Friday, January 29, 2010

University of Ottawa Women's Resource Centre- Hate Speech

Friday, January 29, 2010 1:30 AM 
MEDIA ALERT
Happening Right Now
Captured by Cellphone Photography The University of Ottawa Women's Resource CentreHate Speech-Sent to FathersCan by a third party via a student at Ottawa University. Its an "In the Window Now" Situation. Male Students report being outraged 

FathersCan asks what would the public and media reaction  be if the wording was somewhat different and reflected a male perspective about dangerous women? The reader can use their imagination Would a 'Men's Resource Centre' be allowed to display something akin to this (even were there to be such a resource centre which there isn't)  So? Hate Speech or Not? Does the Law allow this? Not for men to do for sure.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't think you understand what this is about. This is a satirical response to the countless "Rape Prevention" lists that put the responsibility for rape on the (female) victims. I don't think the first three "tips" are meant to be seriously, they are meant to be about as ridiculous as the tips women are often given about "staying out of trouble," which usually stop just short of telling women to never leave the house. Points 4 and 5 are impossible to argue with, as is the conclusion that "real men don't rape."

Is this still misandrist? Perhaps, because not all will get the joke, thus it could be seen as fostering some anti-male sentiment. As feminists always say, the intention does not matter as much as the effect. But as someone who clearly does pay attention to what feminists are saying, you of all people should at least be able to understand the context here, and to inform your readers of what that is so they know the whole story.

jr007r1 said...

BS.

I fully understand what this is about.

Indeed, I worked at a university for 10 years, and was forced into going into "Sexual Harrassment Training" to where, once attending: I was charged with sexual harrassment! (I asked one question re: Mike Tyson; how could two people go into a room, nobody but them knows what occurred, and then a few days later, the woman charge rape?)

I was then falsely charged with "Sexual Harrassement" and the University tried to fire me. All was disproven--and when it was--I made application (just a suggestion) that I then file FALSE CHARGES against the woman who filed false charges against me.

When the University went ballistic. Oh no! YOU cannot do THAT!!!

Well, if we all 'understand' this 'satirical response'--then lets place yet another SATIRICAL RESPONSE against females, mocking them, and placing humiliating and false 'rediculous' claims in an exact poster on the same window.

Wanna play?

I think not.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, this was clearly tongue-in-cheek. I'm a woman and yeah, perhaps you've had to go through "Sexual Harassment Training" but have you even been to one directed at women?

I've been to more than one (mandatory) sessions that essentially blame the women who were raped because they put themselves in that situation, or they wore suggestive clothing.

So, yeah. We get told to stay in well lit areas and never go anywhere without "protection." Should we ever so briefly leave our drink unattended, or sometimes so much as taking your eyes off it, buy a new one because if someone drugged it, well you were dumb enough to drink it.

It's not hate speech. I'll give you that it's bad taste but I think you need to be a woman to understand why they went to that extreme. Like the first commenter said, we (women) are told everything short of just never leaving the house (let alone what they tell us about being in the house) to avoid being raped.

Maybe less women would be raped if men were given education like that. It's not hate speech, it's not misandrist. Here I am right now watching the news about a man who raped several women. His response? "Maybe you should learn to lock your doors."

Yeah, you're the victim here.

Anonymous said...

Having read the article and the responses, I thought I would take a moment to write. Satire can be useful; there is no question. However, tossing satire into such a charged arena mostly results in backlash; some people will understand the satire, but will still think the writer lowered themselves to the standard of their enemies. This satire just was not that good; it actually reads like a joke that women would email to each other. The writer just was not good enough to pull off this type of satire...so what is left?

Every decent man should be offended; every parent who raised a son who is not a rapist should be offended; every wife or daughter of a decent man should be offended. The only people who are not offended by this mindset are the people who attempted the satire, and the few rapists who might see it; the statements play to the writer's own crowd and, in a different way, to those they have been wronged by. Everyone else is turned from the victim's cause by this type of presentation.

No decent man wants to be labeled a rapist, and no woman who is with a decent man wants her partner so labeled. This type of "shotgun" advertising for the cause lumps all men together, rather than pointing out the evil men.

In 10 minutes, with a two pieces of paper and a marker, the author of these signs did more harm to their cause, in the mind of the general public, than hours of talk shows could have done.

They have turned from their cause every man who does not want to be classified as a rapist, and many women who care about decent men.

The pen is certainly mightier than the sword, and can do so much damage in the hands of those who do not think through their actions...

But then what do I know?

Michael J. Murphy said...

Context is everything. This is part of the curriculum of indoctrination in Women's Studies programs. A blunt edged sword is used to paint a whole gender as abusers which includes rapists.

Ask the Lesbians in Vancouver if their taking a stand-up comedian to the BC Human Rights Tribunal was using satire. They don't think so.

The point is there is a double standard at this University as there is in many places dominated with Lifeboat Feminist ideology and mythology. Some of the posters here subscribe to it thinking only as victims and that is a form of paranoia.

The Duluth Wheel purporting all men as abusers as part of the notorious patriarchy and all women victims is psycho-babble but it is accepted as valid in Academia and many other places. You are now seeing the back lash of all this misandry.

The tragic part of it is real victims may be thought of as not as badly damaged as first thought especially with all the false rape charges coming to light. In the military false charges out number legitimate ones and in terms of conviction rates from those thought to be legitimate are even lower again.

Cry wolf long enough and eventually credibility is lost. Its time for Lifeboat Feminism to grow up and act like real adults.

Michael J. Murphy said...

Just in case there is confusion over terminology you can find definitions of various forms of feminism here. http://victimfeministcentral.blogspot.com/

Jason said...

I'm a man, and I was raped repeatedly by a woman. It's not something that is taken seriously by the police.

Michael J. Murphy said...

Police are trained to think of men as abusers only and even if a man is abused by his female partner and calls them there is a high probability he will be arrested.

Most men don't report abuse for the very reasons you describe. In my younger days I have been inappropriately sexually assaulted by females simply because they couldn't keep their hands off me. On one occasion I was followed in to the bathroom, she closed and locked the door, and was all over me in seconds.

I had to stop the behaviour quickly and return to the party so her husband would not get the wrong idea, even though I was not the instigator. Some folks should not drink alcohol.

To have reported the incident to police would have been surreal as no one would believe it. This kind of behaviour I posit is not uncommon but is largely unreported by men.

Anonymous said...

The claim this is satire and tongue in cheek is obscene. The injury of an action is not what the intent is but how it is received by those it is aimed at. Read any harassment policy, they are written to counter this very argument. Tell a sexist joke and say "I was just joking" is not good enough.

Clearly people are offended by these sexist and hateful remarks, they are no protected by freedom of speech. Considering the hair trigger sensitivity of women's groups to comments I find the hypocrisy of the WRC breath taking and shameful.

Malcolm said...

Just started Grad School at UoO and stumbled on this page whilst browsing.

Satire, oh my God they claim it is satire. Just like the SCUM manifesto is satire.

UoO WRC also claims falsely to be "an all inclusive welcoming safe space for all"

I walked in there some time back and felt as welcome as a fox in a chicken coop. I was told I could borrow books from their "library" and attended workshops if men were invited. Apart from that don't go anywhere else and don't hang around.