Rape Can Be Funny

Sometimes, people freak the fuck out over no big deal whatsoever. I take a lot of shit from commenters at my day job who think they have the right or something to censor me. It's like, bitch, you ain't got no inalienable rights as a commenter. And I despise censorship in any form whatsoever. I can say retard, faggot, kike, nigger, and dyke all I want, because at the end of the day, the intent and context defines the meaning of any word. Anyway, RIP George Carlin, who found humor in everything, even rape.

And he was my kind of feminist.

Comments

[Leets]

I guess you can say those words all you want, but I bet you wouldn't use the "n" word while walking through Harlem in any context.

[missbivigou]

'I can say retard, faggot, kike, nigger, and dyke all I want, because at the end of the day, the intent and context defines the meaning of any word'.

I love your writing and completley support you in stating that feminism is not monolitihc. (I was frustrated by the reaction to that now infamous Jezebel post, considering I beleived you were commenting on the documentary and not at all being a rape apologist or whatever else you were accused of).

But the above sentence and the argument behind it smack of detached-selfishness.

If you do indeed use any of the words you mentioned what other reason would it be for but to offend, whether ironically or more malciously?

Words have definitions. Words have meanings. And whatever context you use those words in the menaings still stand. Also the fact that you are neither retard, nor faggot, nor kike, nor nigger, nor dyke might have something to do with why you feel as though you can use such words freely.

The pain behind such slurs can never be used to hurt you. You're never the subject. Hence you can be flippant.

You call yourself Slut Machine so that others cannot use the word slut against you, right? You've claimed it as a weapon, so it can't hurt right? But doesn't slut still mean the same thing?

[slut machine]

no, the reason why i would use any of those words would be in a discussion about censorship. like i just did. duh. (well, actually i call my friends faggots sometimes.) i'd never use those words to intentionally hurt a person.

[archipelagic]

First, you're the reason I started reading Jezebel.

Second, seeing how people sometimes react on Jezebel, it reminds me how I became alienated with feminism. Of course I'm still a feminist, but I start to see the stark differences between "the waves", and how I don't really want to be defined by a wave. I don't know, some feminists just seem really obsessed with rape. And it is horrible, don't get me wrong, but it's often part of a whole system of horrible things.

Also, I call my (gay) best friend "Queermo" and he calls me "Tits". Is that bad?

[Chelsea]

I'm with slut machine on this one.
"I can say retard, faggot, kike, nigger, and dyke all I want,"

I say 'em all too. They are just WORDS people. "sticks and stones can break my bones, but names will never hurt me"? let's take it back to kindergarten folks. If people would stop caring what other people called them, there would be no "bad words".

[ashley]

i don't know, chelsea.

yes, words are only words, but there is a certain degree of empathy one must take on when saying those words. sure, they may not offend you and you may not be saying them in a way in which you're being hateful (though to be honest, i will never understand what a person gains by using racial slurs in any context) but there are people who have experienced things in their lives, had these and other slurs thrown at them in a hateful way, etc. which can in turn make these "harmless" words hurt very much. it's not a case of these individuals being too sensitive, it is the insensitivity and lack of maturity of the person using them. yeah, they're (arguably) fine to use with your close friends, but at least to me, you're being callous if you feel justified in flinging those words around whenever you feel like it, without taking into consideration how it makes someone who has lived a different life than you feel.

[Sabina]

I'm glad you qualified that you'd only use those words in a discussion of censorship, because I think that point is lost in the post itself.

Also, I almost became a Jezebel commenter just to tell the others they were out of line in dissing your post about Polanski-- I don't personally think he's not guilty of rape, but you have the obvious right to question the situation, and you made a completely valid argument about how statutory rape laws disempower girls by labeling them all victims and denying their sexuality until they're of age (despite the constant objectifying sexualization of underage models). So keep it up.

[Jesse]

I hope you get to see this but have you seen A Girls guide to the 21st century sex. http://www.zshare.net/video/112329951c9585f1/
maybe you can put it on Jezebel anyway i don't know anything about downloads and but the doc had 8 episodes. I could only find one.

