A Message to Good Men about Consent and Rape

Rape: a horrifying event, a violation of the most extreme kind, a trauma that can affect a survivor for years and years. Most people understand what it is, in that upon hearing the word they know generally what happened - a man penetrated a woman against her will, probably with force, such as holding her down.

At least, this is what we've been conditioned to think when we hear the word "rape." We think of a male perpetrator, a female victim, and forced, probably violent, penis-in-vagina sex. But this is wrong, and picturing rape with these specific details is incredibly damaging to everyone. Like most things that are completely horrible, rape is hard to talk about. But we have to. We are doing a disservice to everyone - both potential penetrators and victims and current survivors - when we talk about rape with one narrow definition. One week into my training to become a rape crisis counselor, and I've already had my definition of rape, which I thought was quite advanced, challenged and corrected.

One of the most interesting things to come up has been how men are conditioned by society and the media to rape women through tools other than violence - tools like coercion and alcohol, and how to many men, their use of these tools has been so condoned and normalized by the world around them that they use them to rape women who they respect and want to be good to. This post is about men who rape unintentionally, who want to be good and get consent but have been so affected by our society's rape culture that they don't even recognize their actions as rape.

Please note, this is not all people who rape - there are many perpetrators who rape with full knowledge that what they are doing is rape and do it anyway. Those sorts of people need something different to stop them from raping. This post is about the population of men who want to have consensual sex and rape mainly due to lack of education on how to properly ask for consent. I'm hoping that this post will help more of these sorts of men learn how to do better.

Professional Attire at Work: An Impossible Window

Any other working women out there ever feel the soul crushing task of getting dressed in the morning?

Here's a little background: for two years, I served an education focused organization powered by national service. In layman's terms, AmeriCorps gave me a small stipend for serving (intensive, work-like, semi-paid volunteering) in an urban school. For two years, wearing a uniform was part of the job. A uniform with absolutely no flexibility: the only thing I got to any say in was the watch I wore, two pieces of jewelry, and the things I put in my hair, so long as they were only black. Not a lot of choice in the morning.

At first it was crippling and I felt like my creativity was being crushed, but by the end of it, boy let me tell you, I was content. I saved my best clothes for the weekend. It took me all of 20 minutes to get from my bed to walking to the bus. No thought necessary. I couldn't wear the uniform wrongly once I knew the few simple rules, like: tuck in your shirt. Don't unbutton your button-up past the second button. Always wear the belt.

That was it. No room to mess up. No thought. No worries about if you were being too provocative or not professionally "feminine" enough.

However, now I've graduated from the service position into one of the few open jobs at the same organization. A real job that pays more than poverty wages and has real benefits and requires the deceivingly simple stipulation that I wear "business casual" attire.

Business casual: a way to dress that is simple for men, the only drawback the one type of shirt and one type of pants required have to be ironed. But you know what? I'd take a few minutes of ironing in the morning over the endless worry, second-guessing, shade-throwing, gossiping, double standard that women in the business world deal with.

I have never had trouble dressing myself before I got my first "real" job. I'm mature and confident. And here's a sample of the things that run through my head about my professional attire any given day:

How our apology culture stops us from growing

I'm working on developing the trait of being able to call people out in an approachable, respectful and loving way. Getting "called out" and also feeling loved and respected don't usually go together. It takes a certain person with a certain mindset and certain relationship between the person at fault and the person doing the calling out to make it work. I've tried it many times but can count the number of times I've been successful on one hand.

To know what I mean, think to your closest relationship - probably a partner, best friend or sibling. Someone that you have a relationship of deep mutual respect with. Someone who can tell you "you know, it really hurts me when you do that" and you listen before getting defensive, and actually try to understand their perspective. Most of us don't have many relationships like this - we're lucky to have even one person that we can simultaneously be vulnerable enough to admit being hurt by, and loving enough to tell them so in a way that they will actually hear it, rather than becoming defensive.

Simply hearing "sorry" often isn't enough - like when a partner says "I'm sorry" after a big fight, but you know it's meaningless because they don't actually know what they're apologizing for. And I think we'd all prefer to be truly understood by those around us that to have a rose and a meaningless, if heartfelt, apology.

The reason these sorts of relationships are few and far between is because you have to be invested enough to listen to the offended person's perspective and attempt to truly understand it rather than simply apologizing so you can get past the awkwardness and move on. This is what about 99% of people you know do. Here's an example: you're at work, eating lunch in the break room when a co-worker you get along well with but aren't close to tells a story about forgetting his keys that morning and says "I'm like a blond chick sometimes," which you understand to be equated with being an idiot, at least to him. You look up, push your blond hair back from your face and say "excuse me?" The guy, who is a good and decent person, quickly apologizes. "Sorry, you know what I mean, it's just an expression." You want to keep it going, to ask him why he would say that if it would risk offending someone in the room and get him to agree to not say such things anymore, but you let it drop. You have to work with him every day, and after all, he did just give a real apology and clearly didn't mean to hurt you.

