Discussions of how to call out a perpetrator rarely centre on the survivor’s needs. “Avoiding defensiveness” provides the pretence to shift the discussion back to the needs of the perpetrator. Once a perpetrator has been called out, a similar framework is used to undermine support for a survivor. The false supporters endlessly reassure us that they are not angry that a perpetrator was called out, it’s only the way they were called out. The fact that a survivor would speak openly about their experiences is seemingly taken as more violent and controversial than the violence of those experiences themselves, which warrant very little discussion by comparison. How a survivor’s public response might reflect their needs does not seem to occur to the false supporters as they are so preoccupied with their need to preserve an artificial social peace. Again we see liberal tendencies rearing their head, as the false supporters’ insistence on denouncing the resistance of survivors, on claiming to also despise the Culture of Rape while simultaneously diminishing any fight against it, is reminiscent of liberals who claim to agree with the grievances of protesters and yet condemn any actions they might take to address them.
—Betrayal: a critical analysis of rape culture in anarchist subcultures, bolding added. I have my misgiving about this zine but it’s got some good stuff and I might be posting more quotes from it soon.
June 23rd, 2016 at 11:30 pm
You say “bolding added”, so as an FYI I don’t see any bolding there. Outside of maybe titles, I don’t think I recall seing any bold (or any emphasis effects at all, come to think) anywhere on the site. Could be a theme thing.
June 24th, 2016 at 7:02 am
There’s definitely bolding there. Maybe it’s your device?