din ciclul care e diferenta intre feminism si anti-pornografie, de pe acest blog (episoade precedente: 1, 2 si 3):
citeam un interviu relativ recent cu catherine mackinnon: “In her new book, leading feminist Catharine MacKinnon argues that women are still treated more like “things” than people. …”
deci din p. meu personal d.v., desi am ajuns de-a lungul anilor la o pozitie foarte diferita de ideile intransigent/absolut anti-porn si anti-prostitutie ale lui mackinnon si dworkin, sint totusi mai de acord decit nu cu ce spune mackinnon pe linia “Pornography affects people’s belief in rape myths. So for example if a woman says ‘I didn’t consent’ and people have been viewing pornography, they believe rape myths and believe the woman did consent no matter what she said. That when she said no, she meant yes. When she said she didn’t want to, that meant more beer. When she said she would prefer to go home, that means she’s a lesbian who needs to be given a good corrective experience. Pornography promotes these rape myths and desensitises people to violence against women so that you need more violence to become sexually aroused if you’re a pornography consumer. This is very well documented.” chiar cred ca e mult adevar in chestia asta. si cred ca vedem rezultatele in “rape culture”-ul care se perpetueaza la nesfirsit… motivul pentru care atitudinea predominanta fata de viol ramine cea cu “victima trebuie sa fi facut ceva sa merite – sau macar sa invite atacul” (si asta nu numai din partea unor persoane conservatoare sau fara compasiune la alte capitole). numai intr-un rape culture e posibil ca, in secolul xxi:
– in italia (unde btw legea impotriva violului marital este inca ceva f. nou), intr-un caz in care o fata a fost violata de tatal ei vitreg, sentinta sa fie mai usoara pentru ca fata avea experienta sexuala
– un senator in sua sa poata vorbi despre singura exceptie pe care o poate vedea el la noua lege in south dakota care interzice avortul chiar in cazuri de viol sau incest, in urmatorii termeni: “A real-life description [of an exception scenario] to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life.” (pentru ca, altfel, majoritatea violurilor sint o nimica toata. mai ales daca victima nu e virgina/religioasa.) alte reactii la napoli si interzicerea avortului in south dakota: aici, aici si aici.
– despre un caz in care o stripteusa (negresa) i-a acuzat de viol pe niste studenti (albi), cineva sa poata scrie urmatoarele “It’s racism at Duke, all right. Racism against white students. Members of the Duke University Lacrosse team may have abused a black party girl, but, without any proof or trial, the Duke Lacrosse team was punished by the university, suspended from further games. So terrified was the administration of being charged with “racism.” The black female wins again. She is truly an ace on the field and in court.” cu alte cuvinte, nu numai ca nu se poate sa fi fost viol pentru ca e vorba de o “black party girl”, dar chiar daca ar fi fost un viol nedreptatea aici e ca victima a indraznit sa-ngreuneze vietile celor care au atacat-o si ale suporterilor lor. (sau, daca nu e acuzata pe baza faptului ca e o femeie usoara si ne-alba, atunci victima e mincinoasa pt. ca “She filed a sexual assault report ten years ago and did not follow through with the investigation.”)
etc. etc. etc. si-apoi, desigur, te intilnesti cu atitudini de-astea, uneori mai “subtile” uneori nu, la tot pasul. constant. grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr