Part 1: Sluts
I curse like a proverbial sailor. I'm not particularly proud of this fact (nor am I ashamed of it) but I have no issue with profanity, per se. I DO have an issue with hateful language, however.
"What are words used to describe women and girls who are sexually active?" I ask my high school classes. Their responses usually include:
- Slut
- Skank
- Hoe
- Bust-down
- Chicken-head
And a variety of other insulting names. Insulting is the key word here. According to students' vernacular, being a sexually active women is a very bad thing. (And please note, these words aren't reserved only for women who are sexually active, but for women who dress "provactivly"-- irrespective of their sexual behavior).
This would not trouble me if it were a simple matter of language. But it isn't. If you look at sexual violence on a spectrum, it's pretty easy to see how the language we use is connected to sexual harrassment, abuse, assault and exploitation. Bear with me here:
--> If we (society) call women "sluts" because they dress or act a certain way, it's easy to start thinking of them as "sluts" or being less worthy of respect.
--> If we think of certain women as sluts it becomes easy to treat them with disrespect, make unwanted comments or advances and even believe that such behavior is warrented or wanted.
--> If treating some women with disrespect goes unchallenged we excuse and justify sexual harrassment and abuse -- under certain circumstances.
--> If we excuse harassment and abuse under any circumstances we are participating in victim-blaming and upholding the myths that justify sexual violence, including rape and sexual exploitation.
All people regardless of gender, sexual experience or dress are worthy of respect. A person's sexual proclivities or wardrobe have nothing to do with their humanity. This is crystal clear to me. But does it sound crazy to you? (Sometimes I think I'm too entrenched in the movement to see things from a "normal person's" perspective, and I honest-to-goodness want your feedback).
I used to greet my girlfriends with an affectionate, "what's up slut?!" We liked to drink, party, and "hook-up." I think calling each other by that name was a reclamation of sorts.
But I've turned around on this issue. Until sexual harassment, abuse, assault and exploitation are understood by and handled respectfully in popular culture, I argue that these kinds of gender-based insults do much more harm than good.
So here is my charge to you: think about the language you use. Don't beat yourself up about it, just think about it. Assess whether changing the way you speak can do any good. (If you're not sure please read my upcoming post -- parts 2 & 3 of this entry). If you currently use offensive or hateful language, please consider making some changes in your vocabulary. And if you want to take it a step further, talk to your friends about why you're doing it. A bunch of small changes can make a big difference.
To close, please check out this new commercial from Scotland. I'd love to see ads with this message in the US!
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Saturday, June 26, 2010
(the) Power (of love)
"You still don't get it. It's not about right. It's not about wrong. It's about power."**
And the thing about power is: those who have it do what they can to keep it.
Is it a stretch to say that every social movement in history was rooted in power struggle? I'm not enough of a history-buff to confidently answer that question. But I think it's a reasonable hypothesis. And, if it has all come down to power, I think we need to reassess our goals.
The Anti-Rape Movement taught us that sexual violence is about power and control. It's not about right and wrong. It's about people with power demonstrating how they intend to keep it. So if the Pro-Consent Movement is about gaining power, what will prevent us from replicating the choices of our oppressors as our movement succeeds? After all, memories are short and the movement is long.
Therefore, we need to be purposeful in stating that the goal of the Pro-Consent Movement is not to gain power. Rather, it is about spreading love. It's about learning how to love to the best of your ability, and helping those around you to do the same. It is about treating yourself and others with care and respect. We can only truly change the world if we stop playing by the rules of our oppressors. Rather than fighting to take what they have, let's teach them to value what WE have. It's as simple as being kind to yourself and kind to your neighbor. Easy-peezy-lemon-squeezy...
well, kinda...
To close, I leave your with a little Huey Lewis. Soooooooo gooooood!
Have a pleasure-filled day!
And the thing about power is: those who have it do what they can to keep it.
Is it a stretch to say that every social movement in history was rooted in power struggle? I'm not enough of a history-buff to confidently answer that question. But I think it's a reasonable hypothesis. And, if it has all come down to power, I think we need to reassess our goals.
The Anti-Rape Movement taught us that sexual violence is about power and control. It's not about right and wrong. It's about people with power demonstrating how they intend to keep it. So if the Pro-Consent Movement is about gaining power, what will prevent us from replicating the choices of our oppressors as our movement succeeds? After all, memories are short and the movement is long.
Therefore, we need to be purposeful in stating that the goal of the Pro-Consent Movement is not to gain power. Rather, it is about spreading love. It's about learning how to love to the best of your ability, and helping those around you to do the same. It is about treating yourself and others with care and respect. We can only truly change the world if we stop playing by the rules of our oppressors. Rather than fighting to take what they have, let's teach them to value what WE have. It's as simple as being kind to yourself and kind to your neighbor. Easy-peezy-lemon-squeezy...
well, kinda...
To close, I leave your with a little Huey Lewis. Soooooooo gooooood!
Have a pleasure-filled day!
** Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Season 7, Episode 1.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Moving from "Anti-Rape" to "Pro-Consent"
Lot's of people who, according to legal or social definitions, have been raped don't call themselves rape survivors. In my years as an anti-rape activist I've heard more stories of this nature than I can count. And this used to frustrate me. The way I a saw it, every person who refused to call rape "rape," held back those who called it by name (and arguably, when you're within the "anti-rape" movement, that is the case).
But I see things differently now. I think individuals can and should define their own experiences. If you don't feel comfortable calling what happened to you "rape," by all means, don't! I can name about a million reasons not to, after all: it's painful, you're likely to not be believed, friends/family/legal & medical staff may blame you, if you were engaged in any sexual activity prior to the assault (especially if you identify as a woman) you may be disregarded as a "slut," "whore," or as "asking for it" -- just to name a few. Not to mention that plenty of people experience what's legally defined as rape without feeling traumatized by it.
I'm not trying to dissuade folks from coming out as survivors. If you want to come out, kudos to you! That is some brave shit!! But I'd like to call attention to the problematic nature of hinging a movement on individuals' ability to call an experience "rape" in a culture that tells survivors that it was merely "bad sex" and that if is was indeed rape, it was probably the victim's fault (their sexual history, dress and/or level of intoxication will likely be looked to as explanations).
We need a paradigm shift.
Let's start by finding some common ground:
Can we all agree that you should only engage in sexual activity with someone who wants to engage in that activity with you?
Yes?
Okay, good. (Phew).
If you're in agreement then you are in favor of consent. And if you're in favor of consent calling yourself part of the "pro-consent" movement shouldn't be too much of a stretch. Using the language "pro-consent" doesn't necessitate survivors to come forward. All it asks is for you to have consensual sexual experiences. Period. And who doesn't want to do that?! One of my favorite Sexual Violence Prevention researchers Paul Schewe has wisely pointed out, if you engage in consensual sexual practices you'll likely have "more sex," and "better sex." Amen, brother!
Call your experiences whatever you like, but please know that not saying "no" is not the same as saying "yes." When it comes to our bodies and sexuality we have the right to be heard and respected. American culture does not support open communication about sex and sexuality so it's likely you haven't practiced enthusiastic consent in the past. But it's easy to start: if you're not sure if you have consent, just ask! (Thank you Jaclyn Friedman). By engaging in enthusiastic consent that is active, ongoing and mutual you are doing your part to end sexual violence and probably having a great time while you're at it! Everybody wins -- what's not to love!?
But I see things differently now. I think individuals can and should define their own experiences. If you don't feel comfortable calling what happened to you "rape," by all means, don't! I can name about a million reasons not to, after all: it's painful, you're likely to not be believed, friends/family/legal & medical staff may blame you, if you were engaged in any sexual activity prior to the assault (especially if you identify as a woman) you may be disregarded as a "slut," "whore," or as "asking for it" -- just to name a few. Not to mention that plenty of people experience what's legally defined as rape without feeling traumatized by it.
I'm not trying to dissuade folks from coming out as survivors. If you want to come out, kudos to you! That is some brave shit!! But I'd like to call attention to the problematic nature of hinging a movement on individuals' ability to call an experience "rape" in a culture that tells survivors that it was merely "bad sex" and that if is was indeed rape, it was probably the victim's fault (their sexual history, dress and/or level of intoxication will likely be looked to as explanations).
