Silencing Women, Chapter 2; In Defence of @LorrieHearts

I find myself facepalming at the stupidity of humanity on an increasingly regular basis.

This afternoon, Lorrie Hearts tweeted something that confused the hell out of me. A twitter user, Darren Elmore, had accused Lorrie of threatening and insulting him. Needless to say, Lorrie challenged this, thus bringing the conversation to the attention of her followers. Cue me scratching my head in a confused manner.

See, I’ve been following Lorrie for a while now, on both my RL account, and under FrothyDragon. I’ve yet to come across her threatening anyone. The same can be said of  her insulting people. It doesn’t happen. So, taking up my childhood dreams of becoming a detective, I searched through the conversation.

Now, remember that post I made about rape jokes not being funny? Lorrie’s interaction with Darren Elmore had begun after Elmore’s claims that the woman upset at Tosh’s joke was “ovary-acting”. (Yeah, because only women get hurt by rape jokes, right?) Lorrie did what I would like to think I’d have done under the same circumstances. Pulled him up on it. What followed was a game of what I like to call “Woman Silencing Bingo”.

Elmore responded automatically to Lorrie’s heckling with insults, immediately calling Lorrie a “humourless asshole”. I mean, hell.. You’d think an amateur comedian would have some experience of dealing with hecklers, right?

But what’s most notable is throughout the exchange, Darren Elmore repeatedly insulted Lorrie. “Mental”, “humourless asshole”, “idiots”…

Elmore fails to understand that women have the right not to hear “HEYYY, rape can be funny!”. Had I been in the audience, I would have interjected. Telling women to STFU and take a rape joke is effectively telling them to just shut up with how they feel about rape. “Yo, it’s all very well that being raped severely traumatised you, but y’know, let me tell you how you should laugh about it instead…”

Men joking about rape deserve to be challenged. I mean, rapists love rape jokes. You see that comedian, making all those rape jokes on stage? Each time he utters a rape joke, he’s reinforcing the rapists’ belief that rape, really, isn’t that wrong.

But what’s most telling is the number of men who’ve spoken out in defence of Daniel Tosh, whilst claiming rape is abhorrent. “I’m not pro-rape, but women, STFU and let men make rape jokes.” What Elmore has effectively said this afternoon can be summed up along the lines of “yeah, rape’s awful, but don’t challenge our right to joke about it, else we’ll insult you, then claim you did the same to us…” In other words, Elmore was trying out the old silencing tactics.

To men, like Darren Elmore, who claim they believe rape is abhorrent, I have a few suggestions. Stop making excuses for rape jokes. Stop insulting women who speak out against rape jokes. Stop making rape jokes. Instead, put the energy you use in doing that into speaking out against rape. Find a way to give survivors back their voice, rather than silencing them further.


14 thoughts on “Silencing Women, Chapter 2; In Defence of @LorrieHearts

  1. It’s ok though, because he got molested as a child, and our “righteous indignation” was nowhere to be seen. So you see, because he’s had a traumatic experience and likes rape jokes, everyone should (note to readers, read that with a healthy sarcastic tone!)

    Then he blocked me, as apparently expressing sympathy that he went through something horrific was proof that he “couldn’t win” and I was making him out to be a monster…

  2. I really appreciate this post, and others that you’ve written, which aim to debunk the bullshit around rape jokes, rape myths and rape culture.

    What you’ve written here sounds so simple: Man makes joke about rape jokes. Woman challenges man. Man repeatedly insults woman, then blocks her and lies about her to make himself seem the victim. And it sounds simple because it is. Yet, whenever we get into debates about rape jokes, it always seems so complicated: who’s taken what the wrong way? Who has the right to say what? Did he really mean he’d rape her? What about freedom of speech? The issue gets extrapolated so far and always by the same people: those who, for some reason, value “The Joke” above the feelings of half of the world’s population for whom rape is a constant threat.