Of course, blonds don't get comments like this nearly as much as oppressed peoples - notably, women and minorities. As a white woman, I cannot speak to the minority experience and will leave it alone. If you're a minority and would like to comment, I'd love to read your thoughts. What I can speak to is what it's like to be a woman and hear things like:

• "God, that woman behind the counter didn't smile at me once - what a BITCH."
• "Why haven't you taken your husband's last name?"
• "Come on, pretty girl, smile! Don't look so sad."
• "Quit being such a tease."
• "All these little pre-teens in their booty shorts are just asking for it."
• "God I'd love to hit that ass."
• "Cat calling is just a harmless compliment. Just accept it for what it is."
• "Looks like Miley Cyrus has joined the slutty girls club."
• "You know how to install an air conditioner?"
• "Are you sure you want to use the drill? Maybe you should stick to the non-power tools."
• "Is it your period or something?"
• "What will you do about your job when you decide to have a family?"
• "I'm not sexist, you're just overly sensitive."

You can either ignore something or challenge it. If you are brave enough to challenge it, you can do so in two ways: the angry way that lets you get your feelings out while letting the other person know what a horrible person/idiot they are - or the way that is kind and loving and meant to effect some change in the offender rather than make him or her feel bad.

It's hard to challenge it in the loving way because it can feel so damn good to do it an angry and justified way. And anyone who gets hurt by someone else's thoughtless comment's feelings are totally justified. But when choosing to respond, you have to ask yourself: what is my end goal? Is the end goal is to walk away with a feeling of justified and angry self-righteousness, knowing you have one less friend, or to get that friend to truly understand why what they said was wrong and not do it again? The latter is what we want but the former is what normally happens. And that's human nature. But it's time to work against it.

Many people who say things degrading about sex or race - or blondness - are decent people who honestly don't know why what they're saying is hurtful. And if no one has ever taken the time to tell them how they sound and what it does to others, how could they?

"Mercy" film urges discussion of rape and victim blaming

Mercy, a new indie film centered around the rape of young woman and fall out - which including victim blaming within a culture of rape - urges an important discussion of justice, violence, and victims in a society that allows and even encourages rape.

The film is meant to both further promote the dialogue that recent atrocities have begun, as well as explore the horrendous way that such crimes are dealt with by the media. As the website explains:

The incidents themselves are heinous, but the official response to them by the media -- and the American public at large -- is almost as disturbing.  The extent to which victims of sexual assault are shamed and ostracized for speaking up speaks volumes about the way our culture perceives rape.  And we are of the firm belief that this needs to change.

Needless to say, an incredibly important movie is being made. I've written on these issues before, and a film will hit home the very real way that rape affects people - probably in a way that will be extremely uncomfortable and downright painful. And that's a good thing.

Marissa Mayer looked girly and submissive in Vogue - but that's not the problem.

photo: Vogue

You may have seen the recent picture of Marissa Mayer (right) posing sexily on a lounging chair, all dolled up and wearing heels, in the latest issue of Vogue. Some people say it's a step backwards for women, that a male CEO would be photographed in a more powerful position.

That second part is true. And we should definitely work towards overhauling the societal structures that make it normal for women to be - and be photographed as - submissive while men are dominant.

But Marissa Mayer is allowed to pose in Vogue however she wants. By critiquing her every move, in a way that doesn't happen to men, we are reinforcing the notion that a woman's actions can and should be policed. The idea of policing a woman's actions takes lots of forms - saying a friend's shirt is too provocative, that a drunk woman on the street probably should be more careful, that a powerful female CEO's appearance in a magazine should follow a specific set of standards. These things are all policing a woman's looks and, because actions go into making up how you look, their actions.

When we police a woman's appearance, we are telling her that her body does not belong to her. When you say that a woman shouldn't be wearing something or looking a certain way, you send the message that you know what she should do, that you know what's best for her, that you should have the power to make her decisions - in essence, that you - perhaps representing societal norms as a whole - own her.

We can hate on Marissa Mayer for her hit and miss workplace policies,but to hate on her for how she chooses to appear in a photograph is different. I work hard to not police the actions of other women, even if I think I'm doing it for the "right" feminist reasons. I don't try to convince my engaged friends to keep their last names like I did if they like the idea of a new last name from the man they love. If my family members are able and willing to be stay-at-home moms, more power to them. And if a good friend wants to wear a shirt that shows her cleavage, I'm not going to police her actions and "warn" her that her shirt might give men the wrong idea or something like that, because it's up to the men around her not to perceive her shirt as an invitation. 

