Sure they would, my sub asks for that all the time. Maybe the guy was a masochist and he asked for it. Why didn’t he report it until later that night when he realized “something was missing”? Maybe it was just a case of rough sex, and the alleged victim only wanted to cry assault later on when he realized something had gone wrong and he regretted it. That’s how a woman would be treated if she reported something like that, but you won’t see that said about a man.

I’m still hung up on that. I’m still trying to figure out why that would be. I mean, in the man’s case there is physical evidence of assault that would not be there if he had not been assaulted. There isn’t mention of that in the second article, but that article leaves out a lot of information and besides, there have been numerous cases of injury from rape in which the rape was still put in quotation marks. So that’s not it.
Then I thought, well, no one would be asked to be kicked in the nuts. No one asks to be raped either – that’s the definition of rape – but in many rape cases, the “alleged”ness is a question of whether the act (and the accompanying injuries, recently deemed “rough play” in some asshole court or another) were actually asked for in some nonspecific way by the victim. That’s fucked up… but the victim in the quoted story is a child, so that’s even more fucked up. Children can’t ask for rape. So why is it “alleged” here?

Then I realized it was just no damn good to pinpoint a single reason for any of this, since there is not one. Just an insidious culture that encourages simultaneous contradictory beliefs – including the plight of the innocent man, attacked by some crazy bitch (the article implies), who is nonetheless not a victim of sexual assault. (Just a victim of crazy bitchitude, perhaps? All men are, it must be okay!)

/rant

And honestly, I tried to find an example that was both approximately the length of the first article AND an adult female victim, but the length won out.

The female attacker is openly criticized. The male attackers are described neutrally.

You know, I hadn’t noticed that. I had really hung up on the “victim”/”alleged victim” dichotomy, and missed that particular detail.

And it’s true — what that man experienced *was* sexual assault, and, while he’s not getting the treatment women/girls get when they report sexual assault (are you sure you weren’t asking for it, etc.), he also didn’t get the recognition that it WAS sexual assault. All because, of course, men are the aggressors, and therefore can’t be sexually assaulted (unless they’re in prison and/or attacked by another man). Women, as you know, can’t sexually assault people either.

I wonder when that particular myth is going to finally give up and die. It does such a disservice to anyone and everyone who is raped / sexually assaulted / molested / etc.

My personal euphemism-to-English translation of civilization is “that which gets me (rich white dudes) more of what I want, and makes me look good in my own estimation.” Democracy loosely translates as “bullying other countries into agreeing with me, the rich white dude nation”.

BOTH 100% cringeworthy, at least in common usage.

When I hear the word “civilisation” I just can’t help but think “ridiculous hierarchal structure which is biased and unfair.”

Or maybe that’s just me.
Thanks for those links, they make an interesting read when I’m trying to avoid doing my weekly reading for class

Another point I’m not sure I’ve made elsewhere, but that has come to my attention more than once, is that the U.S. has this big-headed idea that it’s *ahead* of so much of the rest of the world (if not all of it, natch), but that as far as equal gender representation in government is concerned, the U.S. is far more male-dominated than countries U.S. attitudes and/or foreign policy treat as lesser, whether they’re looked on with disdain or pity. I mean, Rwanda’s parliament is almost more than 50% women — the only one in the world to be so close — and the only place one hears/heard about Rwanda was in reference to the violence of recent years (as though the US wasn’t rife with violence!)

Of course, General Opinion (that is, the one that is reflected in the makeup of our various governing bodies) might just hold that it’s far more “advanced” or “civilized” or even (gag) “democratic” to have more white-male-otherwise-privileged leaders. This would be, sadly, unsurprising to me.

Here are the data I’ve seen on women’s representation in government:
Women in Parliaments
Guide to Women Leaders

ETA: I completely botched those numbers on Rwanda. I was remembering a 50/50 split: what I last saw (late 2008) was that 45 out of 80 members of the Rwandan parliament are women.

I’m going to try and figure out the numbers for this if it were Australian, if that’s okay.

I love this