Showing posts with label sexual assault. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sexual assault. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

An open letter to victims of sexual assault

Sorry for the ONE YEAR LONG delay in writing. I am working on a ton of new projects, which includes retiring this blog for a brand new one. Details coming soon!

[This is kind of obvious, but trigger warning for discussions of sexual assault]

Dear Jane Does,

I hope this finds you well. Sadly, it probably doesn't. What a terrible few weeks, huh? Ugh. So horrible.

I don't need to update you on Steubenville, Rehtaeh Parsons or Audrie Pott. You've heard about them. You've read about their stories on every Facebook timeline, Twitter feed, news story, etc. Sure, it's great that their stories are getting coverage but damn, you wish they'd talk about something else, right? Listening to that stuff is tough as fuck. Hits way too close to home.

Thankfully, some people are getting the story right. Melissa Harris-Perry, a rockstar in her own right, penned a beautiful open letter to Steubenville's Jane Doe. If you want some extra support, you can check it out here.

I want you to know that I am sorry, too. To echo the powerful words of Melissa, I am so fucking sorry that we live in a world in which the heinous things you experienced are a reality. I send you a thousand apologies every single day.

You are not alone. Not just because there are tons of people in this world fighting for justice for you, but because there are tons of people in this world just like you. Conservative estimates put 1 in 4 womyn in the category of sexual assault survivors. 1 in 4. There are people in your school, at your workplace, in your synagogue who carry the same weight that you do. Sadly, some of the people who've reacted badly to your disclosure are probably carrying that weight, too. 

But I want you to know that I respect you.

I respect what you did then and what you've done since. I respect your decision to punch him out, to not have screamed, to have told everyone you know, to have told no one. I respect your decision to report it to the police, to have not reported it to the police. I respect your right to have your experience(s) define you; to reject the very notion that it's a part of who you are.

I respect you. I respect your right to navigate this world in whatever way feels right for you. You have rights. You matter.

Your experience matters, even if the police said it didn't; even if your family didn't believe you; even if your friends weren't there when it mattered.

Your life matters. You matter. 

I don't want you to think that we only care about Amanda Todd, Rehtaeh Parsons or Audrie Pott because they're dead. People cared about them when they were with us.  People care about you. Yes, you. Right now. This very second. There are people who care very, very deeply for you.


You are entitled to justice and there are people in this world who spend every waking second fighting for that justice.

I want you on this Earth. I want your abusers brought to justice and I want the pain to stop. And I commit to doing everything in my power to ending the bullshit that has traumatized too many of us.

I'm sorry for what happened to you. But an apology means shit without action. So, please know that I commit to keeping up the fight for justice. That means I will commit to talk about sexual assault, even when it makes people squirmy. I will call out people who argue that rape jokes are funny, that womyn lie about their rape and that rapists are 'good dudes who make decisions'. I will call out journalists who care more about the 'ruined lives' of our perpetrators than the trauma they've inflicted on us. I will educate those in my life on how to be an effective bystander and what it means to be an ally. I will continue to speak the truth about rape culture and will always refuse to be silenced.

You deserve that much.

The world need not be this ugly.

We deserve better.

So please, hold on.

“Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.”- Arundhati Roy

In solidarity, rage and love,

- FC


Monday, March 5, 2012

What I wish people understood about women who've been sexually assaulted

I haven't updated since October?! My bad!

As a support worker for survivors of sexual violence, a feminist academic and a friend to many womyn (and therefore, survivors!), I find myself having the same conversations over and over.

[TRIGGER WARNING for discussions of sexual assault... obviously.]

So here it is.

I wish people understood that women who've been sexually assaulted:

1- Are not fabergé eggs:
Womyn who've been sexually assaulted are not inherently fragile and ready to break(down) at any minute. Of course, the time when they start to heal is not an ideal time and they're probably not feeling their best. But if at least 1 in 4 womyn will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime and humankind has existed for centuries and centuries, clearly womyn have found ways to cope and continue living their lives.

It's problematic at best and sexist at its worse to assume that womyn who've been sexually assaulted are forever 'broken' and should therefore be treated like children.

2- Are not going to react in the ways you expect or hope: The amount of people who've told me that their disclosure of sexual assault was dismissed because they didn't 'act like someone who has just been assaulted' is downright depressing. When someone is assaulted, they might pull a CSI victim and break down in tears, they might bury it deep and deny it, they might speak about it non-stop, they might never speak of it again. They might abstain from all sexual activity, they might sleep with anything that moves, they might quit their job or go back to work the next day. They might drink/smoke it away, they might become macrobiotic vegans.