This is also why I'm not going to say anything about Marissa Mayer's photograph in Vogue. If getting dolled up and doing what the professionals at Vogue told her to do is what made her feel comfortable appearing in one of the most famous publications on the planet, then fine. I have my personal opinions about what it all means in the grander scheme of things, but I'm not going to police the actions of one individual woman making her own choices - that's easy to do but ultimately ineffective and creating any change. Instead, I'm going to work harder against the things that matter on a larger scale. I'm going to make sure I'm not quiet and submissive in my workplace, even when that feels like the safe thing to do. I'm going to focus my efforts on not letting my husband be the default decision maker, which for whatever messed up reasons sometimes feels like the natural thing to both of us. I choose to wear minimal or no make up so that worry a little less about if I'm getting somewhere because of my appearance rather than my abilities. These are my choices, and they reflect where I am at my part of the journey and work towards equality. But other woman are in different places, have different comfort levels, and feel differently about these issues, and that's ok.

Recently a teenage family member I was spending a few days with asked me if a shirt that was somewhat see-through was "ok" to wear out. I said "if you're comfortable it's fine by me" even though I wanted so badly to tell her that she wasn't an object for strange men's viewing pleasure and could she for God's sake put on an opaque shirt? I didn't say this because I did the same sort of thing when I was a teenager, and nothing anyone said could get through to me. I had to endure the lewd stares and comments for a few years before I realized, on my own terms, that I didn't want to dress that way anymore. The decision was and is much more meaningful and absolute than if others had policed my clothing; if my mom had forced me to wear different clothes, it would have been a short-term win for her but I may have changed the second I was out of her sight. Instead, she (usually) let me wear what I wanted, and I came to a deeper and more permanent decision about the way I dress.

The call to action is this: don't police the actions of other women. This is a short-sighted and usually ineffective way to make change. It's easy to call out a stranger for taking a "step backwards" for women everywhere; it's harder but more effective to work against the societal and cultural standards that surround her choice in the first place. Double down on your own efforts. Cultivate a powerful stance and presence, focus your efforts on your abilities over appearance, or do whatever it is that works against the things you dislike in Marissa Mayer that you're personally comfortable with. Think about what you can do, in your own life, to work against the messed up culture that puts one of America's most powerful woman in a submissive and sexual pose for her photoshoot.

What feminism does not equal: aloneness, lesbianism, or man-hating

Feminism can be considered a dirty word. For much of the population, it brings to mind cranky old bra burners who hate on men and never get married.

Just look at Katy Parry's recent rejection of the word as she accepted the Billboard Woman of the Year award - so ironic - or Taylor Swift saying she doesn't believe in "guys versus girls."

Now Taylor, I love your music, but you're hitting on a misinformed belief about feminism commonly held by women in our age group: guys versus girls.

Simply put, no. This is not what feminism is about. Feminism is, at it's most basic definition, about liberation and equality. Not being better, or having power over men, or oppressing them so they can have a taste of their own medicine. It's not about being a single cat lady at a rally burning your bra because men are evil.

In fact, you can be a self-identified feminist and still wind up married to the man of your dreams - I know because I'm a feminist who just married the man of my dreams. And no, we did not meet at a bra-burning rally. That doesn't happen any more, and in fact, it never did. So put that stereotype out of your mind.

My husband is a man who is on his way to becoming a chef, loves pit bulls, hip hop music, and scary movies. He grew up in a typical household in Wisconsin without any notable hardcore feminists around him. He dated girls in high school and college, met yours truly at the age of 21, and proposed to her in typical proposal fashion a year and a half later. He's never identified as a feminist, but obviously I see it in him or I wouldn't be here today, sitting on a couch in the apartment we share on Chicago's west side. When we talked about him being a feminist, he listened to what I had to say and then said "yeah, I suppose I am a feminist then."

Like it was no big deal.

Because guess what? It isn't. You can be a feminist and still date cool guys. You can be a feminist and wear a bra, wear make up, have "girl talk" with your friends, and be heartbroken over a breakup.

the summer I became a feminist

I wasn't born a feminist. Rather, it has evolved over time. Specifically, a switch went off in my head during the summer after my junior year of college, during one really hot (temperature-wise) seven week period of working at a summer program for high schoolers.

There was a heat wave in New Haven and despite all the great things about Yale being one of the world's most prestigious universities blah blah blah, their dorms do not have air conditioning. As an instructor/RA at the summer program being hosted there, I was contractually bound to sleep in a boiling little room on the second floor, peruse the Quad in search of kids heat-resistent enough to play four square, and roam around New Haven during their free time just to make sure they were being resepectful in the stores and restaurants. Needless to say, other than the few hours I spent in air-conditioned classrooms teaching, I was by default hot, sweaty, and irritated.

It was that heat that got me out of my comfort zone and into the realization there there was more to me than a prettily made up face.

City Year, Diversity, and Trayvon Martin

This a bold statement, but I'm going to make it: if everyone did a City Year, the Trayvon Martin tragedy wouldn't have occurred.