We need a paradigm shift.
Let's start by finding some common ground:
Can we all agree that you should only engage in sexual activity with someone who wants to engage in that activity with you?
Yes?
Okay, good. (Phew).
If you're in agreement then you are in favor of consent. And if you're in favor of consent calling yourself part of the "pro-consent" movement shouldn't be too much of a stretch. Using the language "pro-consent" doesn't necessitate survivors to come forward. All it asks is for you to have consensual sexual experiences. Period. And who doesn't want to do that?! One of my favorite Sexual Violence Prevention researchers Paul Schewe has wisely pointed out, if you engage in consensual sexual practices you'll likely have "more sex," and "better sex." Amen, brother!
Call your experiences whatever you like, but please know that not saying "no" is not the same as saying "yes." When it comes to our bodies and sexuality we have the right to be heard and respected. American culture does not support open communication about sex and sexuality so it's likely you haven't practiced enthusiastic consent in the past. But it's easy to start: if you're not sure if you have consent, just ask! (Thank you Jaclyn Friedman). By engaging in enthusiastic consent that is active, ongoing and mutual you are doing your part to end sexual violence and probably having a great time while you're at it! Everybody wins -- what's not to love!?
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Men are the solution.
Thinking about rape sucks.
I mean, really.
It is no fun.
At all.
That in mind, I have crazy appreciation and respect for non-victims who've chosen to join the anti-rape movement. Shoot! I have crazy appreciation & respect for anyone who chooses to align themselves with the movement.
I am a survivor of sexual assault. I have to think about rape. Whether I like it or not, it is a part of every step I take, every sentence I write and every word I utter. Being a survivor of sexual assault is part of who I am. And frankly, if I didn't HAVE to think about rape I'm pretty damn sure I wouldn't. Because (as we know) it is no fun. At all.
And I like fun. To quote a wise friend from high school, "fun is awesome." And a world without rape sounds pretty fun to me. Idealistic? Sure. But certainly fun.
A world without rape. Think about it...picture it...got it?....okay,.....now......smile, aaaaaaand [repeat].
Granted I am not sure how to create a world without rape. But I am fairly certain that the 1 in 6 - 8 women and 1 in 10-33 men who are survivors cannot do it alone.
Perhaps you've heard these statistics before. If so, you've probably heard them used as an educational tool or even a scare-tactic. But have you ever heard them as an invitation? If not, I invite you to.
So far, the business of fighting sexual assault has been pretty much left-up to survivors and their close family and friends. Please understand that it is draining to have your deepest wounds continually re-opened during your regular-work-week. (The plus-side of this is that you're generally forced to make great strides toward healing in a relatively short time. In my mind, the benefit outweighs the cost). As such, I think the movement could flourish (rather than merely survive) if we were joined, en masse, by people who weren't so darn 'drained' by it.
So please, join us!
Right now, I am not asking much. It's as easy a 1...2...3...
1. Please become a follower of this blog (see the grey follow button at right? yeah...that's the one...)
2. Check for updates now and again.
3. If you feel inspired to do so, leave a comment -- ask a question! Start a debate! Do a little bit of very-un-fun thinking about rape.
That is all I ask of you. And I believe the benefit could be great. I believe that if we're willing to make small, incremental changes we can collectively make a big difference.
Anthropologist & feminist Margaret Meade famously said, "never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
Ms. Meade was right on. But we have a powerful tool that world-changers in the past lacked: the World Wide Web. So with respect for these "small groups" (to whom we owe so much), I say, let's shoot bigger.
Surviving isn't good enough anymore. We all deserve to thrive.
I mean, really.
It is no fun.
At all.
That in mind, I have crazy appreciation and respect for non-victims who've chosen to join the anti-rape movement. Shoot! I have crazy appreciation & respect for anyone who chooses to align themselves with the movement.
I am a survivor of sexual assault. I have to think about rape. Whether I like it or not, it is a part of every step I take, every sentence I write and every word I utter. Being a survivor of sexual assault is part of who I am. And frankly, if I didn't HAVE to think about rape I'm pretty damn sure I wouldn't. Because (as we know) it is no fun. At all.