It is absolutely absurd that we throw out all logic about the uniqueness of people when it comes to sexual assault responses.

3- Owe you absolutely nothing: Just because I've told you about my experience of trauma, that doesn't mean that I now owe you every detail of my assault(s), every detail of my therapy session, etc. To pry for more information is both inappropriate and fucking creepy.

4- Want their power back: Sexual assault is not about sex; it's about power. To assume that men sexually assault because they can't control their sexual urges it not only illogical but also offensive to men.

And so when someone is sexually assaulted, they are dealing with the fact that their power, bodily integrity and agency have been violated. And so telling them what they need to do and insisting you know what's best is not only annoying but also contributing to their disempowerment. If I've learned anything in my years as a support worker, it's that the vast majority of womyn who've been sexually assaulted and who seek out help are looking for validation, resources and the space to vent. They know what's best for them and the course of action they should take, they just want you to validate their choices and provide them with any necessary resource information.

5- Don't need your judgment: They don't need you to question why they accepted a ride with that guy, why they dressed that way, why they drank so much, why they went back to him, why they didn't report, why they did report, why they waited weeks to tell you, why they didn't self-defense classes, why they didn't leave the party, why they invited him inside their apartment, etc.

Womyn who've been sexually assaulted don't need your judgment: Society is doing that part just fine, thanks.

Monday, October 31, 2011

Feminist Blogosphere

Read this if you still fail to understand the power of feminist blogging.

Oh and, this if you're one of those assholes who believes the brouhaha about 'slutty' Halloween costumes.

Friday, August 26, 2011

Why we need to care about DSK's charges being dropped

TRIGGER WARNING: This post discusses sexual assault in concrete and theoretical ways.

I recognize that I've been an incredibly lazy blogger as of late. I apologize about that. I've been extremely busy.

And then beloved Jack Layton died and I've been reeling.

But one thing that's gotten be riled up as of late is the entire case of DSK.

Unless you have the pleasure of living under a rock, you've heard about Dominique Straus-Kahn. Even my last blog post was about the joy of being famous, referring in part to DSK's treatment even though he face(d) serious charges of sexual assault.

Since that last post, the victim in this whole story as come forward. We now know her Nafissatou Diallo, an immigrant womyn of colour who is also a single mother and chambermaid in a New York hotel. She came forward and told her story.

She says that she walked in to clean DSK's room and found him partially undressed/exposing himself. She apologized, he told her she didn't have to and then sexually assaulted her.

DSK has since done what most men do in those situations do: Claimed it was consensual.

It was recently announced that all charges against DSK in the United States have been dropped because of inconsistencies on the part of Ms. Diallo. He will however go on to face similar charges in France for a sexual assault that he committed against a journalist there. Or rather, is "alleged" to have committed.

And that's where I start feeling a little.... stabby.

As an outspoken advocate against sexual violence and as someone who works as a front-line, support worker, Ms. Diallo's story is all to damn common.

On the one hand, you have a poor, single mother who also happens to be an immigrant of colour. On the other, you have a rich, powerful and 'important' man. In many circumstances, people like DSK would deny having any 'sexual relations with that womyn' (Sound familiar?) But in this case, like in Clinton's case, once you get to the point where all evidence leads to some sexual contact, then they play the 'Cried rape' card.

"It was entirely consensual!" they say "It makes total sense that a womyn who makes barely over minimum wage in a precarious job would risk it all to bone me, even though it was not until she saw my face on TV that she knew I was famous. And even though I'm a married rich powerful man, it makes total sense that she would just walk into my room and say 'I WANT TO SUCK YOUR COCK' and then go home. Yup that makes perfect sense".

Let's not kid ourselves folks. That is exactly what DSK is saying. I'm just doing you the favour of sparing you the BS elements of it.

Meanwhile, DSK's wife diligently stands by his side, even though at best, he had oral sex with a complete stranger in a hotel room and at worst, he sexually assaulted her.

"But! But! He should still be in the running for France's President and we should definitely be supporting him, because 'bitches be lyin'."