    When I think about it dispassionately, I know that patriarchal privilege makes some men think they can make rape jokes – even in the faces of women who are begging them not to, backing up their pleas with personal stories of how they’ve been affected, traumatised, almost destroyed by rape. But when you’re in the middle of a shit storm, and some disgusting creature is hurling abuse at you because he’s so blind with rage at you calling out his “joke”, it’s impossible to imagine what’s going through his head. It hurts me that so much energy goes into actively defending the right to hurt women, and that’s why posts like this – that chip away at rape culture, molecule by molecule, are so important.

    Thank you.


  3. I was the one who said Rape date cuz you single out a single man for a bad joke and instead of being a voice of reason you attack a single man If ya really cared ya would list a number of groups to volunteer to but NOPE ya attack your the problem not the solution

    • I’m sorry, that justifies your “rape date” comment HOW, exactly? Why is it women who are expected to be the voice of reason, whilst men are given a free card to make rape jokes, support rape jokes, and make comments suggesting a “rape date”?

  4. As for him “being a victim” If one joke brings on a people like me being reported endlessly on facebook at her request instead of her facing me directly and stating her case then yes its a senseless attack I can and will answer for my statements and actions But NOPE sending minions to faceless attack is COWARDLY The internet is a easy battle ground groundless attacks without debate If she had a debate she should have brought it but NOPE it was a internet fury without merit

    • How could Lorrie have brought about this debate, Scott? She could see your comment, she couldn’t reply. And I know I wouldn’t wish to engage with someone who had just suggested a “rape date” against me. I’d rather converse with people who weren’t threatening me?

      I reported your comment, btw, because I think it’s vile men can make comments such as that without considering just HOW that makes the target feel? Or maybe you did think about that, and made that comment because you wanted to scare Lorrie?

      As for the “internet fury without merit”… I’m assuming you wouldn’t react to personal attacks, lies and libel over the internet, then?

    • Seriously?? After saying you’d have a rape date???

      I don’t understand people like you, you’re in the wrong yet firmly believe yourselves to be victims..

      And us so called faceless minions are real men & woman who are really disgused with you and your friend.

      Nothing makes your comments acceptable and when the fact you offered to take her on a rape date is pointed out you ignore that and choose instead to focus on the fact that many of us are rightly furious!!

    • I also reported the comments Scott, since they were both credible threats of violence, and hate speech (within the ToS of Facebook) on the basis of gender.

      Attempt at debate was made Scott. Darren’s first foray into the debate was to call Lorrie a humourless bitch. He proceeded to then call anyone who disagreed with him “mental”. My expression of sympathy for his experiences was met with the comment that “he couldn’t win” and I was intent on turning him into a monster.

      It is a little difficult to engage in dialogue when someone blocks you, as Darren did to several who engaged with him. Once blocked, he then proceeded to lie and defame and insult; those insulted and lied about had no option of reply to him, as they were blocked, hence the public responses.

      The problem is Scott, we’ve got to the stage where robust debate is classed as threats and intimidation, whilst threats, lies and abusive sexual terms are being portrayed as legitimate responses. That can’t be right. Darren himself has even said rape is a terrible thing, yet refers to those he has blocked as “the anti-rape brigade”, as if that is something shameful, rather than what ought to be the default human position!

      For all his complaints of not being listened to, Darren himself was an adept non-listener, claiming insults where none were given, and denying the what was said even when the evidence is there. Has he even retracted his claim that Lorrie hacked his Facebook account, which was the only way he could account for people being able to see a PUBLIC conversation?

      I think it would be beneath Lorrie to accept your challenge, as there is little to debate. The facts are public. However, if she does, be prepared with better arguments than you or Darren have so far advanced.

  5. Err, no woman in her right mind would want a debate with a guy that made a comment about a ‘date rape’. That is what you don’t get – once you stoop to that level, then women will not engage with you in any manner whatsoever. Despite what you have said above, even making the ‘date rape’ comment shows that you are a rape apologist – any man who had genuine empathy for rape victims would NEVER make such a comment.

  6. much as engaging with this dickless wonder would clearly be pointless, am i the only one who’s kind of hoping lorrie could do a paxman on him just for the comedy value? it would make for hilarious performance (anxiety?) art.

  7. Pingback: Occupational hazards… « circles under streetlights

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s