Dead Ends

[thessalian]

First of all, from draxar and guido_was_taken,
You are an Eshu!! EXOTIC is the word to describe
you. You have a natural flair for travelling,
and the tales you weave have no equal. But you
also have a problem with restlessness. Never
contented to be in one place for long, you are
always up and about doing one thing or another.
Learn to relax and stick around in one place
for awhile. You just might be glad you did.


Which Changeling Kith Best Fits You?
brought to you by Quizilla

Well ... yeah. Right.

Then again, today, travel is a problem. Or was a problem, at least. Bastard TfL. Signal failure at Finchley Central. Stood on the platform for three-quarters of an hour as they told us that they thought they'd have it back up and running in 15-20 minutes but we ought to take an alternate route if possible. The first 15-20 minutes, I figured, "Well, this is my only shot at still being on time for work and I won't be able to get on a bus anyway", so I waited. The next 20 minutes or so, I figured, "Well, this is my only shot at not being abysmally late for work". At which point they said, "Well, we're now finding that this could take a few hours now." At which point I swore a lot and decided to take an alternate route. I got followed by a woman with a heavy accent who was trying to get to Tottenham Court Road and only knew that one route so thought she'd stick with me because I obviously knew what I was doing. Originally I was going to take the 125 to Southgate and take the Piccadilly Line down, but a 143 turned up first so I got on that (with nice foreign lady in tow) and took it down to Archway, losing my tagalong at East Finchley. Eventually I got on the Northern Line to Tottenham Court Road, looked at the clock ... 10:53. SHIT. Got into work at 11. Whoo.

Where the hell does the money we give TfL go, anyway? They've raised the fares three times this year, each time above standard inflation, and it's only going to get worse. I wound up having a chat with the nice foreign lady and some guy carrying a copy of The Mirror (apparently his taste is all in his mouth, or at least his clothes, because he was wearing a very nice suit). We quietly bitched about the fact that the train arrivals board was never accurate and the rise in transport fees and the fact that the last guy who resigned from a high-up position in the TfL awarded himself a £6 million bonus, not to mention the fact that the buses, while trying to respond to the problem, make matters worse by not going their allotted route and instead dumping their entire complement of passengers to go back to where they started from and pick up more passengers, propagating the bottleneck. TfL is insane. But of course, if we paid them according to performance, they'd go on strike and we'd all be screwed. Then again, at least we would know we were screwed and be able to make allowances. Now blind hope keeps us going.

In other news, I happened to catch yesterday's Metro headlines while grabbing a bagel between Archway and the tube trek from hell. Apparently something like a third of Britons believe that women who 'act flirtatiously' and 'dress provocatively' (whatever that means) are partly to blame when they're raped. Acting flirtatiously? That's a subjective thing; what some people consider flirting, others perceive as merely being friendly. Dressing provocatively? People dress for themselves, you know. Should a woman really be considered to be 'asking for' rape? People can talk about "She was just asking for it; look at what she was wearing" until they're blue in the face but there was no consent, therefore it was rape. Plain and simple. Women should not have their behaviour and manner of dress codified to avoid being raped just because some men can't be bothered to control their lusts. No one ever says, "Well, okay, she was wearing a low-cut dress but seriously, that raping fuckhead should learn some self-control". I suppose that's because it should be self-evident. However, not to a third of the people in this country and I hate to think what the percentage looks like in the US.

I'm beginning to think, all told, that we have hit some kind of evolutionary cul-de-sac.

Comments

[pickwick.livejournal.com]

I've seen the rape poll thing a few places - I think the actual wording was "partially responsible" rather than "partially to blame", which is much fuzzier wording, and I can see how some people could have said that women were partially responsible without meaning that they were in any way to blame. But it's still freaky as hell...

[thessalian.livejournal.com]

Not seeing the distinction. Taking responsibility for an action is pretty much the same as taking blame for something; blame basically means responsibility for a really sucky action, rather than just an unfortunate one. Blame can mean deliberately doing something or just making a mistake, so the line is terribly blurred between the two. I'm not seeing how you can be responsible without being to blame in this instance. However, even if there is a clearer distinction between the two, I'm not seeing a woman coping very well with her friends, the police and anyone else who ever finds out about it telling her to "accept responsibility" for what happened to her.

[pickwick.livejournal.com]

I'm thinking about "is responsible for" in a bit more of a scientific causation way, without any blame attached. EG, if you walk down a dark alley at 3am, you might be *partially responsible* for being mugged, because if you hadn't done that, you wouldn't have been mugged, but that doesn't mean you're in any way to blame.

But possibly I'm just trying to make myself feel better about people.

