Five second innuendo has no connection to advocating rape

From the FEW players you have met; that is correct that a few of them are courteous and very humble. As for roaring fans blocking out the sound of the innuendo? Well in the stands people had quieted down to hear what had been said. So it was heard by more people than you realize. Finally, if you had gone to the STOP sexual assault meeting last week, you would have learned that rape and sexual assault has been tied in almost always on this campus with alcohol abuse. So, one would think the issue should be looked at with just as much scrutiny as alcohol.

You wouldn’t see jokes on racism or (hopefully) homophobic marks on the big screen; why would we allow jokes demeaning women with threats of assault?

The point of my letter was not about the crowd noise; it was about the absurdity of assuming UW is trying to advocate rape through a segment at a football game. Rape is taken seriously as it should be and if they have STOP sexual assault meetings they’re obviously trying to do something about it.  And no, I can’t say all football players are courteous and humble.. but blacklisting the whole team because of one semi-offensive remark is just as demeaning

Right, but the point is that if you allow those who are representing the university to make jokes that clearly reference sexual assault, you are encouraging a culture in which rape is taken lightly. In that kind of culture, how likely is it that a woman who has been assaulted will come forward and report, it, and be treated with respect when she does, and get the treatment she needs after the fact? How will this factor into her recovery and ability to regain her sense of self, if everyone around her thinks that her experience was a big fucking joke? Whoever put the video together should have considered this. And whoever approves the video material for the games should have considered this. The football games are a huge venue, and everything that happens there reflects on the university. A change in our cultural approach to sexual assault is needed, and we can start by sending the message that we never condone jokes about rape, no matter what movie they came from, and no matter how ignorant the student athlete making them might be.

Hi coffeepatchkid, I just wanted to let you know that I see how you’re trying to troll us, but just in case you aren’t, I’d like to illustrate that you’re a hypocrite. You post here about the tragedy of rape victims not being taken seriously while responding to a rape victim in another comment thread with a sarcastic, “Yeah, right.” 0/10 troll factor. 0/10 consistency factor. 10/10 moron factor.

It’s a classic move to come into a comment thread like this and shut down conversation by saying “well, I’m a rape victim, and I think rape jokes are hilarious and victim-blaming is awesome.” The point is, the principle is still the same. Even if “Molly O’toole” really is a woman, and a rape victim, that doesn’t change the fact that rape culture is harmful to women. I am a woman, and rape culture is harmful to me. It is harmful to my daughters. It is harmful to all the women in your life. It is harmful to all the women in that football player’s life.

And I’m sorry, but isn’t “Molly O’toole” the kind of name you would make up to use as a sort of rhetorical, um, tool? Wasn’t that pretty clearly communicated?

 Interesting that this Molly doesn’t know how to utilize capitalization in her own name. Or is it really “her” name?

So, by your own standards, I have to ask, what’s worse: crying wolf or sarcastically dismissing a possibly legitimate claim?

Crying wolf might set a bad societal expectation concerning the gravity of rape and rape claims. However, isn’t it worse to actively, cognizantly be a part of that dismissive society?

Blaming “Molly” for your dismissal of her by shifting the blame of your choice to dismiss her on to her poor choice for a pseudonym is exactly what you’re speaking out against. Knock it off.

 OK, so let’s grant that “Molly O’toole” is a woman and a rape victim. In that case my comment was inappropriate, and I should apologize for that.  I also should have been more clear in my comment. It seemed pathetically transparent to me, but I should not have spoken so soon.

But what the fuck does “her” comment have to do with this discussion? After emancipation many former slaves wished they were still enslaved because they were psychologically unprepared to live under these new conditions, and they had internalized the broader cultural attitudes toward them. So let’s say a woman is raped, but she has internalized our cultural attitudes toward rape to the extent that she believes it is her fault or that she deserved it somehow, so she fails to stand up against the very culture that allowed for her abuse. Does this delegitimize arguments against that culture or make her victimization any less of a crime? No. It’s irrelevant, and in the context of this discussion, “Molly” was throwing that in as a red herring. It simply has nothing to do with whether the comment made at the football game was acceptable or not. Even if every woman in the world who was raped adopted the victim-blaming attitude of the culture in which they are embedded, rape would still be a problem. But this comment was clearly an attempt to derail the dialogue. And it worked.