This is a departure from my usual focus on action-oriented feminism, but it's a departure I feel obliged to make. There are so many reasons why national service should be a part of every young person's life, but they are often discussed in the abstract. This is an opportunity for what I believe is a real-life, concrete example.

City Year is a national education-focused non-profit organization that does work in closing the achievement gap and is powered by AmeriCorps. Young idealists sign on for a year of full-time service in urban schools, serving students who are slipping through the cracks and run the risk of not having the skills necessary to graduate high school. Please note that I do not represent City Year Inc. and everything written here are my words and views, and not those of the organization.

As I'm sure you can guess, this puts City Year Corps Member in contact with a whole lot of diversity. Not only does the organization do an incredible job maintaining a diverse Corps in each of the 25 cities it serves, but the public partner schools are usually either racially diverse or mainly made up of minorities. For someone like me - a white, suburban woman of middle class Wisconsin - it was the first time I had meaningful contact with a diverse population.

Why More Men Having Plastic Surgery Does Not Equal Gender Equality

photo: prweb.com

While on a flight back from a work conference in Boston, I realized the limitations of my new Nook, other than being among the least sexy, if most useful, of my wedding presents: you can’t read during take-off and landing. Desperate, I picked up an in-flight magazines called American Way. And between the articles about people who dress up like mermaids and Armie Hammer was a piece titled “Nip/Tuck Secrets: Plastic Surgery AMONG MALES is booming, but it’s not one of those things guys want to discuss.”

Having recently read an amazing book titled “Beauty Junkies” by Alex Kuczynski, about America’s addiction to plastic surgery and cosmetic enhancement (non-surgical procedures like Botox injections), I was intrigued. The article starts off with the story of code name Brian, who had a surgery to give him a stronger-looking chin and is quoted saying “vanity these days is not just for women…I hate to say it, but I think a lot of people do judge you based on how you look. This is something for myself, not anybody else.”

Oh really? Before I move onto all the other seriously flawed statements in this article, of which there are plenty, I want to address the notion of plastic surgery being done “for myself, not anybody else.”

The Iowa Supreme Court and one "irristible" dental assistant

In case you missed it under the news of George Zimmerman's trial and the Asiana plan crash, the upheld it's previous ruling that it was lawful for a man to fire his dental assistant for being "irresistible." The woman in question, Melissa Nelson, was a dental assistant who has the misfortune of being attractive to her boss. The court found that Melissa Nelson's termination did not amount to discrimination, and that it was over a matter of a personal relationship, and not gender bias.

The Sacramento Bee sums it up nicely: "The all-male court found that bosses can fire employees they see as threats to their marriages, even if the subordinates have not engaged in flirtatious or other inappropriate behavior. The court said such firings do not count as illegal sex discrimination because they are motivated by feelings, not gender."

A Case Against the TV: Women and Consumerism

photo: jamesmaystock.com

While reading the mind-melting, life-changing book The Story of Stuff by Annie Leonard, an expert in international sustainability and environmental health issues, I thought a lot about the impact of our consumer-driven way of life on women specifically. In chapter 4, Consumption, she details out some of the more familiar parts of the story of Stuff: how advertising plays with our heads and gets us to buy more junk while we engage TV watching (one of our favorite pastimes), how we have to work more to have the money to buy this Stuff, and how the bulk of it is completely and utterly useless brickabrack that ends up either in a landfill or collecting dust in your closet. (She calls this the "work-watch-spend" cycle, and it's a treadmill most of us live on for much of our lives.)

I spent a good few years on that treadmill myself. I'm not here to explain to you how our economy was engineered so that we would work a ton, have too much junk, and completely and totally ruin the earth for our children and how we can fix it - to learn about that, pick up The Story of Stuff. (Ideally from a library or used book store. It really is a great read.) What I am here to explain to you is how I was a slave to the work-watch-spend cycle, and how I - inadvertently, I'll admit - managed to take break free and what it has done for me in terms of my self-image and confidence.

It goes like this: TV commercials market beauty products to young women. Over half - 56% - of commercials during shows with a high viewer population of young women focus on appearance. Compare that to just 3% of commercials aimed at men.

a note from my interlude

I've taken a bit of a break from writing, and that has been intentional. Between finishing my second year of service, buckling down on my wedding planning and rediscovering how to make exercise and health a part of my lifestyle, writing has been put on the back burner.

But I'm going to be a married woman in one week from today, and there are a few things I need to share before that happens.

I need to share what you probably already know: how much of a burden is put on women in terms of weddings and marriage. Justin, my fiancé, has truly tried to help with the planning, and has even succeeded to a certain degree. With my dad, also a chef, he has planned the menu, worked out the catering stuff, ordered the animals, and learned how to roast them; he's also handled ordering the pies from our favorite Milwaukee bakery, and set up the whole rehearsal dinner. This is a lot. Especially considering how much our society in general has made it clear that he shouldn't have really done anything except get an outfit together and pick out some choice whisky for the guys in the wedding party.