[CR]

sort of off topic but I started reading Jezebel because of you and I never comment or anything but have read the controversial rape posts. tiresome. but its funny reading your post today right after I was reading a post about diamond rings being unfeminist on Jezebel and there are already like over 100 comments most of which(from my scan)are all, "diamnonds are so evil!!! i have a saphire because i am an awesome human being!!!" basically what i'm saying is i finally reached my threshold for disgust with all that. i'm only gonna go on friday for pot psychology from now on.

[Moby Jane]

Yep. You can say whatever the fuck you like. Some people just want to be contrary for the sake of simply being contrary. Fuck the censors!

[Sam]

Do your thing, SM. Say whatever you want, especially here. I'm with archipelagic, you're why I started reading Jezebel anyway.

[Meghan]

1. This post is completely apropos. Props.

2. Maybe its because I, too, have a Communication degree, but I totally agree with you on words themselves not having meaning blah blah blah. I can hear my professor saying this exact sentiment in my head to this day.

3. I kinda feel like the vitriol blasted at you from Jezebel commenters offended by your take on the Polanski thing is a lot of misplaced anger and need for closure as it relates to their own experiences. Which is valid, I guess...but come on. To be completely honest, reading those comments, all I could think was, "Damn, some of these bitches need to get laid." Or some therapy. Either way...

[boring diatribes]

I think the problem on that post was that your intentions weren't being understood by the commentors. Like I commented in your later post on the issue, I've never heard you be hateful or ignorant, so I gave you the benefit of the doubt, even though if someone I didn't know had said something similar, I would've vehemently argued until I understood where they were coming from. Another problem with Jezebel commenting is that it gets like a fucking angry mob with pitchforks and shit. Once a couple people are pissed, everyone starts shouting, and the same thing is said 1000 times. I mean, not everything is black and white. I feel sometimes like I can't question things on Jezebel because people see red flags in certain topics/words.

I do completely agree, in general and not related to your words, that words have meaning in context. I call my gay friend a fag and he calls me a cunt because we know that we could not be more well-intentioned when we're really discussing the issues. But you better believe I correct my little brothers every time they throw "fag" around because even if I understand the power of words, not everyone does. Someone above commented that they're "just words." I don't think it's that simple--we need to understood those words and their connotations before we can own them.

[Michael R. Jackson]

I don't know. Every time someone calls me a fag, I don't feel empowered, I feel overpowered. Particularly if it's from people who are liberal who think that gives them permission. And I guess that bothers me with all of this. Yes, you have the right to say whatever you want, but I often feel, as much as people poo-poo political correctness, that if I say I don't like being called a fag, or I don't like my sister or my female friend being called a cunt, that I'm going to be told that I'm just being a politically correct (fag, cunt, nigger, etc.) and to shut the fuck up and get with the program. And so basically I don't understand. I wish that it was not a prerequisite as contemporary human in 2008/9/10/etc. to employ a rhetorical style that's about using insults to get your point across and being so hard and badass all the time. There's something to be said for, not necessarily censoring yourself, because obviously these words do exist and we need to be able to talk about it, but at the same time, what's wrong with being respectful and sensitive to others' feelings and historical relationship to certain words? Why is that SO out of fashion?

Also, sure I think rape can be funny, but I come from the school of though that thinks comedy should be about undermining the status quo. Like, I only really want to laugh about rape because it makes me uncomfortable to think of someone being violated and their choice being taken away and therefore more conscious of the human condition in some way, not "aww, what a hard day at work, you know what I need to take the edge off? A martini straight up and a rape joke, giggle-giggle." Like, what IS that? Why are we (me included) such sophisticated, hip, soulless barbarians?

[Lex]

You totally listened to NPR today. If you didn't then you are very in tune. They had an old interview with Carlin where he described his love for words and the context and thought meant everything and the word itself was powerless. Great point! He will be greatly missed for his humor, his rebelliousness, and his ideals. He was great.

