| ETA: I agree with mvanveen's comment below. As Georgia says, her duty is done. My confusion should be taken as my own failure to relate. Our duty is to fix these problems. I'm confused by the attitude of (maybe I'm reading this wrong) "This is a big deal, not like that silly 'feminist' stuff" when everything wrong here (other than the attack itself) is subtle institutionalized sexism. They guy's a creeper, but he wasn't already outed and banned. The victim's story is questioned because of flirting/drinking/invitation/politeness She had to second-guess herself and worry about legalities during the attack. She's now afraid of sexist comments and still doesn't want to publicly name someone who is dangerous. (I'm not criticizing her choice per se, the problem is whatever is giving her reason not to identify him) It's easy to treat all of these as little things, but if the community had treated these issues as a big deal and dealt with them, maybe this attack wouldn't even have happened. |
I think it took tremendous courage for the author to post this and I don't think it's fair to ask her to try and address all these issues with her tone.
I think the fact we're more interested in analyzing the authors tone rather than sympathizing with a woman who DEFENDED HERSELF FROM RAPE and wasn't given sufficient support at a conference is maybe why she feels like she has to put out such a tone.
Please don't misinterpret me and think I'm saying that dongle jokes are ok and that subtle, institutionalized sexism isn't a big deal. I just think we could do more to give people some safe space to express anecdotes like this, and that might help foster an atmosphere of discussion.
Maybe then the next person who has the courage to come forward with an issue like this will feel empowered enough to talk about the cultural factors you're mentioning without needing to get on the defensive.