But more than dealing with these to-be-expected expectations from society (SOCIETY!), I've learned that just being aware of them has not been enough to get around them. I'm talking about myself now.

A great example of women's impossibly narrow fashion standards

While reading about the recent factory collapse in Bangladesh, I saw a link on the bottom of the page called "The right way to wear leggings in school." Curious and already somewhat annoyed, I clicked. What I found was a perfect example of the incredibly narrow and nearly impossible to reach standards that women are expected to conform to. These tiny windows of what's acceptable exist in multiple areas - personal and professional conduct, sexual expression, how intelligent you come off - and are especially obvious within the fashion world.

Case in point: the leggings debate. Are they pants? Can they be worn with tight shirts? Does thickness matter? What if you're working out?

The article claims that no, they are not pants, and gives several pictures of celebrities to help women understand the incredibly narrow, specific way that they are acceptably worn. But look closer - they still give an inconclusive definition of what's ok. Some women wear them with shirts that go below the rear end (what I had learned should be worn with leggings during college) but others are sporting shirts that go perhaps midway down the rear or - wait - don't cover it at all. Some of them are wearing tighter shirts, some of them looser. The author mentions the need to hide the lines from undergarments, but that's not a real problem depending on the thickness of the leggings, and isn't that also a thing that happens with certain sweatpants or even certain jeans?

The conclusion I draw from this has nothing to do with how leggings should be "properly" worn, but more on the fact that women must conform to an impossibly narrow standard of dress.

The 'deranged' sorority girl's email is just a reflection of society's priorities for women

I'm not about to defend the Delta Gamma's officer's email that has been making headlines for it's ridiculously over the top emotions and threats. I mean, really, she threatens to "c***punt" her sisters. She also ridicules her sisters as being mentally slow (I personally have strong feelings about why we shouldn't liken people we don't find intelligent to individuals with downs syndrome) and emphasizes not showing up to the night's event if you're going to be a "cock block," which seems to give importance to the sexual gratification of the fraternity they've been paired with. But this isn't another post to expose and ridicule the author of the email.

While the media has been quick to publish the email, offer commentary, give advice on the eternalness of online content, and even do parodied readings, no one has stepped back and asked why: why did this woman write such a heartless and shocking email that reflects such misplaced values? Why would someone value the women of the group she is leading being fun and exciting to the men in the fraternity they had been paired with over having fun and being themselves?

I don't think this question even needs answering, but here we go. The woman who wrote the email is simply a reflection - a big, cartoonishly exaggerated reflection - of the values that society dictates to women.

What does an American "look like"?

Newsflash, since apparently the actual news people can't get it right. An American doesn't "look" like anything. American's are black and white, brown, copper, golden, and everything in-between. Americans have all colors of eyes, our hair is straight and thin, curly and thick. We have different dialects, cultures, and norms that vary from state to state among people whose families have been living here for generations, as well as newcomers.

If the Boston marathon bombers look so American, does that mean that people who are darker skinned, don't wear baseball caps, wear clothing other than jeans, and don't blend into a crowd or not?

Come on, media. Stop being so goddamn racist.

Why I'm not "excited" to get married

As a woman with a ring on her finger in the throes of planning a large wedding, I get asked a lot if I'm "getting excited" about getting married.

The simple answer is no. No, I'm not excited to get married.

If I have the time and the proper relationship with whoever asks me, I give that answer and explain that what I am excited about is to have a giant party with everyone we love in the world in attendance, giving us thoughtful gifts we can't afford ourselves and celebrating the concept of love. But I'm not excited to get married because essentially, nothing will change. So stop asking.

Don't get me wrong - I know that we'll now have certain legal protections and rights - like very important medical and hospital rights - that make marriage important, and make it something worth fighting for so that all people can access those rights. But for the (knock on wood) immediate future, nothing's changing. In a time past, yes, a ton would change. But that time, when couples didn't co-habitat or sleep together (maybe) until marriage hasn't been around for while.

But this is one of the things I've learned are expected of women when they're engaged. We are expected to be incredibly excited about getting married. We are also in charge of planning a huge, multi-layered event, carefully balancing the desires and demands of two families, trying not to step on toes while ultimately working towards what we want at our own "big day"s.

We already live together. We have a joint bank account and a dog. We had all those things before we were engaged. And we had something else, too - a deep and meaningful love and commitment to each other. So really, other than a few little details, nothing is going to change when we get married. We'll still have all those things. We'll still be committed to each other, we'll still work together to pay the bills and vacuum up animal hair, we'll still argue over where to go for dinner. We will still have to make an effort to meet each other's needs, still feel the pure and simple happiness of waking up next to the person we love every morning. We won't gain more commitment, and we won't lose any of the trouble spots within our relationship.