[C]

i find in times like these, it helps to remember that no one cares about internet shit like this more than a week or so.

yeah, it's SERIOUS BUSINESS and all that, but sometimes everyone needs to chill and get away from the computer. ya know?

aw, george carlin. :( :( :(

[Colette]

There are the writers who write what they want and how they feel without blinking an eye. Then, there are the writers who care too much about what people think.

You write from the heart. You write things that not many people would even dare writing about. I think a lot of those people who were berating you on Jezebel are deep down jealous of your writing and what you stand for. Say whatever you like. You have the talent and the balls; they do not.

[Nene]

Criticizing someone's writing or asking them to support an argument is not censorship. 'Don't judge!' and 'You're so closed minded' are the battle cries of an increasingly anti-intellectual population that forwards on urban legend emails and buys diet pills and infomercial crap.

I love(d) George Carlin and I like quite a bit of your writing, but you need to back that shit up.

[Nene]

I forgot one-- 'You're just jealous.'

[Emily H.]

Great post! The point of humor most of the time is that it's about things that make us anxious -- death, race relations, getting embarrassed, sex, etc. Rape is one of those types of topics; people can laugh at it because it freaks them out (or me at least, I'm scared of rapists), not because it's inherently "funny" or "not a big deal." I like reading Jezebe & all, but some of the commentators are so terribly earnest & sanctimonious, they don't realize this.

[wrongagain]

wrong again tracie... your shitty colloquialisms draw out the true fence-sitters. stick to what you know, not what you employ to keep your near-30 ass "edgy".

[wrongagain]

and p.s., george carlin would laugh in your fucking face if he ever met you.

[Shanta]

Why do you guys still stick around and bother reading if you disagree with all this stuff? maybe its just me, but if I read something I dont like, or hear a song I think is crap, or something lame comes on tv, I change the channel. duh. It all seems a bit martyr-y to me. I agree that censorship is completely entwined in context- and awesome post Tracie! Sorry to be one of those kiss-arsey commenters, I figure you probably only read the interesting whiny ones anyway lol, thats what I would probably do too!

[mariaaaaa]

Hola... not all the comments related to "the post" were critical... I threw in my two cents a couple of times. I think people got way bent out of shape from an IM conversation. An IM conversation! I know that my conversations with my closest friends would totally be deemed offensive or incorrect by onlookers.

Context and intent do make a difference. I regularly greet my best friend with "Hello Ho!" or "Hey dummy!" and of course I don't think of her as either, it's just funny to say. However, having grown up with an abusive parent, I know very well words can indeed hurt. Context and intent...

[lan]

there are some seriously wacky commenters on Jezebel--and they always seem to come out when you post, which i suppose is to be expected because you post about interesting/sensitive cultural and personal topics.

however, reading some of those threads made me think of those bitter old hillary supporters that came out screaming and threatening to vote for mccain after her concession to obama. you think they read jezebel?

anyway, i thought your response to the original post and its reaction was really good and actually explained a lot--especially this idea of using humor and an irreverant attitude to not only diffuse a tough topic and create a space to talk about said topic--but also to empower the participants and maybe some minority opinions. it opens conversation in a way--preventing a revamping of the same old hegemonic discourse.

seriously, maybe i read too much shit into your posts on Jezebel, but I think you got your own brand of "thaaaaaang" going on there. i like your bloggy style.

[mauve]

