What Is Wrong With the World??

[hellison]

1. headline from bbcni re cervical cancer jab - "Girls urged to ABSTAIN in jab row"
why? Because its a dirty cancer you can get from SEX and obviously if you've been having sex you deserve it. Or... something.
More from the helpful FAQ here -

Colin Hart, Director of The Christian Institute, said the way to tackle the problem was not to offer injections, but to tell girls not to have under-age sex.

Ahh. So it's only *underage* sex that causes cancer. Good Girls won't get it, and thus don't need vaccinated. Well that's all clear then!

I know there are Other Issues around the vaccination and which version was chosen etc, but that's not what these people are saying. They're saying girls shouldn't be vaccinated against a potentially TERMINAL DISEASE, because then they might have sex! And we can't have that!!
Would there be the same outcry if it was discovered testicular cancer was also linked to a virus and teenage boys were offered it?

2. This article about date rape is making my head explode with WTF and RAGE. Because obviously if you go drinking with a guy who turns out not to care whether or not you're concious when he gets off on/in you, well that's YOUR fault you silly loose drunken woman. It's not like he's done anything WRONG, or should face any consequences for it! SKIN CRAWLING NOW.

SEND KITTENS PLZ. NEED HAPPY THOUGHTS.

ETA New Mistful Fic! and at lunchtime too. Couldn't have been better timed.

EDIT 2 - just to add, now the original RAGE has calmed slightly, this turned into a thought provoking discussion; a timely reminder the world isn't completley full of morons. Or at least my flist isn't ;) Thanks!

AAAAND if we can keep it civil kids, that would be good. _unhurt_, I still have crutches. And I know where you live. Keep up the ranting tho. Rants Good. CIder better. MOAR CIDER

Comments

[tyrell.livejournal.com]

That was the reaction when the vaccination was first suggested: somehow, they think that protecting these girls from a consequence of sex will cause them to have more sex. The list of ways this doesn't follow is long and humourous.

[thesme-01.livejournal.com]

[hellison.livejournal.com]

I'd seen the reaction before, it was the way the bbc headline was worded that really got to me this time - not 'Cancer jab on offer' but 'girls urged to abstain'.

And the strong suspicion that if it was a Boy Cancer, the issue of sex wouldn't come into it at all.

Tho perception today may be slightly skewed by rage at the following article, which is making me more than a little incoherent.

[hellison.livejournal.com]

YAY KITTINGS

I may need to spend most of lunchtime at cheezburger/cuteoverload to restore brain balance.

[kelemvor.livejournal.com]

The HPV jab controversy I've seen before. Because OBVIOUSLY there are some girls who are abstaining from underage sex PURELY because they might get cervical cancer as a result, and so they'll DEFINTELY start shagging any boy with acne as soon as the sting from the needle goes away(!) Idiots.

The whole date-rape thing... Guh. That it happens makes me ashamed to be male. (I suppose it's possible for a woman to have sex with a man when he's incapacitated by alcohol, but I doubt that it would be worth the bother...) Sadly, I can't see a light in the greyness that would allow work.

[tyrell.livejournal.com]

I have an opinion regarding men, alcohol+arousal, and the danger facing women saying 'no' when both are drunk and naked in bed. It is not an opinion which I can ever type on the internets, because I will be de-friended immediately and flamed for the rest of my years.

Most of the article makes me angry. My comment on one part of it makes everyone else angry. Better not, then.

[doccy.livejournal.com]

KITTEH OVERLODE!!

http://community.livejournal.com/baaaaabyanimals/3697167.html#cutid1

[kanaalzahir.livejournal.com]

Well, I agree the date rape article was mostly stupid, but it always puzzles me when people cry out in outrage about articles advicing young women not to go home alone, drunk, late at night, in scant clothing through empty parks. Then people cry "SHE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO NEKKID IF SHE WISHES!!!!". But no one get supset about articles about how to protect your home against theft (lock the doors, get an alarm, neighbourhood watch, leave the radio on, timers on lamps) and cries "I SHOULD BE ABLE TO LEAVE THE -ING DOOR AJAR IF I WISH!!!!!" ...?