UW, the athletic dept, and football team are endorsing anything that plays up on the big screen during the game. They just are. That’s how it works.

Be careful, because it sounds like you’re saying Molly should have just kept her mouth shut and shouldn’t have brought up the fact that she was raped at all.

But even if you sort of accidentally said that, I won’t twist your words to mean that because I know that’s not the spirit of the message you’re trying to convey.

However, you have brought up an important point I was hoping to address. What if Molly hasn’t internalized her victimization and actually just has a highly-developed sense of what’s a joke and what’s reality? What if, unlike every other crazy person in these threads, she understands that what the footballer said, and what the producers of the clip approved, was meant without malice. What if she understands that a stupid joke doesn’t actually have any influence on how grave sane people consider rape to be? What if she’s a real person that has an ounce of wisdom to her? Is society really so atrocious that it’s more likely for someone to cry wolf about being raped than it is for someone to have a grasp of when something is joke and when something is a real threat to your daughters?

 So drugging a woman as a way of picking her up can be a joke? Really? How about if that woman is your daughter, or your sister, or your wife? Then is it still funny, or is your sense of humor not highly-developed enough to accommodate that reality?

 Spencer, I think you’re well-meaning but sadly naive about the interplay between culture and the values and attitudes of individuals within the culture. I know it’s popular to make jokes about rape, and to use the word lightly. I know many young people think that this has no impact on our attitudes about actual rape. Sadly this isn’t true, and we can learn from history. The nazis  used language to shape societal attitudes toward certain marginalized groups, and got away with genocide. Here in America we used racial rhetoric to justify slavery and racist policies, and it worked. The words we use are very important, whether we acknowledge it or not. The jokes we laugh at and narratives we tell do become an integral part of our worldview and shape our attitudes and values.  There’s just no way around it. It’s easy to shrug that off if you feel that doesn’t impact you, but it’s dangerous to do so.

And here’s a bonus: at the risk of being dismissed like Molly was, I will offer up the fact that I consider myself to have been raped in the past. Here’s the clencher: I actually find myself making excuses for the rapist so that maybe it really wasn’t rape. But the fact of the matter is that I explicitly asked her to stop and she coerced me into going through with it. At the end of it, I was disgusted with myself for being too weak (emotionally) to stop her. In fact, throughout the whole process I was disgusted with myself, but I was too afraid to stop her. Sounds like rape, doesn’t it? Now, I won’t attack you for making rape seem like a crime in which only women are victims, because you probably didn’t even think about the possibility that I might also be a victim. But I bring this up to illustrate how little you can know about someone based on their choice of screen-name.

You’re exactly right, rape isn’t a joke. However, you also need to understand that jokes are not rape. That’s the biggest thing I’m trying to say. Making a joke is not raping someone, it’s not advocating anyone should rape anyone, it’s not even making fun of people who have been raped. Yes it’s distasteful, but asserting that a joke made by a college footballer is going to make any sane person take rape any more lightly is pure. fucking. bullshit.

For example, most of the people in these threads seem relatively sane. Coffee, Jaime, me, we all seem like sane people. Coffee, Jaime, do you guys take rape any less seriously as a result of the joke? Does it seem like I take rape any less seriously?

And to clarify, even Molly’s post doesn’t indicate that she takes rape lightly; it indicates that she takes jokes lightly. Please, please understand the difference.

P.S.: Even if Nazis used propaganda to convince other people it was ok to commit genocide, who is more culpable? The Nazi artists that drew the posters or the Nazis who thought a catchy slogan justified pulling a trigger? (In case that analogy isn’t clear, the footballer is analogous to the propaganda artist, the insane people that are motivated by jokes to rape people are analogous to the Nazi soldiers.) Also, setting up propaganda as equivalent to a joke made by a college footballer is ridiculous.

And GODWIN’S LAW!