This narrative happens over and over and over. And then we wonder why 8 womyn a day are sexually assaulted in Ottawa and only 1 reports it to the police. (Source: OCTEVAW)

Because it doesn't matter if you're white, of colour, rich, poor, able bodied, disAbled, queer, straight, etc. It doesn't even really matter if he is either. (Although that's not always the case, particularly around men of colour, queer men and men with disAbilities or mental illnesses, but that's a whole other story).

It doesn't matter what the circumstances are because 'bitches by lying' and 'men getting framed'. ALL THE TIME.

And so in this case, you have a womyn saying she was sexually assaulted by a complete stranger. She got a high powered lawyer, had a publicity machine and she STILL wasn't believed. So do you think that someone who was assaulted by their partner/coach/professor/parent is going to be believed? What if that person was intoxicated? Good luck with that.

Nobody knows for sure what happened except for Ms. Diallo and DSK. Let me clear about that. I cannot prove that she was sexually assaulted just like I can't prove that he didn't. What I can say is that the way in which we talk about this case says a great deal about the culture we live in and the way we treat survivors.

Language is important. I wish I was half as eloquent as fabulous anti-violence advocate Jackson Katz but since I am not, I will let him say it for me "Every time we call [Ms. Diallo] an accuser, we undermine her credibility and bolster [DSK's]". AMEN.

I know that personally, I use the term 'survivor' but I know that's not legally appropriate or universal. I use the term 'survivor' for very political reasons, but also because it's what people who've been sexually assaulted have asked me to refer to them as. So I listen. But I know that we can't all use that term and that's fine.

But in this case, I'll take victim 100x before 'accuser'. Using the term 'accuser' in the case of DSK is the equivalent of the time the New York Post called her a 'hooker', even though they had absolutely no proof she was a sex worker. (Newsflash: She isn't).

Why is that we insist that DSK is innocent until proven guilty but Ms. Diallo? "Oh clearly she's a lying, money grubbing prostitute who is accusing him of a crime he didn't commit!"





The double standard is so blatantly obvious that it's shocking how rarely it is mentioned.




Yes, in strictly legal terms, he is accused of a crime by Ms. Diallo and that makes Ms. Diallo the accuser. I understand this. But let's not pretend that legally, socially or otherwise, we treat sexual assault as we do other crimes. We just don't. When people say they've been robbed and have 'proof' that their items are stolen, do we say 'The supposed victim of a robbery'? No, we don't. Even though people make up that their items were stolen, their houses were burnt down, their cars were jacked, etc. So if we treat the accused of sexual assault with kid gloves, why don't we do the same for the 'victims' of sexual assault?

All in all, the DSK case leaves me feeling sad.

There are no winners here. Well, except for the patriarchy, of course. In this case, the patriarchy keeps on marchin' on.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Ahh, to be famous...

**Trigger warning for discussion of sexual assault, rape and victim blaming**

What do the President of the IMF, the former Governor of California, an information 'freedom fighter' and a Hollywood Director have in common? Why, sexual assault of course!

I know what you're thinking. "No, no Ms. FC, you mean sexual assault accusations." Ahh yes, pardon me! Rape accusations thrown at famous men because womyn are opportunistic whores. Ahh yes, my bad.

So the President of the IMF, Mr. Dominique Strauss-Kahn (DSK) has been arrested on charges of at least 1 sexual assault of a hotel room cleaning staff. He's also been accused of sexually assaulting at least 1 journalist a few years ago. In fact, Mr. DSK was known as being quite the 'charmer'.

Then you've got the Governator himself who is not only filing for divorce from his Democratic wife Maria Shriver over allegations of cheating (and fathering a 'love child'), he also has a well documented history of being well... grabby.

Julian Assange was accused of sexually assaulting two womyn, but we all know that didn't happen because he's a lefty who wants to take down the greedy government, so it's clearly all just a big old conspiracy to take him down.

And Roman Polanski? Look dude might have anally raped a young girl that he had plied with drugs, but her mom shouldn't have let her come over anyway and it was such a long time ago. Plus, have you seen Chinatown? Cinematic gold!

FYI - This list fails to include athletes, although we could easily talk about Kobe Bryant, Ben Roethlisberger, and Check-Out-Photos-Of-My-Dick Brett Favre.

See, when it comes to sexual assault, you're pretty much off the hook to begin with, but if you happen to be famous? You're in the clear, my dear!