funny you make such a big deal about freedom of speech/thought etc., when the main reason commenters on jezebel were offended was not what you said about polanski, but the fact that you abusively banned a commenter just because they happened to disagree with you and bring additional facts to support their position. that is the thing everyone expected you to apologize for, and the fact that you keep talking about what a sex-positive feminist you are and such doesn't make it any less obvious that it is you who do not respect other people's freedom of speech, not the other way round.
i of course agree that many of the commenters on jezebel acted like an angry mob, and there have also been some gross exaggerations of what you had actually said in the original post (which i didn't find so revolting, neither did i think you were a rape apologist or whatever absurd things people accused you of afterwards). but i think that your shifting of the focus of their criticism is sort of hypocritical: most people were revolted at what they saw as a censorship of the commenters in your act of banning one of them, and not so much at your initial position, as everyone in fact seemed to agree (except for the 'banging issue')that you were entitled to your own opinion and that, furthermore, what you could be accused of was merely unfortunate wording or an approach not sensitive enough to the issue of rape, but not bad intentions or anything like it.
so in my opinion, tracie, you have built a straw man (which is the anti-feminist stance you have fabricated as representative for your critics) against which you have been fighting in order to legitimize what was actually a visceral reaction to criticism by which you banned a commenter, and which in fact caused all the outrage. it wasn't a question of the n-th wave of feminism, neither a question of freedom of speech (at least, not of YOUR freedom of speech), neither a question of liking sex or unicorns or whatever
as a person who has read every single comment for both posts, but decided not to participate in the debate, i'm on your side in what concerns your revolt against the innane comments about you being a rape apologist, or a herpes transmitting harlot or a victim blamer etc., but i think that if you pay attention, you can see that the strongest and most legitimate arguments come from the people who were revolted at your abuse of power. and i think that you have avoided the issue entirely, even if that was much more problematic than the fact that you used the word 'banging' for most of your brighter critics. but of course, it is way easier to isolate from the comments the most reatarded ones and only respond to them, because this way the people who weren't following the whole debate will be persuaded that the world is full of tracie and freedom of speech haters, and give you unconditional support, and also by ignoring the intelligent and to the point criticism and only answering to the idiotic, off the wall comments you can also give a strong air of legitimacy to your position in general, giving the illusion that you were globally right, while, in fact, you were right (or at least legitimate) in your expression of your own opinions, but not in censoring another person. these are two different things and while, of course, you have the right to say whatever you want and you owe nothing to your readers, you should allow others the same rights and freedoms you feel entitled to have.
and i also think that the easiest way for you would have been to just apologize for the banning, which was uncivil, but not for your opinions, which you have every right to express

[slut machine]

i didn't apologize for banning that chick, because i'm not sorry about it. she's been a bitch to me in the past. it had nothing to do with her expressing a different opinion than me at all, but for continuing her nasty attitude. blogs aren't a democracy, they're a dictatorship, so my power wasn't abused, it was simply used. i don't give a fuck if people disagree with me, but they will respect me when they do it.

[Lauren]

you are the bee's knees and I love you . I too (as everyone else) read the Polanski post ,and my take away is how scary it is that in 2008 people,educated people ,can't just read something and understand it's opinion. Why people even try to argue based on opinion is futile. It's good to be passionate , and like someone said before I am not sure if I agree with your statements regarding the rape, but I did find it interesting to hear a varying perspective. I personally was annoyed by the 8 trillion pages of comments/responses to your post ,most of them basically running around in circles and various individuals restating the obvious.

keep just keeping it real S.M. Not everyone is gonna "get it",but those of us that "get it " have your back girl.

Love and Kisses from California,
Lauren

[Lukas]

SM, you're great. sometimes i hate the internet, but i always love you.

[Southpaw]

In my opinion, the outrage was mostly due to the fact that you wanted to discuss the age of consent (which is an interesting subject in itself, I might add, without Polanski) but you presented a rape case as an example. And I don't mean the statutory kind.

What I'd like to know is whether reading the court documents (I'm assuming you didn't, since they make it pretty clear that the girl did not give consent) would have made any difference? I know the post was about the document but since this information was readily available, I think it's only natural that it was brought up.

[C]

ok! went back and read a bunch of the jez threads to figure this shit out, and i have only one observation:

people who make a living blogging about tv on the internet really need to not complain about how "stressful" their job is. bitch please, you work in your pajamas. come chill with me down at the psychiatric hospital if you wanna know stress.

god. for real. the drama of shallow women on the internet knows no bounds (and just fyi, i'm a chick.). i'm embarassed for all y'all just reading that crap.

[Jessica]

I feel bad for people who use the phrase "all y'all."

[C]

i feel bad for people who still find the words dyke, nigger, kike and faggot useful. i try to stick with the character-based slurs myself.

for what it's worth, i've lived in kentucky all my life, and if anyone can use "all y'all," i'd like to think i'd be allowed. my two graduate degrees also help balance it out.

jessica... you, on the other hand, can die in a fucking fire. are you cool with me using that turn of phrase, you worthless bitchface?

