Why RINJ makes me CRINJ

Last year I came across, or was directed to, a Facebook page called Sex Assault Is No Joke (SAINJ), which belonged to an organisation called Rape Is No Joke (RINJ). Their purported goal was to remove the pro-rape pages that had popped up all over Facebook. Pages with names like "Going at it softly so you don't wake your girlfriend" and "Knowing she's playing hard to get when you're chasing her down an alleyway" (Not exact names but I really can't bear to look them up). These pages disgusted me, to the point that I had, for a year or more prior to this, set up a page of my own dedicated to getting hate pages taken off Facebook.

For awhile I was quite happy to follow RINJ on Facebook and Twitter. They were raising awareness of rape and sexual assault by posting links to stories in the media, something, to me, that is very worthwhile, as it is only by talking about these crimes openly and honestly that we can break down the silence that surrounds them. They also seemed to have weighed in on the battle to have Kyle Sandilands removed from the airwaves late last year, after he, on air, called a journalist who had the temerity to report factually on his TV show tanking badly a fat slag, and threaten to hunt her down (And like most people I'm sure he didn't mean to give her a friendly hug or shake her hand). Again, noble aims.

I became concerned when I saw the following text posted as a note on their page:

For some bizarre reason, when a man is found to be having sex with a fully developed teenaged person in the United States, police attempt to brand the accused person as a pedophile to get themselves more attention and to further vilify the accused above and beyond the truth of the case.

The strange and dangerously inaccurate thing is that the crime is described by police and local media as pedophilia to get more national attention from the shock and awe they have created, meanwhile the list of allegedly known pedophiles is further diluted by another indiscriminate skirt chaser with maybe with bad eyes or bad judjment or both.

So the USA now has many offenders branded as pedophiles but who are not pedophiles and it is now impossible to identify real pedophiles who may well be the most dangerous offenders in modern society.

It is impossible to identify which treatment programmes work best for real pedophiles in the U.S. because the USA is treating so many people who are NOT pedophiles.

This is a very serious and dangerous disease and we know nothing accurately about it in the United States because real pedophiles are hidden among normal males who get their hormones over-pumped by Hollywood's focus on youth, sex, bare midriffs and promiscuity.

Pedophilia is a disease wherein the infected cannot be aroused by a fully developed post-pubescent person. A real pedophile is ONLY ever found to be having sex with pre-pubescent children. Pedophilia is a serious illness not to be confused with men who like young women as sex partners but it's about men or women having sex with children prior to puberty who are not in any way developed and should not under any circumstances be involved in any sexual contact because they are babies per se.

The error is a typical American problem and it seriously skews statistics.

Older than 14-year-old post-pubescent fully-developed females in many U.S. states may indeed have legal sex if the person they are with is the same age.

In Europe, in many countries, a 14 year old may have sex with anyone. Age of consent around the world ranges mostly from 13-16.

http://en.wikipedia....nsent_in_Europe

The definition of pedophilia is unequivocal and the danger from real pedophiles is so extreme because in all their lives the will not have sex or be satisfied by sex with a post-pubescent person. A pedophile will only seek out little children who are undeveloped, pre-pubescent.

Pedophilia is a term that is misused in the United States where education standards concomitantly are also very bad. Whenever American media describe a man charged with having sex with a young person and call it pedophillia, we make clear the age and circumstance because the person deserves a fair trial and because The United States is a very bullying nation state that jails more of its people than any nation on earth and uses a bizarre set of religion-driven common laws that deviate from international law in the extreme and tend to deviate from the truth for the sake of rallying more bullies and winning heir case rather than finding the facts of the matter.