So why should I be excited to get married?

Rape Culture in South Africa: Helping Anene Booysen

Anenes foster mother holds her photo at her funeral

I wrote a few days about the brutal gang rape of Anene Booysen, the 17-year-old South African woman who was so horrendously traumatized that her family is requesting the media not release the details. Since then, I've been thinking a lot about how a culture of rape contributes to, well, a prevalence of rape, and learning about what a huge problem this is in South Africa. I've also been looking for some tangible ways to support the situation in South Africa specifically. Read on for what I've found.

Part II: Rape Culture in South Africa

A baby girl born in South Africa has a higher chance of experiencing rape in her lifetime than of learning how to read. Statistics disagree about whether it's one in three women who are raped, or one in two women, and if it's every  36, 26, or 17 seconds that a woman is raped. The country has the highest rate of child and baby rape in the world, which stems from the myth that sex with a virgin will a man of HIV or AIDS. (This type of rape occurs every two minutes in South Africa.) An explosive survey revealed that many men find gang rape a good way to experience male bonding, and that while violence against women is by far the most prevalent, one in ten men have been raped by other men. There's also this idea that you can "cure" a lesbian by raping her, leading to the surge of "corrective rape," leading to more than 10 lesbian women being raped every week in an attempt to "turn" her into a heterosexual.

Whatever the real statistics are, the problem is an epidemic.

It seems that South Africa is an immensely patriarchal society, and women are often blamed for rape. Many men view rape as a way to assert themselves as men, especially if they are bullied for not being circumcised or having to do "women's work" around the house, an example of which you can read here.

The standards of thought create a stigma against rape, which causes 8 out of 9 women to not report their rape to the police. 76% of rapists who are accused will never be prosecuted for their crimes. Of the 24% who are, most of them end up in jail because of surviving child victims telling their stories on the stand. But for men who rape adult women, the rate of incarceration drops to just 3%.

There are many complicating factors to the South African rape culture. There is an emotional, social, and economic legacy of apartheid's incredibly brutal racial segregation to consider.

since you're already here...

go ahead and take a look at this video: 

these women are about to tell you some things that are absolutely non of your business

then, tell me if you'd like to get a group of ladies together to recreate this and share it on youtube.

South African Gang Rape Leaves Me at a Loss for Words

Anene Booyson

The gang rape of 17-year-old South African Anene Booyson has left me at a loss for words. 

According to this cnn article, the details of her rape and mutilation are so horrendous that the family has requested that the media not release the details. 

If you think you can handle those details, this jezebel article has them. But I warn you, reading this marks one of the few times that I've had a physically painful reaction to reading something. I'll probably be nauseous the rest of the night. 

We know that these breathtakingly brutal crimes happen to women every day. This is a reminder of why 2013 shouldn't just be the year to end rape, it needs to be the year to end rape. This needs to stop. 

But how to do this? This is supposed to be a blog about being action-oriented, but reading about this crime has left me at a loss for words. I'm going to have to do some serious thinking about how we can combat crimes like this through the daily actions of our every day lives. Stay tuned, and in the mean time, if you have ideas, please share. 

what is "rape culture"?

Sorry to put a buzz on your Valentine's Day high, but I'm still thinking a lot about the recent gang rape of South African teenager Anene Booyson. Even on Valentine's Day, in this country, a woman is sexually assaulted every two minutes. In South Africa, a woman is raped every four minutes. (In the war zones like the Congo, it's more like every minute. Needless to say, there is a rape going on, somewhere in the world, as you read this sentence). And now that I've had some time to think about it, I think that one of the best things that we can do, as individuals throughout our normal days, is to combat rape culture.

But before we dive into ways to combat it, it's important to understand what rape culture really is. So, without further ado, welcome to a series of posts about the subject.

Part I

What is "rape culture"?

There is a culture of rape around the world, and America is not excluded. Throughout my next few posts, I'll be exploring what this means and a few quick, simple ways to combat it, and I'm really hoping for some comments.

This first post is about defining rape culture and the serious effects it has on women.

The idea of "rape culture" refers to an environment in which rape not only exists, but is prevalent and normalized through the media and culture in general. Things like misogynistic language ("you hit like a girl"), glamorized sexual violence (check out just a few examples here) and objectification of women's bodies create a culture that makes sexual violence seem a bit more normal, which makes for a society that doesn't take women's right and safety seriously.

This affects all women, not just the ones who live in unsafe areas or frequent drunken parties. The rape of just a few women means degradation, fear, and certain limitations on all women. Most women in America limit their behavior because of the simple existence of rape - how many female readers have never felt the need to walk home with friends late at night, or been slightly frightened by a man's action, or even the way he looks at you? Most men do not feel the need to take the precautions against rape that women take, which is how a rape culture puts women in a subordinate position to men. This is true despite the face that many men are not rapists, and many women will never experience rape. The degradation, fear, and limitation exist for all women regardless of whether or not they themselves have been a victim of a sexual attack.

