[WikiEN-l] The Second Rape: Victim-Blaming (was Re: Self-sensorship, how far should it go?)

[Michael Noda]

On 8/2/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/2/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 02/08/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > I think that sums up my feelings on this matter, too.  I just cannot
> > > > understand why Slim Virgin is being described as "a net detriment to
> > > > the project" on account of attacks that are made by *her* by people we
> > > > all recognise as either severely unbalanced or having an axe to grind.
> > > >  It quite disturbing.
> > >
> > > The response you've described is so astoundingly lacking in empathy,
> > > and, frankly, wrong-headed and immoral on so many levels, that I find
> > > it frightening.
> >
> > ...and this is talking about an email which directly compared my
> > comments to being a wilful apologist for rape.
> >
> > It is six o'clock in the morning. I first recieved a copy of that
> > charming email at two. I have been unable to sleep because of it. It
> > is monstrously insulting, it is at best tangential, and it is
> > completely inappropriate.
> >
> > It is an smear and an allegation I cannot reply to, because of its
> > scale, its implications, its emotive power, and the ability to glibly
> > say "well, yes, but you would say that" to any response. It is an
> > escalation of this discussion by several orders of magnitude, from a
> > reasoned attempt to say "please stop" straight to "fuck off, you
> > scumbag". I can't reply; I can't leave it hanging there.
> >
> > I got it by email, sent both to me and to the list; it didn't get
> > through, and I assumed it was moderated for one of the many possible
> > reasons someone might object to its content. But you also, it seems,
> > were sent a copy; you chose to send it here. And then you have the
> > temerity to refer to a glib rewriting of my argument as "lacking in
> > empathy ... wrong-headed and immoral".
> >
> > I would have thought that would be better used to refer to the person
> > who chose to equate me with a rape-apologist on some spurious analogy.
> >
> > I had, seriously, hoped for better from this discussion. I don't
> > *like* the fact that I had to stand up and complain; it's not the kind
> > of man I am, and not the sort of thing I ever want to do again. But I
> > felt it needed said, and there does not seem to be a shortage of
> > others who feel just as frustrated by it.
> >
> > I have tried to keep the discussion on a sensible level; I have tried
> > patiently to explain my position and do so in what is as
> > nonconfrontational a manner as possible, considering the rather
> > uncomfortable nature of what I felt needed said. I am finding it hard
> > to describe some of the responses as anything other than deliberately
> > inflammatory.
>
> Repeatedly telling people they should leave Wikipedia because stalkers
> and crazies are saying nasty things about them cannot help but be
> confrontational, no matter how many times you put the word "Please"
> before "leave".

The stalkers and crazies are saying mean things about person A.
Person or Persons B makes the situation, likely without meaning to,
many times worse.  It is reasonable, in this case, to ask Person or
Persons B to leave.  Therefore, I, and others, are asking you, Jay, to
leave.

SlimVirgin herself seems to be bearing up quite well; I see no reason
to call for her departure, although she may wish to do so anyway for
her own reasons.

I hope that was clear enough.

Although it's still only 1:20 AM here on the East Coast, suffice to
say my feelings of anger and outrage are no less than Andrew's.
That's all I'll say on the subject until I've calmed down some more.

-Michael Noda