[sudo-discuss] post-Bike Smut follow-up

[rachel lyra hospodar]

Complaining when it seems to contravene the status quo is scary! Especially
when it's around an issue of harassment or consent, which are big old
lightning rods for getting verbally abused.

My rule of thumb around these kinds of discussions (based on past
experiences) is usually that, if someone was upset enough to come forward,
others who feel less safe/empowered/whatever probable also were really
upset and didn't come forward.

The takeaway for me is twofold:

If I am bothered and feel safe speaking up, I should, because others may be
bothered but feel unable to address it.

If someone speaks up about something bothering them, it is important to
listen even if what is bothering them didn't bother me.
On Jun 27, 2013 7:07 PM, "Tony Barreca" <tony.barreca at gmail.com> wrote:

> "...have yet to see any complaints..." I meant.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Tony Barreca <tony.barreca at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I suspect that more are following your conversation than participating in
>> it, and I have to see any complaints.
>>
>> But of course, sharing is totally up to you.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Sonja Trauss <sonja.trauss at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> No I'm reading
>>>
>>> On Thursday, June 27, 2013, Rabbit wrote:
>>>
>>>> There were other parts of the film that I thought were worse than that
>>>> part but I don't want to get into details here on the list.
>>>>
>>>> Since we're the only ones talking in this thread I'm going to take it
>>>> off-list now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Rabbit,
>>>>
>>>> Well, the email got us off to a less than ideal start, but I think
>>>> we're recovering ok :)
>>>>
>>>> Getting back to the film you brought up -- I'll recap it for anybody
>>>> who didn't see it, and then give my interpretation.
>>>>
>>>> The film depicted a sex act which was consentual on the surface, but at
>>>> the end, one woman revealed that she had been conspiring to make the other
>>>> one, a stranger, an unknowning participant in getting her pregnant. The
>>>> victim of the deception hurried off in horror.
>>>>
>>>> First, I acknowledge that the film could be difficult for somebody to
>>>> watch, especially somebody who's had experiences with nonconsentual sex. I
>>>> personally felt uncomfortable watching it.
>>>>
>>>> But I do not think its intent was to condone the behavior it showed. It
>>>> seemed to me that by highlighting the lack of consent -- almost treating it
>>>> as a punch line -- it invited the audience to reflect on the act. By
>>>> showing the victim's emotional reaction, and the detachment of the
>>>> perpetrator, it implicitly acknowledged that there was something going on
>>>> that was at least unusual, or maybe worse. It didn't offer explicit
>>>> commentary on that, but my impression was that it was the sort of film that
>>>> was created with the specific intent of provoking reflection or discussion.
>>>>
>>>> I'm curious: if the event had offered more opportunity for immediate,
>>>> and maybe facilitated, group discussion of the films, would you have felt
>>>> OK about that one being included?
>>>>
>>>> Pete
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Rabbit <rabbitface at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Pete.  Yes, I wasn't sure if you were part of Bike Smut or not.
>>>>
>>>> I apologize for misunderstanding part of your message, and thanks for
>>>> cooling down the potential flame war.
>>>>
>>>> Email is a poor medium for this kind of conversation. :/
>>>>
>>>> -rabbit
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Rabbit,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the reply. I think there's a lot of value in what you have
>>>> to say here.
>>>>
>>>> Only a couple points I want to respond to:
>>>> * Sorry I wasn't clearer, I am not part of Bike Smut, beyond being a
>>>> personal friend and a supporter of their mission.
>>>> * Your summary of my message was overstated in a few places -- in
>>>> particular, I most definitely did not mean to suggest that YOU are unkind,
>>>> only that your message was. I don't know the first thing about you, but I
>>>> do start from the assumption that you are a kind person and aiming to do
>>>> good. Also, I have of course no desire to silence you. You obviously have
>>>> worthwhile things to say. I just found it troubling to have those things
>>>> boiled down to a matter-of-fact and inflammatory "this supports rape
>>>> culture."
>>>> * I agree that some more discussion at the end could have been
>>>> worthwhile; and I think it's pretty common at Bike Smut's events.
>>>>
>>>> -Pete
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Rabbit <rabbitface at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have a lot to say about this!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pete,
>>>>
>>>> I love the idea of Bike Smut and I wish it success.  I hope it will
>>>> hear this feedback and improve next time.
>>>>
>>>> So, facts and not o
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Tony Barreca
>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/tonybarreca
>> Skype: tonybarreca
>> Twitter: tbarreca
>> Mobile: (510) 710-5864
>
>
>
>
> --
> Tony Barreca
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/tonybarreca
> Skype: tonybarreca
> Twitter: tbarreca
> Mobile: (510) 710-5864
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130627/f839745d/attachment.html>