If you haven't heard of the Steubenville rape, it's time you did

The Stuebenville rape case is making news because of both the unabashed use of videos and social media by the rapists that practically give a minute-by-minute description of what happened, and because of the relentless work of crime blogger Alenxandria Goddard of Prinniefied. An ex-resident of Steubenville who knows the small town's obsession with the high school football team, she suspected that there was probably more to the story of football players allegedly assaulting a young girl, and made sure to preserve evidence of references to the rape made on social media. Somewhere there are pictures of the victim, naked and unconscious, that were texted between the rapists. There's a 12 minute video of the young rapists joking about how dead the girl must be, and how hard they raped her, with various other male voices laughing in the background. There are tweets referencing rape, such as this one:

"Women in combat a dangerous experment" ???

photo: www.newyorker.com

Trying out writing with a bit of snark. Is this more fun to read, or do you just take the content less seriously? I'd love to know your thoughts!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reading up on the new changes that will allow women to fill combat positions within the military, I came across this opinion piece, stating that Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta's announcement of the changes marks the beginning of "a dangerous experiment."

Just for fun, let me take you though the argument and so-called reasoning of the author, Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, of the Family Research Council, and then let me point out all the reasons that his ideas are completely bonkers.

He goes on  for a bit about how women are great, women are valuable, the military needs to draw from the full pool of talent blah blah blah BUT, here's the thing, women will now be allowed into the Special Forces, where soldiers have to spend extended periods of time together in awful environments without privacy or bathrooms, while enduring life-threatening situations, and now on top of that, they will have to add to the mix of horrible things UNDERLYING SEXUAL TENSIONS.

My God.

Let's unpack this. First off, this idea is built on a few assumptions:
1. All men and women are straight.
2. All men and women, when placed together, will develop some level of sexual-based feelings/interactions, or "tension."
3. This sexual tension negatively impacts their ability to do difficult work together.

First, not everyone in the military is straight, or did you miss the whole thing where "Don't Ask Don't Tell" was removed so that all the gay people in the military could be open about it?

can we PLEASE stop talking about Michelle Obama's fashion and get back to the incredible work she does?

Quick, name one designer that Michelle Obama has worn in the past six months. Now tell me the name of her initiative against childhood obesity. 

I don't know about you, but I'm getting a tad tired of seeing full-fledged reports and photo time lines of Michelle Obama's wardrobe choices. She's beautiful, yes. And has killer arms. Like most women with her level of education, she mixes expensive pieces with dresses from Target. Sometimes everyone loves her choice and sometimes people are divided. But here's my question: why is what she wears even an important enough "issue" for people to be "divided" over? Aren't abortion and gun control enough for Americans to have foaming-at-the-mouth arguments about?

I just love what this photo, by rosae posey, does. It makes the audience examine the notion that a woman is defining a part of her identity with the length of her skirt. That somehow a woman is making a statement about what sort of woman she is with some arbitrary line on her legs. (After all, where is the line between "provocative" and "asking for it?" There isn't really one, of course).

It also made me think again about how men are rarely, if ever, forced to make a statement about their sexuality with their choice of clothing.

Share this photo if you can, and see what kind of conversation starts around it. It'll be nothing if not interesting. 
source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/roseaposey/7173294256/in/photostream

Are there really evolutionary reasons for gender differences?

A recent NY Times article titled "Darwin was Wrong about Mating" caught my eye, as I'm never a fan of the whole "it's biological" argument about supposed differences between men and women. You should read the whole article, but I wanted to point out a few key things I took away from it.

A few researchers have been testing previous studies that "prove" that men are more interested in casual sex and less selective of their sexual partners. However, some researchers tested this out by using a fake lie detector, and found that when men were not hooked up to it, the numbers reinforced the idea that men have more sexual partners than women. But when they were hooked up to a machine that they believed would go off if they lied about the number of actual sexual partners, the numbers shot down. Both men and women reported sleeping with an average of 4 partners. (Actually, women's average was 4.4 to men's 4.0 - take that, gender stereotypes).

Some further thoughts on findings like this from the article:

"But the fact that some gender differences can be manipulated, if not eliminated, by controlling for cultural norms suggests that the explanatory power of evolution can’t sustain itself when applied to mating behavior. This wouldn’t be the first time we’ve pushed these theories too far. How many stereotypical racial and ethnic differences, once declared evolutionarily determined under the banner of science, have been revealed instead as vestiges of power dynamics from earlier societies"

So let's think about that - just as scientists used to find bogus data to "prove" that white people had larger brains than black people, or that women were ill-suited to life outside the home, so is it still possible that so-called scientific findings are used to enforce current societal power dynamics. After all, why even question men being promiscuous and not invested in the lives of their children if it's all biological and there's nothing you can do about it?

