A Girl Is Threatened With Rape In A Rap Battle, And So The Judge Steps In To Deliver His Own Verse

[ismnotwasm]

Set scene: A woman is on stage with her male opponent in an MC rap battle in London when all of a sudden the dude makes a rape threat. Not cool at all. The misogynistic dude tries to calm the crowd down as they look on in disgust. Then suddenly up pops visibly pissed-off BBC radio presenter Nihal, who decides to step in and rip into the rape-threat dude with his own, much better verse.

I want to be clear on two points before you watch it: 1) The young woman didn't need him to step in, but I'm appreciating this as a "see something, say something" moment, and it's great to see that others have her back in such a hostile environment. 2) The fat-shaming in his verse isn't cool either, and I wish that wasn't in there, but I still appreciate this moment of solidarity and outrage.

http://www.upworthy.com/a-girl-is-threatened-with-rape-in-a-rap-battle-and-so-the-judge-steps-in-to-deliver-his-own-verse

While some music--and not just rap-- is rife with violent threats against against women, and in the comments there was some defending of the lyrics because "if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen" and the invariable comparisons to murder in rap, assault in rap (sound familiar as a red herring?) no genre is a special snowflake that escapes being part of rape culture. It's too late y'all.

Rape culture is everywhere and every time you bow down to it, every time it masters you, and rape culture is a master in our society--that women or girl or child or man or baby who is being raped somewhere right as I type this--you're a part of that. You're participating with that, you're complicit with that.

I don't think we have a white knight here so much as we have someone who knew, probably instinctively, because I doubt he knows what rape culture is, knew he had a line to draw. He stepped right up to it. Good for him

[seabeyond]

1. i was just gonna post that. totally agree with the two points made. AND... this is what we are

talking about. each and every time, do NOT keep mouth shut and take that shit on.

[ismnotwasm]

2. Yeah

A friend from work tagged me with it, I'm glad the author stated it like she did. But this *is* what we are talking about-- speaking up

Not just feminists but everybody, this shit is not cool.

The guy can't rap for shit either. If she's already up, there she may have had a rhyme that knocked him down if she was any good. She didn't have to deal with that level of shitty rhyme and rape threats. Which hopefully raises the overall quality. Another thing-- there were lots of young women in that crowd who just heard. "No this shit isn't cool, and it's ok to say so"

[seabeyond]

3. good point. yes. a lot of young women. and i saw a lot of the young men dissing it also,

even in the audience. so ya. that was good.

[cinnabonbon]

4. It was pretty great to see the crowd disapprove so openly

I wonder if we'd see the same if someone in GD threatened another with rape.

[JTFrog]

5. Instead, this is what you see in GD:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4499960

Not, it's not, and that's a scurrilous accusation you're tossing around.

Teenager voluntarily has sex with an adult, even though under the age of consent.

Teenager is physically attacked, restrained, and forcibly penetrated.

Are you telling me there is no difference between the two scenarios? They are exactly the same thing?

Scurrilous indeed.

Rape is rape. FFS.

[cinnabonbon]

6. YUCK.

Oh my god, hope they weren't serious.

If they can't see that exploiting a girl through superior intellect (a teenage brain hasn't developed enough to compare to a grown man's, which is what a statutory rapist relies on when they make their move.) or exploiting a girl through superior physical force are pretty much the same thing, I fear for the future.

[ismnotwasm]

7. Hmm

So rape boils down to a fine tuning? A matter of degree? If you're just this side of an imaginary, or even arbitrary line it's not rape?

Sweet Jesus that's an--odd--way to think.

[MadrasT]

9. Holy fuck that is some sick thinking right there.

[Comrade Grumpy]

10. Why, hello there, HOFers!

I would typically never think of intruding on your echo chamber, but someone pointed out to me that you are discussing my post.

I started in that thread wondering what had happened to the distinction between rape and statutory rape. There seems to be one in the law. (Or, at least I think there is. I don't claim to be an expert on rape law.)

I would argue that in the real world there is a huge difference between consenting to have sex even if you legally to young to and being forcibly raped or even raped because of impairment. (I am aware of the legal argument that people below a certain age cannot consent, but that is a legal fiction designed to protect young people. Young people consent to sex quite regularly, and sometimes even with people they cannot legally have sex with. Again, that law is designed to protect them, and I don't have a problem with that.)

The responses here are shocked and appalled that I cannot see that "rape is rape." But I am in turn a bit mind-boggled that no one is willing to make a distinction between someone doing something voluntarily (even if perhaps being victimized by doing so) and someone having something done to them against their will.

Some teenagers are no doubt tricked/fooled/coerced/manipulated into having illegal sex with older people, but does anyone doubt that some teenagers do so simply because they want to? Are they as victimized as someone who is forcibly raped?