So, sillycoffeescreennamelady, IF Molly has “internalized our cultural attitudes towards rape,” it is still not fair to blame her for it. You’re not blaming the slaves are you?

While I agree with you that the interplay between culture and values is strong, I also see our fear of jokes leading to ridiculous amounts of political correctness. Sorry kids, someone’s going to get offended. Indeed, it is when speech is restricted that we really need to worry. (Insert comparison to Nazi Germany here.)

While I do feel that the joke was perhaps not the best choice to put on the big screen at the football game, one has to also admit that “What is your best pickup line?” is a question that lends itself easily to comments like the one in contention. After all, pickup lines are inherently sexist in that they assume the low intelligence of women and women’s susceptibility to the suave ape-like charm of the man delivering the line, UNLESS of course you recognize that they are, in actuality, the last thing that anyone would say in real life. In fact, the whole meme of “pickup lines” is built upon the fact that no girl would ever fall for a line like “Is that a mirror in your pocket? …. Because I could see myself in your pants!”

It’s better than insinuating that women are stupid, as every other pick-up line in the universe does. (If, of course, you take them seriously.)

Actually, if you really want to get into the literal analysis of the joke at hand, the chloroform joke implies that the dude can’t pick up the girl without drugging her. That fella has NO game. (Pun intended.)

Also, sounds like Pittman’s sense of humor has developed just fine.

Meh. Be real here. The football players and coaches fall victim to all the flaws to which the rest of humanity falls, so that while a “few” of the Wyoming players may be “courteous and humble” in your oh-so-humble opinion, it is naiive to assume they all are.  Remember that a positive stereotype is just as invalid as a negative one.

What would we do for over-done analogies if it wasn’t for Hitler?!?!

We are all responsible to be the best citizens that we can. Sometimes that means confronting our own tightly held opinions and reassessing them. Is it our fault that we sometimes internalize unhealthy aspects of our culture? No, but when we are confronted with evidence that we are wrong it is important that we not become dogmatically glued to our opinions. Our culture celebrates violence, but we still throw murderers in prison.  

One more time…..if rape can be a big joke, and everyone will sit in the stadium in front of our kids and laugh at the idea of a man drugging a woman in order to “pick her up,” then we have a problem. Of course I get that this was intended as a joke. But some things just aren’t funny. Rape is one of those things that just really shouldn’t be joked about. Ever.

Really? Laughing about date-rape is better than assuming women are stupid? How about we skip both of them, and work toward a culture in which women’s bodies and minds are both respected and taken seriously? Why isn’t that an option?

Where did I say that men can’t be raped? I work with a national group that seeks to make prison administrations take sexual assault seriously, to provide therapy and assistance for victims of prison rape, and to change our public policy  where prison rape is concerned. You think I assume men can’t be raped?

The conversation involving “Molly” had to do with my experience on online forums where rape culture is discussed. Never once have I been in one of these threads where some troll, usually a male, didn’t come in and hijack the thread with a comment identical to “Molly’s.” It’s a great way to jack a thread, and as you can see, it worked with that one. The sad thing is that this kind of move prevents people from being able to have constructive dialogue about a pretty serious topic.

So, one more time. I don’t know who this “Molly” person is, but s/he seems to have disappeared when real questions were directed toward him/her. I acknowledge that s/he could be a rape victim. All the same, his/her feelings are not the final word on this topic. S/he might think that rape jokes are a fucking riot. Great. That does nothing to delegitimize the arguments that have been made against the public display of rape culture that occurred at the game. It’s simply irrelevant.

“And I’m sorry, but isn’t “Molly O’toole” the kind of name you would make
up to use as a sort of rhetorical, um, tool? Wasn’t that pretty clearly
communicated?”

I thought that was the intention as well. There’s something called “reading the subtext” here…

Wow. Where did I blame her for it? Commenting that her stance is not the final word on rape culture is not the same as blaming her. Could you quote me where I blamed her? Or the former slaves? Perhaps you could use some help with your reading comprehension skills.

