A well written piece by Connie from the Social Justice League on her experiences studying law in Australia and dealing with rape culture, barristers and advocates that support slut-shaming and victim-blaming as ways of conducting rape and sexual assault cases, and how they justify playing on prejudices to win cases instead of fighting for true justice.

I highly recommend reading the full peice; here are some excerpts:

“The argument I most commonly run against is: that, in absence of evidence beyond conflicting testimonies, lawyers need to use whatever favorable “evidence” they can find, because they have a duty to do their best to win the case for their client.”

Call me old fashioned or just a fresh-faced graduate from law school, but I thought lawyers were supposed to be officers of the court first. 

“Lawyers [are not] required to do everything possible to win a case. In fact many things are explicitly forbidden because they conflict with a lawyer’s duty to the court. For example, lawyers cannot knowingly allow someone to present false evidence or delay proceedings as a tactic. Lawyers should cease acting for clients who insist on presenting false evidence. From there, even if it isn’t explicitly stated in the Professional Conduct rules, I’d say that it’s necessary to imply a “Don’t reinforce the prejudices of the jurors” in the interests of justice.”

impoliteandevil:

I am so fucking sick and tired of every single person (including some bitch in my English class) saying how Lolita is the villain of the story because she somehow manipulates Humbert and Quilty and how she inflicts power over them. Thiscommon believe everyone shares is why victim blaming is so predominant in today’s culture. When the book came out in the fifties, sure. But it’s fucking 2011!!

Lolita initiates sex ONCE. And this was after Humbert tried to initiate sex with her BY DRUGGING HER. Any psychologist would tell you it’s a survival mechanism adopted by a newly-orphaned 12-year-old being solicited for sex. The rest of the time, Humbert is the initiator. Lolita consents only because she is being threatened or bribed. She has sex to stay out of reform school. She has sex to participate in the school play. She only gives sex for favours. Humbert is clearly controlling her, and she is obviously his victim. Yeah, it can be argued that Lolita manipulates Humbert using sex to get what she wants. But let’s not forget she’s been kidnapped by someone who killed her mother, and then constantly raped and isolated from the rest of the world by that same person. Anyone in that situation would give up their bodies for some form of comfort.

Not to mention it is NOT Dolores’ fault that men are attracted to her. First of all, she’s fucking twelve. A sexual mastermind 12-year-olds are not. Second of all, men have control of their emotions, hormones, and ability to rape. When they give into that urge, it’s on them and not on her. Humbert and as we discover in the end—Quilty are the villains in this story.

It seems the US Navy posted my Sexual Prevention tips poster (HERE) on their official facebook page- and not ironically. It’s caused quite a stir and has even been posted on the Daily Mail UK. 

Thank you to everyone who rebloged, reposted and retweeted this picture., and thank you most of all too Femninally (http://feminally.tumblr.com/) for writing it.
 

Navy spokesman Lt. Alana Garas defended the post: 

‘The intention of posting this poster was to encourage discussion on a serious issue,’  she told Fox News. 

‘It is a crime that will not be tolerated … and the Navy will continue to explore ways to reach our sailors on this serious issue,’ Ms Garas said. 

A Navy post on the comment section also backed the poster: ‘As sad as it is, you’d be surprised how many people need to be told these seemingly basic things,’ the comment reads.

et-tu-dionyse:

[TW: rape, abuse]

You know what’s cute? Having to explain to people why rape isn’t funny.

Of course I could easily explain it, that it isn’t funny because I fail to see anything to laugh about the four times my then-boyfriend beat me and then decided that he should rape me to teach me a lesson.

Of course I could sit there and tell them about how I went vegan to hide the fact that I couldn’t drink milk anymore without having a panic attack.

Of course I could show them the burn marks on my arms - four, one for every time - and show the the x-rays of my broken foot and dislocated shoulder.

Of course I could sit there and explain to them how for the longest time even the most harmless mention of rape would give me flashbacks that would make me physically sick.

Of course I could do all of this, I could describe to them, in detail, exactly what happened to me and I’m sure before I could even finish they’d understand, but I can’t lest they deem me “overly-emotional” and “too sensitive” and of course having any sort of emotion immediately invalidates my opinion because it makes me too irrational to be allowed to speak.

It’s frustrating because it’s so easy. It really is. I can explain to anyone who really doesn’t understand what’s un-funny about rape about the bruises, about the flashbacks, about the countless showers I took trying desperately to feel clean again, about the anxiety, about the shame, about all of it, but I can’t do that because if I did no one would take me seriously because I’m not being “objective” enough.

Well fuck you, that’s not being “objective,” that’s being an apathetic douche who’s too afraid of reality to be able to face any emotions that bullshit comedians like Mr. Tosh can’t give you.