Every time these 'scandals' come out, we hear the same victim-blaming bullshit, we have other 'celebrities' coming out to 'support them' and we have this whole conspiracy theory machine that states that they're being unfairly scrutinized because they're rich and famous.

To which I say - so what?

Why are we appalled that Paris Hilton only spent a few days in jail for drinking and driving but we're downright infuriated that DSK's case is being investigated at all?

Sexual assault, unlike most crimes, is rife with stereotypes. There are stereotypes around who commits sexual assault, who is actually sexually assaulted, who 'cries rape', etc.

According to the myths, who commits sexual assaults? Well, old men with mental illnesses, of course! They are always strangers to the victim in question, have some sort of sick sexual fetish and in many cases are a person of colour/Queer/disAbled, etc.

Does that mean that never fits the profile? Absolutely not. But the % of people who sexually assault who fit this very narrow and specific profile is slim.

And because we continue to perpetuate this same sadistic bullshit, we are equally appalled by the profile of the rapist as we are by the crimes themselves.

Need I remind you of Colonel Russell Williams? People were SHOCKED that a decorated Colonel in the Canadian Armed Forces committed such heinous crimes and yet, it makes perfect sense. Here is a man with ample amounts of power who leads a secretive life where people who know him fully understand that they don't really know him. Not to mention how he was trained to do just that.

And because we continue to perpetuate the stereotype of who is a rapist we continue to victim blame those who are assaulted by someone who doesn't 'fit the profile', because we just don't believe someone like them could do something like that.

Newsflash, skeptics: Rapists come in every size and flavour. They are decorated military colonels, actors, directors, governors, weight lifters, city councillors, janitors, fathers, sons, cousins, colleagues and people of every background, ethnicity, age, socio-economic status, ability and sexual orientation.

Maybe we don't want to believe this because it's too scary to think about. Maybe we want to believe that rapists are easy to spot so that we can sleep better at night, knowing that our radar is on the right people. But this isn't helping anybody.

This mentality is blaming womyn unnecessarily, it's framing men of colour/queer men/ disAbled men/ poor men as sexual predators and it's allowing rich, entitled, privileged piece of shit dudes walk away, consequence free.

I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a world in which we let people get away with sexual assault just because they wear a nice suit and have cushy bank accounts. I gotta believe that we are better than this.

** I'm willfully interchanging the words sexual assault and rape here just for the sake of being concise **

Monday, May 16, 2011

Why I SlutWalk(ed)

Alright so I'm a terribly absentee blogger, but the election results kept me depressed for a while.

But all the media kerfuffle and critiques of SlutWalk have got me galvanized to write again. Now, I'm not going to link to any of these critiques because they are just way too many and many are shit and I don't want to increase their page views. But just Google "SlutWalk" and you'll get more responses than you'll ever have time to read.

This blog post assumes that you know what SlutWalk is and what prompted it. If you don't know, Google that shit then come back and join me. It's been said all over the world over and over again, so I won't bother to repeat it.

So Ottawa had its own SlutWalk and you better believe I was there. In fact, in the interest of full disclosure, I was asked to speak at it, too. But that's where it ends, for the record. I've never organized a SlutWalk, have no part in organizing future ones and quite frankly, spent 5 minutes at the Ottawa one talking about systemic violence against womyn.

I must admit that I was initially a little apprehensive about the whole thing. I'd heard about it in its planning stages and felt that it might have been a well-intentioned but misguided attempt to highlight an issue.

But I was wrong. I was so, so wrong.

It seems that people want to talk about sluts, sluttyness, slut-shaming, slut-positivity and all things slutty. People love sluts, other people love to hate sluts and some people hate that they love sluts.

And that's the fucking point.

See, the organizers knew that if they organized another "Take Back the Night" or "Anti-Sexual Assault" or even a "Stop Victim Blaming" march, you'd get the same little handful of diehards, maybe a blip or two in the media but not much else. The unfortunate reality is that the average person and media outlet doesn't give a flying fuck about violence against womyn and sexual assault. Because only sluts get raped, and womyn falsely accuse men all the time and feminists are whiny and don't know how good they have it and on, and on and on.

A name like SlutWalk catches people's attention, provokes a reaction and is just downright impossible to ignore. The sight of stiff journalists on the nightly news saying "And now, let's go to Marcie who is over at SlutWalk" can't help but solicit raised eyebrows.

And once again, that's the fucking point.