I think thats a problem with the commenting feature rather than Molly not knowing how to capitalize her own name. I notice that fatale isn’t capitalized or separated with a space in your name either.

Every time you’ve tried to make me realize the severity of the joke you’ve given three examples of women that you assume would be close to me. Every time you speak about rape you cite it as a problem for women, not people. Importantly, I want to direct you to what I actually said previously: that I wouldn’t attack you for making it *seem* like rape is a crime in which only women are victims. You didn’t say anything directly concerning your alleged belief that only women can be rape victims, but the language you used strongly implied it. As evidence, I’ve counted 30 instances in which you have chosen to portray women as the only victims of rape, now this doesn’t indicate that you consciously deny that men can be victims of rape, but it does indicate that in 30 out of 30 opportunities you’ve consciously chosen to portray women and never men as victims of rape. Is this damning evidence that you disregard men as possible victims of rape? No, but it’s enough to make it seem to your audience that you do. And of course I know that not saying men are victims of rape and saying men are not victims of rape are not identical ideas: the first is neglectful, insensitive, and ignorant; the second is just plain wrong. Be that as it may, I did originally say that I did not want to attack you for this, so please do not take this as a personal attack, but rather an answer to your question of when you said men can’t be victims of rape.

The situation we’re discussing was a case where a male football player made a joke about using chloroform to pick up a woman. The context made it clear that we were discussing men picking up women. 

How about we work towards a culture that takes rape seriously without demonizing college footballers and censoring their jokes? No one here thinks rape isn’t serious. The divide in this conversation is not focused on whether or not rape is a serious matter. The true divide is focused on whether or not jokes should be taken seriously and whether or not they really cause society to take rape less seriously. I argue that they do not and therefore should not be censored (they shouldn’t be censored even if they do), and you argue that they do and should therefore be censored. You make a valid point that rape is a serious matter. No one has yet made a valid point that jokes have caused the Laramie community to take rape less seriously. Making jokes about a topic doesn’t have that effect. The communal response to this joke is evidence that it does not. This joke has caused an uproar in which many people have been given the opportunity to be very loud in convincing others that rape is a serious matter. It has given others the opportunity to voice their opinion that jokes should not be taken seriously. No one is arguing that rape should be taken less seriously.

If we take a step to censor this joke and punish the college footballer for telling it, we’ve done nothing to legitimately cause people to take rape less seriously. Rather, we’ve caused them to fear speaking or telling insensitive jokes.

Correction: the male footballer never said anything about the sex of the person to whom his joking pickup line was hypothetically directed. You assume that. An assumption that indicates you believe it’s unlikely that footballers are homosexuals and that footballers are only inclined to pickup women. The potential unlikeliness of both of these is not an excuse when your cause is heightened awareness of the marginalization of victims.

So we should disregard Molly’s facetious rape joke as just a red-herring and a joke unimportant to our conversation? Wow. Wooooow. (Haven’t I already covered that this hypocritical?)

And again, preemptively: me using Molly’s probable joke as an example of something that shouldn’t be disregarded as a joke doesn’t discredit my argument. My argument is that jokes do not cause people to take rape less seriously and that jokes should not be censored. Using Molly’s joke to bring my opponent’s attention to the inconsistency of their arguments does affect either of those.

You honestly believe that rape jokes don’t cause us to take rape less seriously? For real? If drugging a woman in order to do anything to her without her consent is a funny thought, then what kind of underlying attitudes toward women does this reflect? What kinds of attitudes toward women does it encourage in young people?

I find it interesting that people find jokes about ethnic groups and hate crimes distasteful (now), but jokes about sexual assault are still totally cool.

You are grasping at straws.

I’ve lived in Wyoming for 5 years now, and yes, I believe it is extremely, extremely unlikely that any football player who was gay would ever admit to it, or that the crowd at the game would laugh appreciatively at a pickup line they perceived as being “gay”.

First off, I never said you were blaming the slaves. My point is that if you wouldn’t blame the slaves, you shouldn’t blame the rape victims for supposedly internalizing cultural attitudes to rape.

