Posts by Craig Ranapia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to nzlemming,
You always have the choice to not click… ;-)
Next you’ll be telling me to stop watching horror movies and rubbernecking at car smashes. Your faith in my masochistic impulse control is touching but ever so slightly misplaced.
But seriously, folks, if you must a trigger warning would be entirely appropriate because we know those sewers are going to go there...
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to Russell Brown,
Because, actually, we only have Marshall’s word that that part even happened.
And it's never going to be tested in a court of law, is it? Could everyone please do my stomach lining a solid and NOT post any links to related threads on Kiwibog and the Sub-Standard because I think the character assassination of the complainant will be as ugly as it is predictable.
-
OK, it might be opportune to adapt a passage from Melissa McEwan’s Rape Culture 101 (shall we just take the trigger warning for the link as read?):
Rape culture is the idea that only certain people rape—and only certain people get raped. Rape culture is ignoring that the thing about rapists is that they rape people. They rape people who are strong and people who are weak, people who are smart and people who are dumb, people who fight back and people who submit just to get it over with, people who are sluts and people who are prudes, people who rich and people who are poor, people who are tall and people who are short, people who are fat and people who are thin, people who are blind and people who are sighted, people who are deaf and people who can hear, people of every race and shape and size and ability and circumstance.
[…]
Rape culture is the pervasive narrative that there is a “typical” way to behave after being raped, instead of the acknowledgement that responses to rape are as varied as its victims, that, immediately following a rape, some women go into shock; some are lucid; some are angry; some are ashamed; some are stoic; some are erratic; some want to report it; some don’t; some will act out; some will crawl inside themselves; some will have healthy sex lives; some never will again.
And I’m going to throw a pretty controversial notion out there – Paul Henry’s replicant-like lack of empathy on 60 Minutes this week is the respectable face of rape culture. It was painfully clear that he still regards his twatcocky misogyny towards women who don’t conform to his idea of how women should look and behave as good clean fun. (And as a sidebar, if Three News & Current Affairs is as strapped for cash as has been reported, perhaps Mr. Henry's publisher should be getting invoiced for the advertorial.)
-
And, I guess, if the woman taken in adultery in John 8: 1-11 could get her shit together and sin no more, the Salvation Army deserve a fair shot at proving they can do the same.
-
I am not aware of any complaints from gay people who have felt discriminated, devalued or not accepted by the organisation while participating within SA programmes or activities.
I’ve asked a former SA member (and now out lesbian atheist) to respond to that herself, because it’s not my place to speak for her. And to be fair, having seen the leadership of my own church lie like flatfish about institutional homophobia and their response to clerical abuse, my scepticism-o-meter is permanently red-lined.
-
Hard News: Bishop Brian: It's worse than…, in reply to Jo Malone,
. Read up on their discussion papers about homosexuality and the behind-the-scenes history of those Sallies who supported the HRA and all it stands for.
So far behind the bloody scenes they exited the theatre and ended up in the middle of the parking lot. I'm sorry, but folks like Campbell Roberts neither deserve nor will receive any credit for their moral cowardice and silence when it really mattered.
-
The MPs all agreed it was a matter of electoral reality – there are 10,000 votes for the having in the Destiny Church membership.
OK, I guess this is a quasi-Godwin question to ask but I'm perfectly serious. If barking moonbat Kyle Chapman has ten thousand racist douche canoes at his beck and call we'd see these four (or more acceptably melanin-deficient substitutes) fronting to their wannabe Nuremberg Rally because, hey... it's election year and a vote's a vote?
If the answer is no, why not?
-
"Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners."
1 Corinthians 15:33 (King James Version)
That is all.
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to Sacha,
The thread’s primary subject matter is delicate and unsettling, but editing your post to say that is just being bitchy.
Well, I was trying to avoid launching into full-on Tim Gunn mode but here goes… If can explain to me what constitutes “appropriate” or “normal” business dress for women nowadays, I’d love to know. My friend’s vintage Donna Karan suits might be too “slutty” for a certain Toronto police officer’s APB (midi-length skirt with a side slit, and blouse showing a hint of boobage) but the woman who brought DKNY by the container load – and wore it to the office – in the 80’s and early 90’s obviously begged to differ.
And I’d like to think the days when Marlene Deitrich’s visits to Saville Row tailors Anderson & Sheppard were deliciously scandalous (and a woman in trousers might as well have had “butch dyke” tattooed on her forehead) are well past.
While I don’t think anyone (male or female) wearing rugger strip in the chamber constitutes business dress, my opinion doesn’t really signify does it? The Speaker and Standing Orders Committee need to arrive at a sightly more objective and useful definition for everyone than “try it on and pray the Speaker’s in a good mood today”. If nothing else, I don't think it was a particularly constructive use of the House's time.
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to Russell Brown,
Actually, Curran did publicly express discomfort about that. She discussed it when it came up in the Trade Me forums. But don’t let that stop you raising it all again.
OK, folks. Russell took the safety off so please note THE FOLLOWING MAY BE MASSIVELY TRIGGERING.
I’ll happily give Curran what little credit she deserves for “expressing discomfort” on Trade Me! Might have been nice if this bullshit had actually gotten some mainstream media attention. At least as much as Paul Quinn’s appalling twat-cockery on Back Benches or Curran's umbrage at beiong ejected from the chamber for wearing a bloody football jersey.
Over twenty years ago, I was anally raped with an object by a pack of thugs who thought it would be cool to humiliate the faggot. I wiped the blood off my arse, hid (and later burned) my stained pants and kept my damn mouth shut for two decades. Because I knew I wouldn’t be believed. Because I knew the verbal and physical bullying would just get worse, and since it happened at boarding school I couldn’t even go home to a relatively safe place at the end of the day. I had to share a dormitory – and shower – with the people who did that to me.
I knew there would be people absolutely convinced that if I wasn’t a mentally unstable and malicious liar. That I must have done something to deserve it. Like actually being gay — and we all know what those people are like, right?
So, yeah, I’m going to keep “bringing up” that the secretary-general of the Labour Party put an authorisation statement on a piece of shit that treated John Hopoate assault as a big fucking joke. (Still live, by the way.) That God only knows how many people at the most senior levels of the party must have seen it, and not been at all sensitive to the rape myths being not only perpetuated but played as a gag.
To coin a phrase, what Hopoate did is not OK.
It’s never a joke. Not because he did it to other men. Not because it happened on a rugby field.
Ever.
From anyone.
But thanks a lot for giving me permission to be a little more than “uncomfortable” that a major political party still thinks perpetuating rape culture is OK. Chur, bro.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 289 290 291 292 293 … 1235 Older→ First