Whether you want to reclaim the word 'slut' or not, you can't help but perk up your ears when you hear the word being used in mainstream, every day conversation by your average folk. And the organizers knew that. They knew that the only way to ensure this cop's comments didn't go unnoticed was to shock people into reacting.

They hoped maybe a couple hundred people would show up, they'd find some solidarity and be able to sleep better at time. Instead, thousands of people showed up, an international media machine was started and there are Satellite SlutWalks around the world. Not bad for a handful of novice organizers in Toronto.

But what about this reclaiming business?

That part is tricky and complicated.

Many womyn of colour have commented that it's not easy for them to do, considering how slut-shaming and labeling is so tied into racism, colonialism, etc. Makes sense.

Others (including myself) think it's also classist and rather 'in-crowd' to assume that everyone can safely embrace the label. Tell that to poor, 16 year old rural girls who are just trying to survive gym class.

But that's okay. See, SlutWalk isn't really about everyone embracing the label Slut because like most things in life, if everyone is one, then nobody is.

But you can embrace the name on a political level while still recognizing how problematic it is at the individual level.

Example: We can embrace Ottawa's annual "Dyke March" while recognizing that a 16 year old high school girl has no desire to embrace the 'dyke' label that is thrown on her daily.

Ideally, everyone who identifies as 'dyke' could choose to do so and others who don't could escape the labeling. But we're not there yet, although we're working towards it.

SlutWalk is not an end, but a means to an end. It's a way to rip open the universal covers on sexual assault and to expose the deeply entrenched stereotypes that enable it to continue at epidemic levels. It's meant to prompt discussion, to test your knee-jerk reaction.

You don't want to call yourself a slut? - Why?
You don't think it can be reclaimed? - Why?

Regardless of what your answer is, it got you thinking and that's the point.

As someone who has been doing anti-sexual violence work in Ottawa for close to 8 years, I've been to every conference, march, demonstration, letter-writing campaign kick-off, red tape cutting, award ceremony, you can imagine. I've been there, I've spoken at them, I've shaked my head at them and I've marched in them. And none of them had the turn-out that SlutWalk did.

Ottawa is an extremely conservative city with a small, (too) tight-knit feminist community and here I was, standing amongst a thousand other people, many of which I had never seen before. The crowd was diverse in age, background, gender identity, ethnicity, etc. And despite what you might have read or seen about the celebratory nature of SlutWalk, it was a rather sombre event. People were angry, not laughing. As they should be - sexual assault isn't funny.

So you've got a conservative community out on a Sunday afternoon, talking about womyn's sexuality and sexual assault in a constructive and meaningful way. Regardless of how you feel about reclaiming language, you have to be impressed by the power it had that day in Ottawa.

(Say it with me) and that's the fucking point.

I have no desire to call myself a slut. None. My reasons for this are many but include the fact that I don't want to define myself by my association with other people (ie: how many people I sleep with, who I sleep with, etc). It's also difficult to call yourself something when a definition doesn't exist. We know that a slut has something to do with sexuality but ask ten people and you'll get ten different answers.

I was called a slut for holding a pro-choice sign at an anti-choice rally.

I was called a slut for attending a new school in grade 10 with no friends or history in that city. A rumour was started that I was chased out of another town for having slept with someone's boyfriend. The truth? I was a virgin who'd had to move for her dad's new job.

Hell, I was called a slut for defending SlutWalk. (The irony.. it hurts...)

But even though I do not long for the label doesn't mean I fail to see its importance. As Jaclyn Friedman so amazingly said, we must all stand under the banner of 'Slut' and recognize that when it is used against one womyn, it is used against all womyn. Because we can all be called a slut by someone at some point and in many cases, the sting of that word not only offends us, but decides whether or not our rape is convicted properly, whether we get access to housing, a job, a promotion, a reference, or even someone's Facebook friend request.

So even if you don't want to call yourself a slut, learn to respect those who do.

And finally, to Gail Dines and every other 'prominent' feminist out there who is using the media as the soapbox from which to criticize SlutWalk, shame on you. I'm particularly upset by Gail because she has some truly excellent things to say and has contributed quite a lot, but her methods for critiquing SlutWalk are downright patronizing. Ironically, she's accusing SlutWalk organizers of shifting the attention away from victim-blaming and yet she's the one doing just that on every major media outlet.