SERIOUS BUSINESS, THIS INTERNET!!!!

[C]

are you the same jessica that gets paid to post your vapid IM conversations? never mind, kudos to you for finding a way to make money off of being a chronic shut-in.

[scarlett letter]

Tracie, your readers loyally log in every day. They love you, they feel as though you are one of their friends, and they are shocked when you express an opinion which differs from theirs. I don't agree with everything you say either, but I still love reading the things you write, and actually kind of think of you as a friend too. The kind of friend that makes me challenge the assumptions I have, the kind of friend with whom I can respectfully disagree. And also one with whom I can share my love of easy bake ovens and unicorns. So, I'm sorry that you got irked, and I hope most of your faithful readership is sorry too.

[squeakel]

I read that debate and I think it was fine to disagree with what Tracie wrote, but to demand an apology, etc. was just mind boggling. If you disagree - just say so and leave it at that.

If you actually believe in freedom of speech, then you must tolerate the expression of views that offend you.

[squeakel]

Also, do psychiatric hospitals offer employee discounts?

[ladyslipper]

Goes both ways, sister.

I think it is your right to say whatever you want. And it's my right to hate it, disagree with it, ridicule it, rail against it, laugh about it, boycott it, have a different perspective about it, and talk about it as much as I want.

I don't get why you are upset about something that is part of the territory, especially considering your employers provide a forum and encourage exactly that kind of discourse.

[Hilary]

I spent a lot of time thinking about the two Jezebel posts - the original one about Roman Polanski and your later one about Unicorns, Easy-Bake Ovens and Vibrators - I've been reading Jezebel for a while but don't comment.

You're a talented writer and I admire your openness and honesty in your posts.

I think you raised some interesting issues about age of consent and how it can sometimes take away the agency of teens to assume that they have zero capacity to consent- it doesn't make sense to think that some switch of responsibility is flicked on their birthday, and I think it would be interesting if more countries took steps like a flexible age of consent (depending on the age of the other person involved - eg sex between a seventeen year old and a fifteen year old should be treated differently under the law to sex between a fifteen year old and a thirty year old), BUT raising those questions in a post about such a prominent real-life case of rape was unfortunate, to say the least.

I agree that the commenters who were demanding an 'apology' or a retraction, and drew connections between your personal sexual behaviour and your opinions on sexual issues were way out of line.

BUT it's not inhibiting your freedom of speech to criticise your argument. I was more irritated at your second post, as you seemed to decide that any disagreement with you was because people weren't in tune with sex-positive, 'radical possibilities of pleasure' feminism. The ironic thing was that it's the same sort of argument that the anti-porn feminists use - women like Mackinnon and Dworkin say to proporn feminists 'the only reason why you think that way is because you've been so duped by the patriarchy'. You're saying to the people who criticised your argument in relation to the Polanski post that the only reason for their views is that they're so mired in a bog of 'monolithic feminism'. And it's just as much bullshit as Dworkin etc, because it seems designed to totally undermine someone's argument without engaging with it. It taints your opponent's argument in a way that they can't recover from, and *that* is what's not feminist about your second post — the respect that you want is not the respect that you showed.

[Kasia]

I agree with C - not the vitriolic stuff, but the general gist. I see the Jezebel thing as a group of stubborn, insecure women yelling past each other, SM included. Everybody was wrong there. Too bad the "dictator" didn't use her powers for good (chilling out the discussion) instead of evil (aggravating it).

Do you guys really find those Carlin clips funny? I thought they were tired harping...and I thought you could kind of hear insecurity in his voice. But different strokes for different folks.

[legedezbenz]

I agree with Hilary. You know, censorship does suck and I'm totally against it to. But to some people there is a difference between what you CAN say and what you SHOULD say. You have every right to express your opinion and although I didn't agree with every aspect of your Roman P. conversation, I had no problem with it because it is your opinion and you backed it up.