Second, the blame I see in your comments comes from your hypothetical treatment of Molly. You are not genuinely granting her the hypothetical validity of her status as a rape victim. Your assumption is clearly that the person posting that is a liar and a fraud, and that even if she is real her opinion has nothing “the fuck” to do with the conversation.

The humor in the joke comes from the fact that chloroform is NOT a way to pick up women. So the idea that anyone would ever say “Does this napkin smell like chloroform?” as a pick up line is funny.

Yes, I really, really believe that rape jokes do not cause us to take rape less seriously. And I really, really believe it would be morally reprehensible to censor such jokes because of an unfounded fear that they do cause such an effect. The fear is unfounded because there is no evidence that jokes do this–none. If you are willing to accept our current topic of discussion as an example, please show me evidence that the college footballer’s joke has caused us to take rape less seriously. I have provided evidence that it has in fact done the opposite: the (moderately) high-profile conversation it has sparked has increased awareness of the gravity of rape. I’m not bending reality to fit my argument here, I’m pointing at reality and asking you to interpret it objectively. Look at these comments. Read them. Understand what the people are saying. There are two groups of people here arguing about two different things. One group is arguing that rape is a grave and serious matter. One group is arguing that jokes should not be taken seriously. No one is arguing that rape isn’t serious. No one is arguing rape isn’t serious. No one is arguing rape isn’t serious. If this joke had done what you claim it does, people here would be saying the following: “Rape really isn’t that big of deal, it’s ok that we make jokes about it.” Nobody is saying that! All of the evidence we have does not support your argument. Half of the evidence supports my argument that no one is taking rape less seriously, and the other half of the evidence supports my argument that jokes shouldn’t be censored. You need to ask yourself, “Do I, Thecoffepatchkid, have any actual reason or evidence that I should fear jokes?” And then you need to answer that question objectively. Ask it! If there are any silent readers, ask yourself that question! Ask yourself if what college footballer’s make jokes about has any negative effect on your opinion of the tragedy of rape. Is that answer “no”? If it is, then we as a community need you to ask yourself one more question: “Why am I assuming that other people would answer the previous question with ‘yes’?” There is no good answer to that question.

The University put it on the screen! They allowed it in the stadium! I don’t see how UW doesn’t have a connection to advocating rape. 

Making a joke about rape and advocating rape are not identical. Is this true? Yes. The University displayed a rape joke. Is this true? Yes. Does this mean the University advocates rape? No. No, no, a thousand times: ‘no’.

Please disregard the following if you are not a troll: I like playing whack-a-mole and having all these opportunities to intelligently discuss this matter is fun for me. Additionally, it gives me an excuse to put my opinion on display. Win-win!

Should you be interested there is not a single openly gay member of the NFL. Additionally, while it is certainly true that men can and are raped, women constitute the majority of victims: 91% according to the Department of Justice. Also, men are disproportionately the perpetrators, with 99% of rapists being male. Furthermore, male victims are further victimized by the culture that we live in. Many find the experience so humiliating that they never discuss it and this can be traced to the attitudes that normalize rape as an expression of masculinity and virility. This emasculates male victims and contributes to the lack of support that they encounter.
    

As I have said elsewhere, the only words spoken were “Does this napkin smell like chloroform?”  Some have said that he immediately said “I’m kidding” also, but I don’t remember that part, and I cannot find a copy of the segment to check; in the movie he was apparently quoting they do say “I’m kidding” or something to that effect, but I certainly hadn’t seen that movie, and neither, I’m sure, had many of the people at the game that day.  On their own, the words “Does this napkin smell like chloroform?” in the context of a pickup-line indicates rape, and nothing but rape.  Assumption that he ”must have been kidding” is exactly that; an assumption.  And even if he did clearly say that he was kidding and I simply didn’t hear it, the same statement as an obvious joke is still damaging to the public’s reaction to rape.  If rape can be accepted as a joke at any time, then it will not be taken as seriously as it should be when it actually does happen.

Hello Geoff!