I'm sorry?!? After reading it a few times all I could come up with was that this was an attempt to call all sex between teens and adults, at worst, statutory rape, and that there was no possibility that it was a result of being targeted by people with a sexual obsession based in age. I was so concerned about this that I voiced my disagreement with, and concern about, what had been written, in a comment attached to the note. Unfortunately I can't show you the text from that; it was removed and I was blocked from making further comments. Yep, in the time honoured way of those who support a rape culture, and as is frequently seen in abusive relationships, I was silenced. Permanently. As I am a member of a rape and sexual assault survivors message board I though it right to warn others about what I had seen. After all, RINJ were supposed to be working for survivors of sexual assault, not trying to further traumatise them. I also pointed out some really horrible victim blaming statements regarding domestic violence.

This resulted in another friend "unliking" both RINJ and SAINJ on Facebook, and, as she is a reasonable person, explaining publicly why. This resulted in some major backlash from a RINJer known as So Nya. She didn't like what had been said, and laid in to my friend, and any of us who agreed with her stance, or defended her actions. Personally I was accused of making a racist slur, something that still horrifies me. The level of venom was quite scary.

Shortly after this I was invited to join a Facebook group called CRINJ, so named because RINJ made the founder, and all of the subsequent members, cringe. The actions and attitudes of the RINJ members were quite horrifying. What had happened to me was, in comparison to what they had done to others, exceptionally mild. The level of anger in CRINJ about what RINJ had done was amazing, blinding even. But it spurred most of the members to start investigating RINJ/SAINJ, and what they have found is truly disturbing. I am not going to regurgitate it all here. CRINJ have a blog HERE and a Facebook page HERE  that can spell things out pretty clearly. Let's just say that removing comments and blocking people is but the nicest of their tricks. Inviting donations for a competition in which all entrants were disqualified, stealing the story of a human trafficking victim, using porn star pictures for profile pics, and one IP address for many administrators of their Facebook pages, are all in there. It's one of those situations that if it happened n a movie or book you would laugh, because it is simply too fantastic.

So I urge everyone to read what CRINJ have to say. They are legitimate, and they are not pro-rape in any way, as RINJ have said outright, in an effort to discredit them. While I am no longer a member of CRINJ (due to the fact that my life is quite full as it is) I fully support their actions, and will continue to do so.

In the meantime I have one major question for RINJ: If you are a legitimate organisation whose administration is above board, and whose actions are truly honourable, why will you not allow open and honest debate on your pages, and why do you not allow commenting on your blog? What are you trying to hide from the world? Or maybe, given your refusal to answer, we should assume that CRINJ have it right.

Victimisation as privilege, and acting for the Silenced: Or, "My Psychic Scars are Bigger than Yours"

An interesting weekend had led me to once again dust off the blog and say a few choice words that I can't say elsewhere without censure or censorship (or maybe just a verbal/written arse kicking).

As those who know me know, I try, in my own quiet way, to advocate for those who are or have been in circumstances similar to mine. While they may not be ready to use their voices I can use mine and hopefully be heard, while ensuring those I advocate for know that they aren't alone in their battles. I don't pretend to be representative of all women who have experienced intimate partner sexual violence, rape and sexual assault, and/or domestic violence, but I hope that by sharing my story I can make a small difference. In my naivety I hoped that all advocates worked in much the same way. Indeed, those I admire most do. But alas it isn't true for all victim/survivor advocates.

Victimisation as Privilege 
 Lately I have come across a small but very outspoken number of advocates who seem to wear their victimisation as a badge of privilege. I am not suggesting that their trauma isn't real, or that it is less important than mine, but I am objecting to the fact that they use their victimisation as a weapon against others, and as a justification for denigrating other people and services.  

On a website which I frequent (which shall remain nameless to protect the innocent, or at least me from getting into trouble and not being welcome there anymore) a frequent contributor has taken to screaming "What about me? at regular intervals. Rather than acknowledge what is being posted as a reality for at least the original contributor they use it as an opportunity to explain why exactly they are so down trodden, marginalised and silenced. Now yes, their circumstances are some that do tend to be minimalised by a large section of society. But screaming "What about me?" every time something doesn't fit their circumstances does nothing more than shut down discussion and make other users feel as if their problems simply aren't problematic enough, thus continuing their silencing. The best example is the constant cry of "What about MEN (as it always seems to need capitalisation)?" in discussions about everything from cancer and rape to domestic violence and divorce.  Small hint; talking about one person or group's experience does not take away from another person or group. If anything it opens up wider communication for everyone.