However, as I stated before, just because you have the right to say something, there may be certain social consequences. When you voice controversial viewpoints, then expect objection and just deal with it (provided that the ensuing vitriol is directed at your statements and not you as a person). A blog is a dictatorship ... I get it. But when you go against mainstream tenets (even on a "progressive" site like Jezebel) instead of being all defensive, keep an open mind and promote the exchange of ideas. Moe takes a lot of shit for her writing but I respect her for it because she has a "fuck it" attitude and thick skin.

The age of consent thing wasn't so bad in itself (I don't really agree with you but I get it). But for many, it was the unfortunate juxtaposition of rape and age o.c.
that made ppl so butt hurt. I think all the drama resulted from a lack of objectivity on both parts. The commenters need to understand that you're not all "yaay rape" and you need to understand that by just mentioning rape in that context you are going to get a whole host of touchy people.

Keep doing what you do and much respect.

[yeah]

unfortunately, this post, along with your unicorns, etc. post has made me realize just how immature and kind of sad you really are. it doesn't make me dislike you or your writing, and i'm all for free speech, but the way you handled this with a "uh-uh, i just won't hear it. na na na na na" fingers in ears approach is pretty unprofessional. yeah, blogging is a dictatorship, but if it weren't for the people who you so obviously refused to have intelligent, calm discourse with regarding your post, you would just be a horny girl sitting in front of her computer in her pjs eating ben & jerry's and then taking pills so that it doesn't make you gain weight. so don't fucking insult them, disregard their comments, and talk down to them like children.

[jaime]

one of the first things i thought when i read this was 'how long before people come over and bitch!'

it wasnt long!

[Liz]

I'm not adding anything super new and relevant to the the discussion, but I just wanted to point out that I read this blog and Jezebel almost daily.

SM, your writing on Jezebel is fantastic--all the writing on there is great. Sometimes I disagree it but sometimes there are really, really interesting discussions brought up. Sometimes, when I can take a break from work, I might add a little comment here and there. Possibly even a comment along the the lines of "Hmm, I'm not so sure I agree with xyz. Have you thought about it this way...?"

But I don't comment on there because for every 1 comment on there that's thought-provoking or witty or insightful, there are 10 more that are part of the uptight, Jezebel commenter clique that's such a turn off.

I agree with you 100% that the blog is not a democracy. If those girls that post a comment every other minute (literally) really are so outraged, then they should just move on. They should only read things they agree with from now on and pat themselves on the back on how awesome and PC they are.

In other words, you rock and I'm glad you used your banning powers.

[a]

Love your writing on here and Jez. It's always sincere and I think girls like you (unashamed, honest, smart) are important to the world and feminism. There's too many whiny sanctimonious drama queens on Jezebel these days; I don't really comment anymore but I still read it. That banning issue is ridiculous. I guess I understand the fear that some of those girls would have about suffering the same fate since they are somehow able to comment 100 times a day...and now they won't give you page views -- take that! agh, whatever. As a fellow feminist often accused of being flippant, I totes understand where your heart is.

[ladyslipper]

At one point it was up to like 35,000 hits - did you end up making a buttload of money?

[Fran]

You know if people really think you're immature and sad, maybe they should stop reading your personal blog and start their own.

That way, they can keep their crappy insights and unfounded instances of ignorance off yours and we can go back to enjoying the fruits of your labors.

Go on now....shoo!!

[gravy]

I'm not here to agree or disagree with you on this one but rather to ask what the deal is with Jezebel. Your reality TV commentary is hilarious, but that blog--feminist though its premise may be--has turned from once edgy to a collection of commenters who resemble a pack of 8th grade harridans. It doesn't help that the blog started out smart and witty and has dissolved into posts of "do you think I'm pretty?"

Be your posts controversial or no, gawker media seems to be a sinking ship...

[Kat]

I'll tell ya something, you have intellectual integrity. Aren't many people I would say that about, and free speech is free speech. There are so many things that people say that piss me off to no end, but I am not a sanctimonious prick who believes they should should be state-sanctioned.

[oops, whateves]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1_y_LaMokGM

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Txp8B4ek_kk&feature=related