But according to this article, these gendered traits are not biological, but probably more a reflection of societal norms. Pretty cool.

So what does it all mean?

rape is never a joke. ever.

This weekend, I went to the house of a new friend for a dinner party of sorts. This friend, a male, is an all-around great guy: smart, kind, funny, and genuine in his insistence on helping me carry heavy things up the stairs.

So when another guest at the dinner, a female, walked into his house and said something like "God, it gets dark so early now, walking alone in this neighborhood makes me I feel like I'm about to get raped," I didn't expect this response from him: "Here's my thing. Trust everyone till you get raped."

He said it in such a light-hearted, easy, joking way. And it really fried my egg, both because of the insensitivity of the comment, and because of being once again confronted with the fact that even wonderful guys who genuinely respect women (or at least really really seem to) are still capable off an off-the-cuff jokey rape comment.

Thankfully, I have never been the victim of a sexual assault. But we all know that sexual assault is often a common part of the life experience of American females. I think almost any lady who went to college has seen the statistic about one in four women experiencing an attempted or completed rape while in college, according to the Centers for Disease Control. And this number seem better than in actually is, since only 54% of rapes are reported to the police. (here's a (notso)fun fact: even with 46% of rapes being reported, only 3% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail. Hope you didn't think the justice system in America was anywhere close to good).

So, now that we've established how common rape is, let's go back to my friend's comment about how we women should just trust everyone until we get raped. Because there were about 6 women in the room, it's more than likely that least one of us had been the victim of a sexual assault. When he said this, I looked around to try and see if anyone was blatantly offended, but there were other conversation. No one seemed to be visibly upset, but then, these sorts of comments are so common that if there was a victim in the room, she'd probably become pretty skilled at hiding those feelings.

If there was a victim in the room, and in other similar cases, no woman should ever have to have her assault made light of. It simply reinforces a feeling that she is under a man's control, that even after the act she will have to live with shame and hurt, all the while people say things to let her know that it actually wasn't even a big deal, so much so that they can make dumb remarks that aren't even close to witty about the act of rape.

Even if you were 100% sure that no one around you was anything close to a victim of sexual assault, you still shouldn't make a joke about rape and talk about it the same way you would talk about stubbing your toe. Remember the victim who died recently in India after being gang-raped and thrown out of a bus afterwards? So hilarious! Said no one, ever.

So bottom line is, guys (and girls), no matter how much you respect women, don't make rape jokes. It's likely that a victim is within ear shot, and it's also just repugnant to make light of sexual assault.

check out this graphic

Check out this graphic the next time someone pulls the "but what about all the guys who are falsely accused of rape?" line. It wraps up the horrible stats about how little rapes are reported, and, of those reported rapes, how few of them a tried for rape, and how a tiny percentage spend any time in jail.

54% of rapists are never even accused.
97% of rapists will never spend a day in jail. (RAINN)

2013: The Year to End Rape

warning: this post is graphic.

I don't have any original thoughts to report, but I just wanted to pass on an incredible new site that I found: Women Under Siege. Part of Women's Media Center, it highlights instances of sexualized violence around the world, and writer Lauren Wolfe recently decreed that 2013 be the year to end rape.

She describes the gruesome story that made its way through the news before Christmas: how a 23-year-old female medical student in India was randomly chosen by a group of 6 men to be the victim of a disgustingly horrifying gang rape and assault.

Wolfe writes how her body was "destroyed by the bodies of the men who allegedly assaulted her and also by the rusting metal bar doctors say they used to penetrate her. The bar removed part of her intestines."

This image and thought has stayed with my for days now - the agony that woman must have felt is incomprehensible.

Women's Dignity March on Jan 2, in Dehli, India

After being hospitalized, the woman died from her wounds a few days later. Wolfe writes: "It has taken an attack that lies nearly outside of comprehension to prompt demonstrations, but the outcry has begun."

Thank God.

Were this woman's death to go unnoticed, as one of the countless rapes that occur every every year, her death would become even more tragic. This gruesome act must be the beginning of a movement. It must be the catalyst to bring a world struggling to admit the realness and prevalence of rape into the light. We must use it as a way to begin the discussion about rape in our own country - and while reports of this terrible nature are not common in America, rape is nevertheless a common act that is not bound to the third world or people of different ethnicities and cultures.

So, here's the action: talk about this rape. Think about the terror that women in some countries live with every day, and how even in America and the rest of the first world, it is basically a statistical certainty that there has been a time in every woman's life when she has felt unsafe. For some women, this feeling is a constant reality. Talk about what happened in Dehli, talk about what happens here, and talk about what needs to be done to change the paradigm, whatever you believe that to be. Talk talk talk. Get the conversation going. That's how historical change is started. This is the year for open conversations about sexual violence, about rape, about how to end it, and for taking action. This is the year to end rape.