Please accept one of my (slightly edited) earlier responses to the same objection:

You base your claims on an unfounded fear that jokes actually degrade the audience’s moral standings.  The fear is unfounded because there is no
evidence that jokes do this–none. If you are willing to accept our
current topic of discussion as an example, please show me evidence that
the college footballer’s joke has caused us to take rape less seriously.

I have provided evidence that it has in fact done the opposite: the
(moderately) high-profile conversation it has sparked has increased
awareness of the gravity of rape.

I’m not bending reality to fit my
argument here, I’m pointing at reality and asking you to interpret it
objectively. Look at our comments. Read them. Understand what the
people are saying. There are two groups of people here arguing about
two different things. One group is arguing that rape is a grave and
serious matter. One group is arguing that jokes should not be taken
seriously.

No one is arguing that rape isn’t serious. No one is
arguing rape isn’t serious. No one is arguing rape isn’t serious.

If
this joke had done what you claim it does, people here would be saying
the following: “Rape really isn’t that big of deal, it’s ok that we
make jokes about it.” Nobody is saying that! All of the evidence we
have does not support your argument. Half of the evidence supports the
argument that no one is taking rape less seriously, and the other half
of the evidence supports my argument that jokes shouldn’t be censored.

You need to ask yourself, “Do I have any actual
reason or evidence that I should fear jokes?” And then you need to
answer that question objectively. Ask it! If there are any silent
readers, ask yourself that question! Ask yourself if what college
footballers make jokes about has any negative effect on your opinion of
the tragedy of rape.

Is the answer to the question you just asked “no”? If it is, then we as a
community need you to ask yourself one more question: “Why am I
assuming that other people would answer the previous question with
‘yes’?”

Please notice that in the terms of the above argument whether or not the footballer was joking is unimportant.  Why?  Because the actual impact of whatever he was doing (joking, not joking, etc.) is not what Mr. Hiatt says it is.  Because that impact does not actually affect our moral stances on the tragedy of rape, his arguments and fears are unfounded.

I agree with everything you’ve said here!

(But that non sequitur at the end there was a little a weird.)

I agree with everything you’ve said here!

You’ve insinuated something very serious here, but I’m not entirely sure what it is.  By saying that you “believe it is extremely, extremely unlikely that the crowd at the game would laugh appreciatively at a pickup line they perceived as being “gay”,” what do you mean?  When I first understood it my first thought is that you were implying that Wyoming football fans are so homophobic that they would be disgusted by such a joke rather than laugh at it.  Is that what you meant?  If you wouldn’t mind clarifying your intentions here, I would appreciate it. 

Also, while you’re at it, would you mind defending or conceding your assertion that I’m grasping at straws?  I’m just trying to have all my bases covered.

 I think maybe you’re just too young to understand the context, so maybe that’s why it doesn’t seem offensive to you. The reality is that many women really have been drugged and raped, although chloroform is an outdated vehicle for this. But the fact is, date rape is very common, and using substances similar to chloroform to attain non-consensual sexual contact with women has been a very common thing in the past. This joke is tapping into this feature of our culture. Most people don’t think the joke is funny because “chloroform is NOT a way to pick up women,” they laughed because it was an unexpected twist. The reality of drugging women in order to attain sexual contact with them isn’t really funny any way you look at it.

But the only reason that conversation occurred is because some people objected to the joke. Otherwise everyone would have laughed, and the young people in the audience would have further internalized the idea that drugging a woman is funny. The increase in awareness only occurred because some people did take it seriously.

Also, I think you’re misunderstanding the larger conversation here. I think the claim is that rape jokes are one part of a larger culture in which rape is not taken seriously (I heard a student say that an exam “raped” him the other day, which leads me to believe he has no idea what rape really is or how deeply it impacts a person’s life), and in which victim-blaming is extremely common. Rape jokes are both a symptom of and a driver of this culture. So I don’t think the idea is that rape jokes single-handedly cause us as a society to not take rape seriously, which is the point you’re arguing against. Rather, it’s that rape jokes are one part of the larger problem. Raising awareness and having a mature conversation about the culture behind rape jokes as well as the the unintended effects of these jokes is a part of the process of moving away from rape culture and toward a culture that fully values the sexual autonomy and dignity of all individuals.

