babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Let me add an epigraph to M. Spector's suggestion #1 above:
"Toute l'écriture est de la cochonnerie." —Antonin Artaud
"Rubbish is rubbish, but the history of rubbish is scholarship." —Burton S. Dreben
The issue here isn't primarily the word zionist (though it does cause a secondary issue when the "dirty" adjective is applied to it), the issue is primarily the inappropriateness of applying the term "dirty" (or synonyms such as "filthy") to any group of people.
The adjective dirty is most often applied to groups of poc such as arabs or natives. It falsely implies that these people are "dirty" (poor moral character) simply because of their skin color. Applying the term "dirty" to zionists implicitly references the racist pejorative use of "dirty". It then implies that there are some "dirty" zionists who are of as poor moral character as the arabs (Palestinians) are falsely implied to be; and that there are some zionists who are not "dirty" in this way -- false implication that some zionists are of a high enough moral character that they somehow should be let off the hook for their support of Israeli apartheid.
Left Turn, I apologize for not providing a link to the thread in question. Here it is. It provides the proper context for my remarks.
The adjective "dirty" was not applied in that thread title to a group of people, but to a single, particularly nasty, individual who has been named on a list of alleged Zionist war criminals entitled "IDF Cast Lead Dirty 200".
In this particular case I don't see any of the implications that you have referred to in your post.
I am sorry that this crap thread was mentioned in bagkitty's amazing thread. I am sorry that I followed up on that mention.
I am stunned, dismayed and depressed that males once again choose to snigger away at women's suffering, here on babble. I apologize in advance for being a humourless survivor of abuse. I know, we're so annoying.
Anyway, back to the usual, great male domination of this discussion board. Sorry for the interruption.
You don't have to go anywhere. What you said has its own validity, which doesn't need to be seconded by anyone to be valid, but I'll do so anyway despite the fact.
There is no room to breathe here, Slumberjack. I'm choking.
i'm with writer on this. am still waiting for the moderator to detail to me what's the "bad taste" he sees.
'cause it seems to me if the mod detailed out loud to us what's 'bad taste' about it he would get why it is against what i see written down as rabble's rules.
i'm saddened writer you too had to see the frat bot crap most men here see a humour.
Rape culture! Can't get enough of it, quizzical! It is HILARIOUS! Especially when one is forced down on one's knees at the age of 5! Whoooo! Heh.
Goodness, it's great to know there are progressive boards like this one where guys can haw haw their guts out about it. There are so few safe places for them, you know?
Sorry, I missed the part where people in this thread thought the North Carolina thread, or the abuse of women, was humorous....
M. Spector, I know. It's a super mystery what "men" and their "sisters"* getting married might involve in a patriarchal society very similar to our own, where abuse in families continues to run rampant. Hahahahahahahah! Oh <wipes tears of joy away>!
* Because men stand alone, whereas women are defined in relation to men! hahahahahah!
It is just so funny!
i'm crying for you and my aunties right now. and i guess for myself 'cause i feel abused after the distain, ignoring, ill founded hilarity and lack of progressive understanding i found in this thread. sure wasn't what i expected but maybe should've.
quizzical, I thank you for standing up to our psychopathic norms, and standing by those of us who have seen the belly of the beast, close up and personal.
Much love.
I think Spector nailed it at #18.
What is the point in making a very bad and inaccurate comment when the reality - that kids can be married off at age 14 to their first cousins - is itself a strong enough indictment of this ignorant decision?
To turn that into a charicature, offensive or otherwise, just glosses over how bad things really are.
Nice that you think that, Smith. I have reached the conclusion that this board has degenerated to such a degree that it invites rape culture in, and heckles and browbeats those who voice an objection to it. And the moderators have been ground down to such a degree that they no longer point to the elephant in the room.
Oh well. So much for that idea. Carry on, fellows!
writer t'anks. i hope i'll always be able to stand against it. my aunties in their 40's and 50's are still trying to survive what happened to them as children.
i saw nuttin nailed in 18 but a gloss over of "look over here not there".
What really pisses me off? That there is no acknowledgement that incest is happening everywhere. That you - all of you - know survivors and perpetrators. That, with these little sophisticated tete-a-tetes where you reassure each other that you know the score about what is and what isn't, who is too sensitive and who is correct in their blah blah blah blah blah ... that you are adding room for the abuse to happen. And you are shutting the door to those who've made it through the trauma, and might just have a thing or two to share that might make you a better person. If you listen. A better ally. A better revolutionary.
But no. Let's close that door. Tight. Forget quizzical's aunties. Look down your nose at the pain you've helped to stir.
This is where you look at yourself and decide what it is you want to contribute to this world. Who you are standing beside, and who you are standing against.
Again, quizzical, I am honoured to have you stand beside me. Many thanks. Together we'll change the world.
The age of consent in North Caroline is 16 (unless you are in a position of authority over the individual then it is 18 just like in Canada) The age for marriage is 18 unless Court approved and parental approved in which case it can be 14-17.
No one can just up and marry a 14yr old nor would it be legal for someone in a position of authority to do so.