[thessalian.livejournal.com]

The implication is still there that some of the fault rests on you. And while I'm not advocating saying that to a mugging victim, your example shows a fairly objective case -- you don't walk down alleyways on your own at 3 am. However, with flirtation and dress sense, it's all entirely subjective what people will consider provocative, as it depends entirely on the eye of the beholder. I read customers_suck and on a daily basis I read stories by women complaining that they are being sexually assaulted in the workplace (everything from creepy stalker behaviour to groping), many while wearing employee uniforms. Last I checked, being courteous and cordial to a customer =/= flirting, and yet by this rationale, the women in the equation would wind up having to take responsibility for their being sexually harrassed just for following corporate policy. As for provocative dress, anything can be provocative if the figure is considered attractive enough, and that varies from person to person. Hell, I've been groped on the Tube and, not to put too fine a point on it, I'm fat. Either it's someone considering my body shape attractive and being unwilling to control himself, or someone just grabbing for the first available opportunity to molest when turned on, or a little of both. Either way, I'm not taking responsibility for bastards who will not control their own damn urges, and I therefore fail to see why anyone else should.

And let me tell you, if the same thing was said about men getting raped, you can bet society as a whole would jump down the speaker's throat. Apparently "Look what they were wearing" does not apply as an excuse when 'what they're wearing' is showing off a tight little man-butt, washboard abs and a good sized crotch-bulge. No, of course, only women can dress to provoke. Ignorant misogynistic fucks.

[pickwick.livejournal.com]

Well, yes, I agree with all of that. I was just saying that I think "responsibility" and "blame" have different connotations, and it should have been reported more accurately.

[neonchameleon.livejournal.com]

To take a military example, an officer is responsible for the actions of the troops under his command. He is to blame for not keeping them under control.

Responsibility and blame are not quite interchangable (like so many supposed synonyms in English).

[aberrantangels]

No one ever says, "Well, okay, she was wearing a low-cut dress but seriously, that raping fuckhead should learn some self-control". I suppose that's because it should be self-evident. However, not to a third of the people in this country and I hate to think what the percentage looks like in the US.

Here in the god-bothered US, self-control is expected of teenagers who are just learning to cope with this sudden hormonal stew and (to quote Soul Music) "bits of your body suddenly developing a mind of their own", but anyone who suggests it should be a properly of adult males, particularly in our highly-trained armed forces, is told "Boys will be boys." And mostpeople either agree with this or acquiesce in it. *sigh* I want a new species. If I ever win the lottery, I may just sink it into funding sclerotic_rings' time travel research and giving Earth a chance to develop intelligent life this time.

[aberrantangels]

Oh, and on a personal note, unless you've really let yourself go since you were in Mississippi, I wouldn't call you fat. Sturdy, still, maybe even stocky, but I probably have more've a weight problem that you do.

[neonchameleon.livejournal.com]

No one ever says, "Well, okay, she was wearing a low-cut dress but seriously, that raping fuckhead should learn some self-control". I suppose that's because it should be self-evident.

And because they (with luck) get locked away. I have yet to see anyone suggest that rape should be decriminalised.

The people who think she's partially responsible have a point. She, by dressing for herself or others, or by acting flirtatiously chose to increase the risk factors for rape and got clobbered for it hard. The result was disproportionate and it should not have happened - but she increased the risk factors for a known danger, and the danger happened.

It all depends on what you mean by "responsible".

The people who worry me are the around 5% (both genders...) who think that she was completely responsible for getting raped.

[thessalian.livejournal.com]

Define 'flirtatious activity'. Hell, define 'what not to wear if you don't want to be raped'. I don't think women should have to feel like they're a target for rape just because they're not wrapped up in a nun's habit all the time. As I've been trying to say, the whole point is that it's subjective. Someone's "I was just being friendly" is someone else's "She WANTS me". To force people to constantly second-guess their choices because some other people can't practice basic self-control is a ludicrous idea. I don't fancy the idea of the country going back to the sheer prudery of the Victorian era just to keep myself from the possibility of rape, thanks.

As for "they get locked away" ... not really. Only about 6% of people charged with rape get convicted for it, and that's not even scratching the surface, since most women know that there's little if any point in pressing charges against a rapist because it will get overturned in court 94% of the time. The reason so few rapists get convicted is this very mentality that women must accept some responsibility because men can't behave in ... you know, it's not even a matter of civilised behaviour -- the lower animals don't generally take a female by force.

[neonchameleon.livejournal.com]

To force people to constantly second-guess their choices because some other people can't practice basic self-control is a ludicrous idea

I thought it was just a part of being human and a member of society.

and that's not even scratching the surface, since most women know that there's little if any point in pressing charges against a rapist because it will get overturned in court 94% of the time.

... and yet things get to court like the most recent outcry where the woman couldn't even remember whether she'd consented or not. I'm afraid that if she had asked for it, she'd asked for it - and if she hadn't, there was no way that there was sufficient evidence of guilt to convict with the presumption of innocence under British law. And yet the prosecutors thought it was worth going for.