 I cannot wait until someone busts out a Matthew Shepard joke in a big venue like that, and then we can have the discussion about how jokes are only jokes and they don’t reflect on our deeper attitudes toward marginalized peoples. Maybe it will be OK if someone aid it in a movie first.

If Geoff Hiatt had made this argument, Jaime, I would probably have never said a word. Fact is, though, he didn’t. He accused a group of people of advocating rape then asked that they be reprimanded and that they apologize.

I’d also like to say that I agree fully with the last sentence of your statement–I’m trying to have that conversation.

But the only reason those conversation-sparking objections happened is because of the joke. And I’ll ask you the same pair of questions, Jamie: Did the rape joke actually negativley affect how you felt about rape? Why do you assume it negativley affected how other people felt about rape?

I would never ask Geoff or anyone to not take rape seriously. I would only ask that he understand that jokes don’t actively worsen the public’s moral standing concerning the tragedy of rape. I’d also ask that he understand jokers don’t deserve to be reprimanded.

I’m pretty sure Amanda is pointing out the same part of the joke Jaime is, albeit in a different way. Jamie’s stance here raises an interesting point, though: if the part the people laugh about is in fact the unexpected twist, are people actually taking rape less seriously when they laugh at the joke?

(By the way, a little less condescension would be sweet! No one here thinks date rape doesn’t actually happen.)

I can’t say I hope anyone is that disrespectful, but if such a joke sparked a similar conversation where we get to talk meaningfully about the severity of hate crime, the importance of free speech, and the detriments of alarmism–I’d enjoy that conversation.

So, making a Matthew Shepard joke would be disrespectful, but making a rape joke isnt?

 I think you misunderstood my explanation about how this is not a one-way causal relationship. The joke caused me to feel sad because it’s a reminder of how lightly we take date rape and how we think nothing of dismissing the bodily autonomy of women and other marginalized groups. This is what I meant when I said that rape jokes are both a symptom of rape culture, and a way that rape culture is propagated and normalized. It’s not a simple one-way causal relationship, as you are insisting.

No. I have never said that and would never say that. If you would like, I invite you to quote any portion of my arguments on this topic that you think infer that I believe rape jokes are not disrespectful; I would welcome the opportunity to explain to you and other readers how they do not.

You’re incorrectly inflating my arguments to a point that they start to fail to make sense. You then assert that they don’t make sense. I have never argued that the joke didn’t make you feel sad. I have never argued that they are not a symptom of our rape culture.

To use the medical analogy, I have only argued that we do not try to treat this individual symptom–rather we should treat the disease. Reprimanding college footballers for telling jokes does not treat the disease of a poor rape culture. It does, however, have nasty side-effects of injustice, censorship, and alarmism.

However, having meaningful conversations like the one we’re having now seems to treat that disease and many others in a way that seems to have no negative side-effects.

And to speak to the metaphorical example that you give of “getting raped by a test”, I would make all the same arguments I have for the footballer’s joke.

Primarily the following:
The student has a right to use whatever metaphor he wants and not be reprimanded.
The joke, while rude, insensitive, ignorant, etc., has no negative impact on it’s audience’s perception of rape–your reaction is itself evidence to the contrary (or that it causes people to take rape more seriously).
You would be justified in politely asking for an apology; you would not be justified in asking his superiors to reprimand him.

I think the metaphor used by the student is more of a case of hyperbole. He wanted to express that the test was very hard, tortuous even. If he had said the test was tortuous would you assert that he was taking the very serious human rights violation of torture lightly? What if he had said the test was rapacious? Would you still be offended? The intent, the effect, and the meaning of, “that test raped me,” and, “that test was rapacious,” are identical. Is one more graphic than the other? Maybe. Sort of. If your response to the first is different from the second, it’s not because of any legitimate worry that one is harmful to rape culture and the other is not. It’s because you’ve been trained to become alarmed when you hear the word “rape” used lightly. Interesting, isn’t it? Definitely worth thinking about, and I suggest you do so.