Take rape, for example: The second-wave feminists made huge strides in having it seen as a social issue. They fought for and developed support services, legislative change and definitional change. Yes, they did this primarily for women. However, by starting the conversation they have made it possible to acknowledge the rape of men and boys. Stating the gendered nature of intimate partner violence, rape and sexual assault is not a slap in the face to the males of the species. Nor is it blaming all men for the actions of perpetrators. And most of all it is not labelling different experiences as non-existent, not important or less damaging. It is simply putting forward a theoretical standpoint that happens to have a lot of research to support it, and reflects the lived experiences of many.

Unfortunately there seems to be a small pool of advocates who aren't willing to accept that. Instead they want to make it all about them. They look at the research and services and demand equal or better, that addresses their own specific circumstances, and they want it now, preferably with as much fanfare and kow-towing as possible to their greatness and position of privilege. What they aren't prepared to do is work for what they want. "Breast cancer gets umpteen million dollars in funding and support - right, give us the same for prostate cancer." And when it isn't forthcoming then they complain that it is because their chosen cause isn't "sexy" enough (I would love to know where all these people who think that any sort of cancer is sexy are. I've certainly never met any of them.) They discount the work put in by people that have been effected by the cause personally, and they most certainly won't get off their privileged arses and work for the cause they believe in. Nope, instead it's all "political" or a conspiracy against them personally.

Victimisation as a Right to be a Perpetrator
Recently I came across a Facebook group called Sex Assault is No Joke, a front for the advocacy group Rape Is No Joke (RINJ). I thought their aims were wonderful; to rid Facebook of groups that are supportive of using rape as a basis for humour.  I decided to "like" them and kept a periodic eye on their activities. That is until Saturday when I came across a post I disagreed with. I commented on the post, politely and respectfully. I did not swear, nor did I denigrate others. I just pointed out what I believed to be errors. I would send you a link to the post and my comments but I have been blocked and my comments removed. Yep, RINJ seems to think that they way to deal with differing opinions to to remove them and prevent people from commenting. I complained about this elsewhere, but truly wasn't too worried. It was obvious that this was a group I wanted nothing to do with.  A friend was not impressed, both with RINJ's treatment of me, and of a victim blaming post that was obviously considered appropriate by those in charge. She made her feelings known and a shit-storm ensued, during which it came out that many others have become disillusioned with RINJ. One person commenting is one of the organisers of RINJ. She accused me of making a racist slur (something that still both upsets and pisses me off) and managed to tell an amazing group of women, many of whom are survivors or rape, sexual assault, and/or domestic violence, that we knew nothing. This person used her victimisation as a reason to be a bully and exhibit attitudes commonly seen in many perpetrators.  (I must say how proud I am of the other women caught in this shit-storm as none of them felt the need to stoop to this person's level, although flinging hurtful, denigrating comments would have been easy. Yet compassion for what this person had been through was what shone through.)

Victimisation is never a reason to become a bully or to act in the same manner as a perpetrators. While these is some evidence to show that the victimised sometimes come to be the victimiser there are a heck of a lot of people out there who don't feel the need to do so. Instead they understand the damage that has been done to them and will do anything and everything they can to stop it happening to anyone else. This person though, was like a husband who, while being emotionally and sexually violent, can honestly stand among his mates and declare that he has never hit a woman, and come out smelling like roses, and leaving his victim wondering what the hell is wrong with them.

So let us be clear: Being a victim does not make you someone special. It does not give you privileges over others. It does not give you the right to be a bully. It does however make you a person who needs support and help. Ask me for that and I will be beside you all the way. Trying to make yourself into the biggest, most misunderstood, most marginalised and minimised person in existence however will see me walk away from you and your cause. I do not need it and I don't need you. And I will do my damnedest to make sure others know who and what you're really about.