The implication of the posters to the contrary is bullshit
This took 30 seconds of googling. And the age of consent in Canada just changed a few years ago from 14. The age of consent has been 16-18 in the US for a long time compared to that
Making 'redneck' jokes about incest and the like totally goes against the facts that it happens everywhere and isnt just a 'rural backcountry' thing. And encourages it to flourish everywhere. In your community cuz hey you aint rednecks and it doesnt happen here. And in rural areas cuz hey thats just what rednecks are like
FYI:
http://law.onecle.com/north-carolina/51-marriage/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age
It does require a court order, and I didn't say that it did not.
My point is that it seems rather absurd to make claims about undermining the institution of marriage in a jurisdiction where it is legal to marry children of age 14, regardless of the hoop-jumping involved.
(edit)
As a matter of fact, the implication of the law - that the obvious solution to child pregnancy is marriage - is even more perverse than if there were no legal constraints.
This may be akin to claiming that polygamy "happens everywhere" and is just as prevalent in, say, NYC or LA as it is in Utah. In a country as large and as diverse regionally as the USA is, there are definitely cultural practices that vary significantly from one part of the country to another.
ETA: The median age of first marriage by a woman in Utah is only 23.3 (by contrast, the median age of first marriage by a woman in Massachusetts is 28.6). Now, this says nothing about polygamy or incest rates, but it does illustrate that there can be vast cultural differences between different parts of the country.
I more or less agree with this, except for the "degenerated" part. Other places on the internet--places who don't have a progressive mandate, let alone a feminist one--have all sorts of practices which at least signal the existence of rape culture and its victims. Trigger warnings on links and threads are a matter of course--and they're respected by people who don't even vote NDP. It's never even been suggested, to my knowledge, that babble adopt such a practice. Rape culture isn't named in our policy--naively, perhaps, we probably hoped the "feminism" bit would be enough.
I've said it before: I'm at a loss. It's clear that women don't feel safe on babble. Not even former moderators. This is proven to me again and again. My response nowadays is to agree with them. Moderators don't have the knoweldge, experience or resources to change the culture of this place singlehandedly, and I rarely, if ever, feel like there's an interest among babblers to change it.
It's astonishing to me that a long-standing babbler communicates genuine disgust and visceral horror at a triggering thread title and is told immediately by two men essentially to be more reasonable. I have honestly no idea how to moderate that. I post articles in the feminism forum that are ignored (since we have so few feminists who post here), and none of rabble.ca's feminist readers who see these threads on facebook dare to come here and discuss them. Why would they? They've seen it before, and they have safer networks on fb, twitter, feministing, jezebel (!) through which to have these discussions.
quizzical, I am grateful to you for raising this concern; and I'm always grateful for writer taking the time to offer her perspective, especially when it comes at so great a cost. I'm sorry I don't have more ideas on how to fix this.
Sven, you are in denial, and your equivalency is idiotic.
I don't have my own words right now. So here are some from others.
Microaggressions
awesome woman writer! your courage is wicked. your sharing it is priceless.
649 could ya plz stop doing the "look over there" thing. what NC marriage laws are is sfa to do with anything.
at issue here is rape culture promoting thread titles and denial they are by men. and thanks writer for giving me those words. now i can express what it is. i knew it made me feel ewey but no words to express clearly.
catchfire could i ask next time you feel something is "tasteless" that ya think deeper about what exectly is tasteless and maybe see it could be more? i think it would help stop and make some men think. if only a couple do it still would be more than none.
ets
"microaggression" more words to describe. it's a wonderful day.
Thanks so much, Maysie and quizzical.
We shut down "ironic racism" pretty quick now ... after a lot of work to get there. And even those who love their privileged, ignorant "humour" know enough to no longer waste their effort trying to find an audience here for their sophisticated anti-racism racism, even though they might obliquely mewl about the heavy burden of silencing they now carry, and what a loss it is to Those Of Us Without Hilarity, who pay for the absence. Dearly.
Quizzical, if someone calls a comment of mine "bullshit" I think it is in order for me to respond, no?
In any case, I don't think too many posting here have claimed that thread title was inoffensive or at all appropriate, even though some of us are expressing different perspectives.
Rape Culture 101 [trigger warning]
Smith: how many is "too many"? And how about acknowledging that your post about ages blah blah blah derailed from the focus quizzical opened with? Had you not participated in the derailment, you would not have had to defend your irrelevant info and thereby continue the derailment. See how that works?
Thank you for pointing that out directly.
Yes, the thread did go on a tangent, and yes, I was part of it. My comment, which no one seems to have gotten, was that that last time I remember there being a problem with thread titles, it had to do with the use of the word "pig".
In any case, I apologize.
Now my point about ages and relationships? Sorry, as far as I can see that was appropriate. My main objection to the title was that an offensive, juvenile joke is doubly offensive when it glosses over things which truly are outrageous - like allowing children to marry. You may see other things there, but I assure you, that part was no joke.
ha! ya didn't really apologize at all. i see you coming back and excusing your derailing behaviour and say you were justified goin off focus. plz understand you're not..