[failing-angel.livejournal.com]

Would there be the same outcry if it was discovered testicular cancer was also linked to a virus and teenage boys were offered it?
I think that might depend on whether the virus was sexually transmitted. I do recall there being noises of outrage at some news stories about condom vending machines going up in schools - but this might just be a false memory kicking in.

*Sigh* I'm not a Christian myself, but I do get tired of hearing all these so-called 'Christian' groups that stand up and bitch about underage sex - not least because it does tarnish the rest of the faith. I'm sure that there are plenty of groups out there with a realistic attitude on all this.

[hellison.livejournal.com]

I think what angered me most about it was the theory that while they agreed the sex in the example given was definitely non-consensual, it WASN'T rape because there was no violence. Which is totally missing the point that if she was that knocked out by drink, he didn't *need* to be violent.

Tho I do take their point that he was possibly so drunk he didn't realise what he was doing either. HOWEVER surely that makes him just as much 'at fault' for letting himself get so drunk he couldn't tell the difference between yes/no/unconsious? He has just as much responsibility for his actions as she does. Why does she have to bear the blame for being too drunk to say no, rather than him for being too drunk to understand that this is not a good thing to do?

[hellison.livejournal.com]

Hmm good point. As I've said above somewhere, my reactions today are probably *slightly* coloured by the RAGE at the date-rape article.
Tho it does remind me of not being allowed a tampon machine in school because Tampons Are For Married Ladies Only.

And realisitic attitudes don't make for good news sadly. So it's the extremes that get the publicity.

[hellison.livejournal.com]

True, but if someone *does* break in, people don't tend to imply it was all your fault in the first place and tell you there's not point telling the police because it'll be the thief's word against yours and he'll just say you gave him the stuff anyway.

[hellison.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the controversy has been about for a while, it was the headline that got me! ABSTAIN!! (curiously the almost identical bbc wales article on the same subject is just "girls to have cancer jab").

And, I wouldn't be ashamed. Men, on the whole, are great. At least the ones I know are and seem to have grasped the idea that sex with someone who's unconcious is Wrong.
What really got me angry was the idea in the article that it wasn't rape because there was no violence. Neatly missing the point that if you're passing out in toilets, not a lot of violence is required.

[hellison.livejournal.com]

KITTEEEHHH

So cute! Kittehs make everything better

[kelemvor.livejournal.com]

No violence = no crime. These people need a few stiff drinks and then to spend the might in the company of someone with freewheeling moral compass...

BTW, you can add icanhascheezburger to your FList as a syndication feed, if you wish!

[kanaalzahir.livejournal.com]

Well, no, and whereas I firmly believe people should be encouraged and not discouraged to report all types of crimes, including rape, it is important to recognise the difference between that type of case and say, theft. Simply in that if you can prove the actual circumstances in a break-in (a complete stranger, possible high on drugs, enters your home while you're not there and makes off with all your valuables) it's typically not the sort of activity that people consent to, wheras in a rape case the actual circumstances (totally plastered people who have never met before engage in sexual activities) is not enough, because that's something tons of people go out and do of their free will pretty much every Saturday.

[lazy-hoor.livejournal.com]

That icon is just amazing. May I rob it?

[lazy-hoor.livejournal.com]

I'm *so* joining that community.

[hellison.livejournal.com]

It's a very bizarre notion really, I don't get the logic of it at all!


I do have the feed added, but due to stupid open plan office, i can't check it too oftne in work (lj I can just about get away with, giant pictuers of kittehs not so much ;p)

[lazy-hoor.livejournal.com]

Yes and no. As I said on my LJ there are occasions where people have misguided drunken sex which they later regret and this isn't rape. It's rape when, in the law in the Republic of Ireland anyway, a man is 'reckless' as to whether he believed consent was given: so if a woman is ratarsed to a degree where she's passing out or can barely stand etc and a man has sex with her, then that's classed as rape.