And I like fun. To quote a wise friend from high school, "fun is awesome." And a world without rape sounds pretty fun to me. Idealistic? Sure. But certainly fun.
A world without rape. Think about it...picture it...got it?....okay,.....now......smile, aaaaaaand [repeat].
Granted I am not sure how to create a world without rape. But I am fairly certain that the 1 in 6 - 8 women and 1 in 10-33 men who are survivors cannot do it alone.
Perhaps you've heard these statistics before. If so, you've probably heard them used as an educational tool or even a scare-tactic. But have you ever heard them as an invitation? If not, I invite you to.
So far, the business of fighting sexual assault has been pretty much left-up to survivors and their close family and friends. Please understand that it is draining to have your deepest wounds continually re-opened during your regular-work-week. (The plus-side of this is that you're generally forced to make great strides toward healing in a relatively short time. In my mind, the benefit outweighs the cost). As such, I think the movement could flourish (rather than merely survive) if we were joined, en masse, by people who weren't so darn 'drained' by it.
So please, join us!
Right now, I am not asking much. It's as easy a 1...2...3...
1. Please become a follower of this blog (see the grey follow button at right? yeah...that's the one...)
2. Check for updates now and again.
3. If you feel inspired to do so, leave a comment -- ask a question! Start a debate! Do a little bit of very-un-fun thinking about rape.
That is all I ask of you. And I believe the benefit could be great. I believe that if we're willing to make small, incremental changes we can collectively make a big difference.
Anthropologist & feminist Margaret Meade famously said, "never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
Ms. Meade was right on. But we have a powerful tool that world-changers in the past lacked: the World Wide Web. So with respect for these "small groups" (to whom we owe so much), I say, let's shoot bigger.
Surviving isn't good enough anymore. We all deserve to thrive.
PS -- I should probably call attention to the (true but) misleading title of this entry. I think it's catchier than "everyone is the solution" (We are the World pretty much covered that territory -- jus'sayin).
Saturday, May 15, 2010
What IS "making love," anyway?
The Words We Use is an exercise I frequently do with high school students in my work as a Rape Prevention Educator. I ask the students to name 10 or more words used for women and girls who have sex or are sexually active, men and boys who have sex or are sexually active and then words used to describe having sex or being sexually active.
The results are consistent: the words used to describe women are generally negative, the words for men are complimentary and the words for "sex" are usually violent. It seems that "nailing," "drilling," "pounding," "banging" & "fucking" casually roll off the tongues of youth but the words "making love" leave them rosy-cheeked and embarrassed.
The cultural definition of "making love" usually refers to two people who are in love sharing their bodies in a sexual way (a blush-worthy definition for any high school student, to be sure). But I'd like to explore a more literal definition. I am wondering what produces love? Is it parenthood? Friendship? Romance? This is a bigger question than can be adequately addressed in this blog entry. Clearly. But for the sake of exploration, roll with me.
Parenthood, friendship and romance all have connection in common. I can argue that connecting & being fully present with others can produce joy and, depending on your definition, love.
My next question is -- what do we enter the bedroom to do, exactly? Is it simply to get off? If that is all, the other person is a mere accessory. You can "fuck," "nail" or "bang" your partner and you may reach your goal of orgasm in happy conjunction with them but you also run the risk of doing it at the expense of their well-being.
Countless songs, poems & visual works of art have been inspired by sex. Yet certainly many 'sexually active' folks have wondered "what is all the fuss about?" I don't claim to have all the answers, but I am pretty sure all the "fuss" did not stem from merely getting-off at the hands of another person [pardon the pun]. It was inspired by something more.
Instead of concerning ourselves solely with attaining orgasm or pleasuring our partner, I argue a more enjoyable experience will be had if we enter an encounter with the goal of connecting or being with another person. That connection can take many forms. It may be tender or rough, vanilla or kinky, it may be shared between lifelong partners or total strangers or anything in-between. But when partners connect with one another, when they check-in and make sure that their actions and behaviors are in-line with their partner's wants and desires, everyone leaves the experience feeling joyful and loving. In essence, you have produced, created, or in other words, made love.
