, just like men) and be representatives just like in first wave feminism? And seeing as you're happy for old rules like "ladies first" and "men walk on the outside of the pavement" to be further cemented by child upbringing, however trivial their potency in this discussion may also be, why should things that women haven't thought of yet be any different?

Stavvers isn't a traditional feminist by any meaning of the word. And her response comes from her experience of men involving themselves "helpfully" in feminism. Objectively, it's as you say: Why can't men do stuff for feminism? Obviously we can. But there's a long history of white knights coming to the rescue of the poor women, and telling them what they should do. That tends not to go down very well.

to me the first thing I thought of when I saw this was how it can liberalise the practice of a date setup without intruding in the situation as heavily as all the preventative measures she mentions.

Sure, it's a nice idea on the face of it. As Audrey Faye says: "If even one woman evades sexual assault because she put on this nail polish, then I will give these dudes a virtual high five". But also: "Despite the never ending stream of prevention products, the statistics haven’t improved."

But you're forgetting the exclusivity some rapists have in who they target.

Most rape, like most abuse, is committed by someone the victim already knows. It's exclusive only in the sense that it's directed at a specific target. As for wider "public" violence, people who are the target of any type of attack (be that sexual assault, gay bashing, any form of hate crime, etc) already know about minimizing danger. (For instance, I already know what I can wear and where I can wear it to avoid making myself an obvious target, and I'm probably over-cautious in this respect.) But for other people to focus "helpfully" on what someone might do to safeguard themself from attack is in effect to blame them for a crime (both in advance and afterwards) perpetrated against them. (This is what "slut walks" are about btw.) Such a focus is really quite annoying; and as a general strategy towards reducing crime, it doesn't work.