To my fellow victim advocates: if you plan on talking about sexual violence against a particular group of victims, do not under any circumstances use another group of victims to show how much worse the first has it. In other words, do not do this:
The ad reads:
“I stand united against rape because when I was Raped at 6yrs old, I wasn’t asking for it, wasn’t drunk, and wasn’t dressed seductively. (What would you say of me if I were a woman?) You’re fooling yourself if you believe rape is a respecter of color, creed, religion or sex. It’s inexcusable, deplorable and far from a victimless crime.” ~ B.
I get the point of the ad. It is meant to show solidarity for female victims. However, the way it is written implies that men and boys face no stigmas or insults, no judgments or expectations when they are raped. That is far from true.
But worse, it uses a male survivor to make a point about how bad female survivors have it. That is pretty low even for a feminist group. There is simply no reason for this, and I would hope that UnitedWomen would be embarrassed, but I doubt they have the dignity and integrity for that.
Toy Soldiers 
Did the government fund this ad in any way?
Colour me not suprised. It’s sad that they didn’t realize the insult…
Nobody ever mentioned my being drunk or dressed in any particular way. Never got much beyond my – apparently – really wanting it. Of course it is possible my aunt was compelled into it by my seven year old patriarchal charisma.
Looking at the ad I was struck by one massive question. Where is it supposed to be displayed?
A central and massive factor in the design of any communication is where it will be seen and by who. Having dealt with some advertising for such things as AIDS – HIV – Domestic Violence against men – cheep cars washes – I’m at a loss as to where this as is supposed to be displayed. … or to who. There is no rational demographic for the advert.
The only place it is showing on any form of google search is farcebook – in which case it’s the wrong format, should have been coded in HTML etc and not wet ink on paper. It’s nonsensical, or being put together by a geriatric media manager who’s iron ling should be turned off as a service to the media industry.
The whole thing smacks not just of Crass Insensitivity but also Gross Tokenism – using old media to reduce any form of impact and deliberately ignoring new media. That is either due to dogma which causes such bias as to be innate, else it’s mindful and strategic which is active hate. … or simple Gross Incompetence due to senility!
So you go to the website for UniteWomen.org and look and you find this “Jane Doe of Steubenville” – and you see that they have a campaign to monopolise the child and a certain venue.
My take is that some are getting scared cos they have not had to throw a guy out there to make it appear they are not sexist and self satisfied. The amateur nature fo the advertising is coupled with the total amateur grasp of rape – who gets raped – male rape … in fact anything outside of the Dogma that has become entrenched in the US rape and Campus Rape industry since 1985
Nice Try Girls – pity about the lack of rational, professional and even adult execution. You are about 30 years behind the field and it’s time for you to stop sucking it up from the Federal Funding Pork Barrel Buffet – your output is smacking of Fraud!
Please Don’t expect anyone to be seeking media advice and strategy advice from you any day soon – you is just Too Amateur.
PS – your website fails basic accessibility standards for Disabled People, so stop being such a massive organ and agent of the Patriarchy and stop oppressing the cripples. That really does make you look like a bunch of amateurs who have forgotten the ideology because of too much Dogma cool-aide.
Who is this guy anyway? I’ve never heard of him. Is he someone boys will identify with?
Rev, I assume he is someone who works for the organization. However, it might just be a stock photo.
What is the difference between telling a male victim: “At least no one will ask what you wore and how much you drank.”
and telling the Steubenville victim: “At least you didn’t get a black eye.”
Both trivialize the actual rape.
Tamen – it does not trivialise the rape, it trivialises The Person. That has been the most disgusting matter in the systematic denial of male rape by the feminist ideologues and media mouths – they just keep trivialising the person.
It does both, and that is what makes it so insidious.
I wonder if this is going to be the next stage of denial for these idealogues? Where we’ll see ads for male abuse but pointing out that they don’t have it bad as women?
“Yeah, men can be raped. But they’ll never be accused of asking for it, criticised for what they wore, etc etc.”
I mean jeeze, I think male victims shouldn’t count on help from these idiots.
Actually, I don’t know any male victims, or advocates who count of help from the entrenched and state funded DV and Rape Crisis Industries that have been created since the 1970’s. As a disability advocate I don’t even count on Refuge and Women’s Aide in the UK for provision of services to Disabled Women – I’ve had to deal with too much Domestic abuse of disabled women inside Refuges by employees to trust any of them – and Disabled Rape Victims get treated even worse, no matter the sex.
You would think that when a police force buys a house and turns it into a rape suite at the tax payers expense they would think of the legal issues like Disability Access. Fat chance! Telling a rape victim in a wheel chair that it’s only 2 steps up is not rational. I have had to point out to a police officer that being disabled and raped does not create the power of levitation.
I was told I was being sarcastic, the officer was warned that sarcasm was not a crime, but Disability Discrimination and harassment of an advocate could end up in criminal charges. It was even worse having had to demand that a male rape victim be treated in equality and given access to the rape suite. The officers view had been it was a lady zone only, and male rape victims had the choice of examination by police doctor in a police cell, an interview room or in the local hospital in A&E/Emergency room. When it was pointed out that an examination table would be needed the floor had been offered as a suitable and humane alternative.
it’s up to any group under those umbrellas of DV and Rape Crisis to show they are equality based and to be trusted. The recent report from Mankind on rape services and men is fascinating and shows just how far they all have to go in showing They are worthy of having male victims as clients.
State Funded Monopolies have to show far higher standards and far higher level of proof … and as so many known from experience, the proof and reality is abuse and negation of male victims (No matter How theses service providers scream they are not treating people badly).