The person who just had a fulfilling sexual experience is probably not the person cutting in line at the grocery store or flipping you off on the highway. They're more likely the person letting you cut in line because you have fewer items or leaving room for you to merge into their lane. In these seemingly small ways (and at the risk of sounding too "hippy-dippy") they are literally spreading kindness, joy, and yes -- love.
So okay, admittedly my definition of "producing love" is no less blush-worthy to an average high schooler than the standard definition of "making love." But I wonder what could be gained if, as a culture, we understood sex as a means of producing love and joy rather than a sinful and often destructive act that ruins young women and promotes young men to a false god-like status.
People have sex. Teens have sex. We can't change that. But we can change our cultural definition of what having sex is and should be. It should produce joy. It should produce love. If it does not, it's possible what we're doing isn't sex at all.
The results are consistent: the words used to describe women are generally negative, the words for men are complimentary and the words for "sex" are usually violent. It seems that "nailing," "drilling," "pounding," "banging" & "fucking" casually roll off the tongues of youth but the words "making love" leave them rosy-cheeked and embarrassed.
The cultural definition of "making love" usually refers to two people who are in love sharing their bodies in a sexual way (a blush-worthy definition for any high school student, to be sure). But I'd like to explore a more literal definition. I am wondering what produces love? Is it parenthood? Friendship? Romance? This is a bigger question than can be adequately addressed in this blog entry. Clearly. But for the sake of exploration, roll with me.
Parenthood, friendship and romance all have connection in common. I can argue that connecting & being fully present with others can produce joy and, depending on your definition, love.
My next question is -- what do we enter the bedroom to do, exactly? Is it simply to get off? If that is all, the other person is a mere accessory. You can "fuck," "nail" or "bang" your partner and you may reach your goal of orgasm in happy conjunction with them but you also run the risk of doing it at the expense of their well-being.
Countless songs, poems & visual works of art have been inspired by sex. Yet certainly many 'sexually active' folks have wondered "what is all the fuss about?" I don't claim to have all the answers, but I am pretty sure all the "fuss" did not stem from merely getting-off at the hands of another person [pardon the pun]. It was inspired by something more.
Instead of concerning ourselves solely with attaining orgasm or pleasuring our partner, I argue a more enjoyable experience will be had if we enter an encounter with the goal of connecting or being with another person. That connection can take many forms. It may be tender or rough, vanilla or kinky, it may be shared between lifelong partners or total strangers or anything in-between. But when partners connect with one another, when they check-in and make sure that their actions and behaviors are in-line with their partner's wants and desires, everyone leaves the experience feeling joyful and loving. In essence, you have produced, created, or in other words, made love.
The person who just had a fulfilling sexual experience is probably not the person cutting in line at the grocery store or flipping you off on the highway. They're more likely the person letting you cut in line because you have fewer items or leaving room for you to merge into their lane. In these seemingly small ways (and at the risk of sounding too "hippy-dippy") they are literally spreading kindness, joy, and yes -- love.
So okay, admittedly my definition of "producing love" is no less blush-worthy to an average high schooler than the standard definition of "making love." But I wonder what could be gained if, as a culture, we understood sex as a means of producing love and joy rather than a sinful and often destructive act that ruins young women and promotes young men to a false god-like status.
People have sex. Teens have sex. We can't change that. But we can change our cultural definition of what having sex is and should be. It should produce joy. It should produce love. If it does not, it's possible what we're doing isn't sex at all.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Peaches, young women, sex, drugs and drama
According to the lingerie company Miss Ultimo, the following images are marketed toward a "young female audience."
Web gossip today tells us about the most recent celebrity drug/sex scandal. Miss Ultimo apparently fired their cover girl, Peaches Geldof, this morning after rumors surfaced about a heroine-induced one night stand.
I enjoy a little celebrity gossip just like the next person, but what's notable to me about this situation has nothing to do with what was put in Geldof's body. What's notable to me is that a company publicly acknowledging that they market the images above to "a young female audience" is less newsworthy than a dime-a-dozen, celebrity-gets-partied-out story.
I'm not pro-censorship and I'm hardly a prude. But certainly I can't be the only person who thinks THESE IMAGES are NOT APPROPRIATE for a target audience of YOUNG FEMALES?!?!? Why isn't this a bigger deal?! (To quote Zoolander: "I feel like I'm on crazy pills!")