I'll tell you what. Let's not even make this about men and women. Imagine a 15-year-old male. In one scenario, he has sex of his own volition with a 21-year-old male. In a second scenario, he is attacked, beaten up, stripped, and forcibly penetrated by a 21-year-old male. Are these two scenarios identical? Are they identical from the perspective of the 15-year-old? I would argue not.

I like words to have meanings. When I hear somebody say flatly "rape is rape" in an effort to quash any nuance, I must object. If you want to say "sexual assault is sexual assault," that's a bit different. I also think that just saying "rape is rape" kind of cheapens the trauma experienced by the victims of brutal sexual assaults.

But honestly, I don't know why I even bothered writing this. My experience with HOFers leads me to believe this group is rigid, ideologically-driven, and not interested in honest discussion of thorny issues. Being unable to acknowledge that there is a difference between being forcibly assaulted and doing something of your own free will is indicative of that.

Okay, heading back to the real world now.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

11. at least you are able to come in and address your post and speak your mind.

I'll tell you what. Let's not even make this about men and women. Imagine a 15-year-old male. In one scenario, he has sex of his own volition with a 21-year-old male. In a second scenario, he is attacked, beaten up, stripped, and forcibly penetrated by a 21-year-old male. Are these two scenarios identical? Are they identical from the perspective of the 15-year-old? I would argue not.

why don't we ask the 15 y/o boy himself?

are you seriously using NAMBLA ethics to justify/rationalize your other post?

talk about doubling down ...

[JTFrog]

12. I'm sure you know who else out there in the "real world" is heavily invested

in trying to minimize and redefine rape. We saw some amazingly dense politicians come out and say the damnedest things about rape last year. Rape is rape. Statutory rape is rape. Violent rape is rape. Date rape is rape. Drunk rape is rape. That's the REAL WORLD. And even though there are REAL LAWS that define all of those things as rape, rapists often go unpunished. Trying to change the definition or degree of rape is definitely not going to help victims of rape who already face an uphill battle in seeing the perpetrator brought to justice. It just ends up causing trauma on top of trauma.

Object away, just know that your objections mean absolutely squat to me after reading your "thoughts" on this subject.

[ismnotwasm]

13. Rape has "nuance"

Interesting. A bit hostile are we? Feelings a bit hurt? Slightly irritated? Actually think you had some insight to share? Show us the error of our ways? The reasons you bothered writing that little tidbit are no doubt varied, hidden underneath a certain amount of baggage and I'm glad you got it out of your system. You'll feel much better I'm sure.

You enjoy your "real" world.

And

[BainsBane]

14. Rape is defined as the absence of consent

The age at which a minor can consent to sex with an adult is called "the age of consent." As seductive an adult might believe a 7 yr old, 12, yr old, or 14 yr old to be, they are too young to consent to sex and therefore any sexual contact with them is rape. Sex without consent is rape. End of story. You know, Jerry Sandusky, the Catholic priests, that sort of thing. Most law abiding people do not consider that a lesser offense that rape of an adult. In fact, most consider it worse.

States vary somewhat in the age of consent and how they deal with age differences between the older and younger participant. This is all available online for you to easily check. But you choose not to do so. Instead you seem intent on convincing us that sex with minors is somehow non-forcible rape, in the Todd Akin, Paul Ryan tradition. No one here is going to participate in that. In the "real world" such crimes are dealt with through jail time, and child predators are seen as the bottom of the barrel within the prison system. So your contention that an old man who rapes a 13 yr old is somehow less culpable than one who rapes a 36 year old is not something shared by law abiding people or even most felons.

[cinnabonbon]

15. Hi there comrade grumpy.

The responses here are shocked and appalled that I cannot see that "rape is rape." But I am in turn a bit mind-boggled that no one is willing to make a distinction between someone doing something voluntarily (even if perhaps being victimized by doing so) and someone having something done to them against their will.

The reason people aren't seeing your side here is because it sounds far too much like you're trying to get validation. It sounds like you're trying to get people to say: as long as it's "soft rape", it's not as bad as "violent rape". Not a lot of victims try to say that one rape is worse than the other, because they know they all involved rape, so of course it's bad.

The truth is that the teenage brain hasn't developed enough to see the long-term consequences of being screwed by a much older person. There's a power imbalance that they're just not aware of, but that the adult knows about and exploits. Saying that that kind of rape is "more okay/less terrible" than stranger rape has no practical use than to shit on the people who went through "soft rape" and to validate those who exploited them.

That's why you hear things like "rape is rape". It's not because people doesn't think adding violence to the rape will make it horrible, but they're not willing to coddle rapists. They're also not willing to throw survivors of statutory rape under the bus.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

8. Rapping Like A BOSS!!

totally OWNING that Stage.