To your earlier point, who's to say what I should and shouldn't wear and where I should and shouldn't go? Yes I'm fairly clued in (these days) about my personal safety but there has been the odd occasion in the past where, after a few pints, I've walked home on a route where in a sensible frame of mind I wouldn't have gone that way in the dark, but y'know - no taxis around, I want the quickest route home. If I had been attacked I'd rather my drunken stupidity didn't have a bearing on my attackers conviction or led people to believe I was asking for it.

Also, I'd rather my clothing not be an issue. A short skirt or a low-cut top really shouldn't be seen as dangerous. I mean, if you take that view where will it end? A glimpse of ankle on show? A shapely calf?

Is it not more reasonable to ask men to not have sex if consent isn't very clear, rather than say to women don't do X, Y or Z?

[hellison.livejournal.com]

It is, of course, not so black and white as 'he stole stuff'.
But what's bugging me about the 'blame' issue is that while the victim is often blamed/chastised for getting drunk enough to get into that situation, the rapist never seems to be held similarly to blame for getting drunk enough to get into the same situation.
In 'grey area' situations like the anecdote above, the reaction seems to be more 'the poor guy, he was just drunk, it's not his fault', which is the *reverse* of how the victims are seen (I'm assuming here this happens to men who have been raped too, it's just so underreported its hard to know). HE was the one who has sex with a near comatose woman, so it IS his fault,whether or not it is easily provable in court. His actions, HIS repsonsibility.

I think (and getting v. long winded here, sorry) that as well as saying to girls "be responsible for yourself, don't get yourself in this situation", we should be saying it to boys TOO. Because I don't think the message is getting across that they have to control their actions as well.

I'm not even sure I'm making sense anymore. MOAR KITTINS.

[lazy-hoor.livejournal.com]

oh I've suddenly remembered when I was a student I had an unnerving episode of a man following me (I was on foot, he was in a car, I managed to evade him). I was coming home from a party (on foot, I was poor stude so no taxi fare). And I was wearing a wooly jumper, jeans and DM boots. Which is why I think censoring what women wear is somewhat silly and missing the point.

[failing-angel.livejournal.com]

You know these days a realistic, moderate religious view could/should/would be news...

Tho it does remind me of not being allowed a tampon machine in school because Tampons Are For Married Ladies Only
Wow, um, that's special. It also sounds like the opinion of a confirmed bachelor who has zero experience of women beyond holding the door open for them.

The Date Rape argument is a highly gnarly one, not least because of what it touches on. There are times when I think back to one or two of my 'one night stands' that were charged with alcohol, I certainly had some gaps in my memory, possibly the girl did to - but we were both conscious and capable of having sex. So if the girl regrets it, and wouldn't have done it sober (if you will - the beer goggle or coyote principles) where does that leave us?

[hellison.livejournal.com]

One of the Many Joyes of a Convent education. Using tampons apparently means you're not a virgin anymore! OH NOES!!! and thus only for After Marriage (how they didn't realise half the 6th form were already on teh pill, i'm not sure).

Date rape IS a gnarly one and not one I'd normally touch on lj, but the view in that article that it wasn't rape because he didn't beat her up just infuriated me. I think the key words in your comment there are 'concious and capable'. Which is a bit different from taking a woman home after she's *passed out* in the resturant toilet and THEN having sex.

Which is why I think it's important to start impressing on guys the message of 'Don't have Sex if it's not clear' and that 'Come into my house' does NOT mean 'come into my body', rather than impressing on women that they shouldn't drink, wear short skirts, go out after dark, go out alone, talk to strange men...

[kelemvor.livejournal.com]

Go for it! The appropriate credit is on my icon page.
It also inspired this one! *Points*