Let me be clear, I am not in favor of promoting drug use or unsafe sexual practices to young women. However, I think it should be noted that it is hypocracy for Miss Ultimo to both sell highly sexualized images of what-girls-should-look-like to young women AND fire their model for having a less-than-prudent sexual encounter. And the fact that Geldof was apparently high on heroine should not further condemn her as unvirtuous. Rather, it should help us call attention to the fact that a person cannot legally give consent while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. This is a teachable moment that we, as a culture, are ignoring.
The way I see it, young women are caught in the ultimate Catch-22. On one hand, they’re expected to work to be attractive and sexual. On the other, if they meet these expectations they’re susceptible to being called a “slut” or a “ho,” rejected by girlfriends or worse, in the event of sexual assault, abuse or harassment they may be held accountable by peers and media who suggest, “you were asking for/deserve it.” (Even though sexual violence is NEVER the victim's fault).
We see this played out in the Miss Ultimo drama. The lingerie company was comfortable projecting highly sexually suggestive and passive images of Peaches Geldof. But when Geldof put those projections to practice, she was fired. We either need to show young women healthy images of sexuality and support their decisions to engage in healthy, age appropriate sexual activity, or we need to be consistent in the message that they're too young to engage. Personally, I vote for the first of these approaches.
We tell athletes to run fast -- they win games when they do. We tell children to study hard, they may get "A"s when they do. We tell men to act tough and they "get the girl" when they do. But what happens to girls who do what they're told?
They get fired from Miss Ultimo.
Something is terribly wrong here.
Web gossip today tells us about the most recent celebrity drug/sex scandal. Miss Ultimo apparently fired their cover girl, Peaches Geldof, this morning after rumors surfaced about a heroine-induced one night stand.
I enjoy a little celebrity gossip just like the next person, but what's notable to me about this situation has nothing to do with what was put in Geldof's body. What's notable to me is that a company publicly acknowledging that they market the images above to "a young female audience" is less newsworthy than a dime-a-dozen, celebrity-gets-partied-out story.
I'm not pro-censorship and I'm hardly a prude. But certainly I can't be the only person who thinks THESE IMAGES are NOT APPROPRIATE for a target audience of YOUNG FEMALES?!?!? Why isn't this a bigger deal?! (To quote Zoolander: "I feel like I'm on crazy pills!")
Let me be clear, I am not in favor of promoting drug use or unsafe sexual practices to young women. However, I think it should be noted that it is hypocracy for Miss Ultimo to both sell highly sexualized images of what-girls-should-look-like to young women AND fire their model for having a less-than-prudent sexual encounter. And the fact that Geldof was apparently high on heroine should not further condemn her as unvirtuous. Rather, it should help us call attention to the fact that a person cannot legally give consent while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. This is a teachable moment that we, as a culture, are ignoring.
The way I see it, young women are caught in the ultimate Catch-22. On one hand, they’re expected to work to be attractive and sexual. On the other, if they meet these expectations they’re susceptible to being called a “slut” or a “ho,” rejected by girlfriends or worse, in the event of sexual assault, abuse or harassment they may be held accountable by peers and media who suggest, “you were asking for/deserve it.” (Even though sexual violence is NEVER the victim's fault).
We see this played out in the Miss Ultimo drama. The lingerie company was comfortable projecting highly sexually suggestive and passive images of Peaches Geldof. But when Geldof put those projections to practice, she was fired. We either need to show young women healthy images of sexuality and support their decisions to engage in healthy, age appropriate sexual activity, or we need to be consistent in the message that they're too young to engage. Personally, I vote for the first of these approaches.
We tell athletes to run fast -- they win games when they do. We tell children to study hard, they may get "A"s when they do. We tell men to act tough and they "get the girl" when they do. But what happens to girls who do what they're told?
They get fired from Miss Ultimo.
Something is terribly wrong here.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Sexual Assault Awareness Month is coming...
April is
Sexual Assault Awareness Month
(SAAM)
Please check with your local Rape Crisis Center and find a way to get involved.
(In Illinois you can find it here.)
I look forward to getting back to blogging in May, after SAAM preparation and events have concluded!
In peace,
Eva Su
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)