So, rape jokes are not harmful (they’re just JOKES, after all) but they are disrespectful? If something is just a joke, and it’s funny, then I assume you think it’s neither harmful nor disrespectful. Your view is rather inconsistent and confusing.

 I believe the request is that his superiors be more thoughtful about what kinds of statements they put on the big screen, seeing as how the big screen speaks for the university in a venue like a football game.

Advocating and trivializing are not the same thing.

Trivializing and advocating are not the same thing.

In his original letter Geoff expresses his belief that the “player should have been reprimanded”. In his second letter he continues to call for a “reprimand appropriate for this situation”. To be fair he later says that an apology or a correction would be appropriate from the footballer, but he later says “Dave Christensen and the other US athletics staff responsible for the creation and oversight of that segment; they are the ones I hold most blame.” If a footballer’s appropriate reprimand is an apology, I’m fine with that. But if Christensen and the staff are more to blame, what’s their appropriate reprimand? How Mr. Hiatt answers that question is what scares me. I’m in no position to answer that question for him, and he only answers it vaguely, but the tone with which he asks that question is extreme. He uses language that suggests whatever fate Christensen and the staff meet, it should be severe. As evidence I offer this line: “But we must definitely hold the administrators of the University’s athletic programs, and especially a professional Coach with a million-dollar state contract, to a much higher standard.” Hiatt has left the vague but severe punishment in the hands of the University. My arguments here are primarily driven by the mission to ensure that there is no punishment or reprimand, but only an apology.

In this post, Jamie, you’ve stopped having a meaningful conversation with me and have instead decided to make claims about Mr. Haitt’s message. Your claims are not necessarily innacurate, but they do ignore the tone with which Mr. Hiatt has conveyed his request. Mr Haitt’s current position is all but entirely indefensible to a well-built argument–to effectively defend it before he has deeply revised it will now be very, very difficult.

No. I have never said that and would never say that. If you would like, I invite you to quote any portion of my arguments on this topic that you think infer that I believe rape jokes are entirely harmless; I would welcome the opportunity to explain to you and other readers how they do not.

No. I have never said that and would never say that. If you would like, I invite you to quote any portion of my arguments on this topic that you think infer that I believe funny jokes cannot be harmful or disrespectful; I would welcome the opportunity to explain to you and other readers how they do not.

No. I have not made those kinds of arguments here. If you would like, I invite you to construct an argument that defends your statements; I would welcome the opportunity to defend my arguments against yours. Until then, you can expect these kinds of answers to your baseless assertions.

You’re excited about the prospect of someone making a hurtful joke because it might prove a point on an internet forum? That’s reasonable.

I’m resigning from the UW athletic department. I see this player everyday (and I wonder if he meant it as a joke, I know he did, but my brain won’t quit), I know of some of you, and it’s sickening to know you think it’s ok to laugh at a joke and tell a joke that is basically about how I was violated. I voiced this, I was told to get therapy. I have been in therapy for 5 YEARS! I went to the game and I have felt sick ever since. He may as well have said does this drink taste funny BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT HAPPENED TO ME! I don’t care it was in a movie. I. Don’t. Care. It’s sicker because IT WAS IN A MOVIE. It’s even worse that this was a pre-taped segment and someone, anyone could have put the brakes on but NOT ONE PERSON THOUGHT TO DO THAT. 

I woke up in my rapist’s bed. He was my boyfriend, angry that I wouldn’t give it up. I went to the police, I went through the exam, and pressed charges. He wound up pleading guilty to simple assault, a misdemeanor because the prosecutor was worried that I wasn’t beaten up, there was a question of consent that it was he said she said. He drugged me, but his attorney said I was a prude who drugged herself to be less inhibited. He lives in Laramie now. He moved here to take a job. He used to joke about rape, actually. And he is a rapist. 
I cannot believe the type of people attending this university. All of you justifying this can rot in hell. I’m already there, thank you. Words and jokes have power you assholes.

I’m very sorry to hear that.  You are not the person who should have to upend your life over this.  The people responsible for it should be doing something, anything to correct their mistake.

I wish you all the best!