The media longs to create tension and division between womyn and thankfully for them, Gail Dines is ready to do just that. *sigh* Get a clue, lady.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Rape Culture 101

[EXTREME TRIGGER WARNING for discussion of sexual assault, rape and violence. Assume a trigger warning for this entire post and all links within it]

I’ve been thinking about writing a post on ‘rape culture’ for a while but after scanning the news today, I feel like I have no other choice.

I did a little search through my Facebook and Twitter feeds and this is what I found in ten minutes:

- Nurse jailed for sexual assault in Iqaluit

- Sex worker found dead in Caledon in an article that speaks more about her occupation than humanity

- Maclean’s runs an ‘amazing’ “Escort vs. Prostitute” ‘joke’ column that includes the ‘fact’ that escorts like horses and prostitutes look like them. (I’d link to it but 1- it’s been pulled down thanks to activism on Twitter and 2- I don’t want to give Maclean’s anymore traffic)

- Youth pastor had sex with queer teens to ‘cure them of their homosexuality’.

And I’m sure it’ll just get worse as the day goes on.

But even in the context of all this BULLSHIT, I still hear tons of rape apologists and flat out haters claiming that the term ‘rape culture’ is dramatic and exaggerated. As someone who routinely complains about rape culture and the war on womyn around the world, I’m used to hearing this kinda stuff. But my goodness, does it ever piss me off.

Part of the insidious nature of rape culture is that it’s taboo to even talk about it. So when I hear the haters and sceptics, I think to myself “Maybe they just don’t know. They don’t get it because they’ve never had it explained to them”.

So let me explain.

Since the internet age has completely killed people’s attention spans, I decided to make a handy little list for y’all:

Rape Culture is the creation and maintenance of an environment where rape is condoned and where those affected by it are systemically silenced.

Rape culture is

- The fact that 1 in 4 Canadian womyn will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime

- Studies have found between 80-100% of womyn have experienced street harassment at least once in their life

- The fact that this street harassment is normalized

- The fact that it’s often referred to as ‘cat calling’, which not only makes no logical sense but reaffirms that womyn are deemed less than human

- That a womyn makes an incredibly racist video attacking ‘Asian students’ and rather than challenge her for her racist views or her absolutely vile comments, the internet trolls make threats of rape

- In expressions like “I just raped that exam” or “Wow, we got raped by that team” when referring to victory or defeat

- The fact that we’d rather discuss the details of someone’s ‘escort’ girlfriend than the actual scandal, which is scandalous contracts for much needed water treatment on reserves

- The fact that a 21st century university institution chose to blame a survivor of sexual assault for her own assault, legally stating that she ‘failed to take any steps to protect herself’

- The fact that every day in Ottawa, 8 womyn are sexually assaulted and only 1 reports it to the police

- This and this and every other music video, movie or advertising campaign that glorifies stalking

- The fact that Harper’s “Economic Action Plan” built more animal shelters than womyn’s shelters

- Journalists who create torture porn out of news stories

- The fact that Canada sits around 21% womyn in the House of Commons (How does that relate to rape culture, you say? Well rape culture is inextricably linked to sexism and the entire notion of ‘keeping womyn down’ and ‘in their place’. And time and time again, we’ve seen that ‘their place’ ain’t the House of Commons, it ain’t in the public sphere and it ain’t about making noise)

Rape culture is viewing sexual assault as a rite of passage for womyn.

Rape culture is the fact that more people know about "Womyn crying rape" than they do about "Rape culture" or "Trigger Warning".

It is the fact that we only care about the sexual assault of men because society is homophobic; we don’t care about the violation of boys but the fact that they were the subject of a homophobic act.

Rape culture continues to exist because it benefits those in power. It keeps womyn out of politics, out of the media, sports and unions. It keeps police, lawyers, insurance companies and advertisers in business. It allows men to climb ladders on the backs of womyn and call it ‘meritocracy’.

Rape culture is alive and well in the hearts of those who read about it and roll their eyes, rather than their sleeves.

Thursday, May 6, 2010

Sexual Assault Awareness Month

May is sexual assault awareness month. It’s April in the US, which seems odd, but whatever… In any case, it’s the time of the year when we’re supposed to be raising awareness about sexual assault.


What the hell does that even mean?


Does it mean dispelling the myths of all the bullshit ‘prevention tips’?


Does it mean targeting boys and men to not only stop raping people but calling out other dudes who do?


As a sexual assault support worker and an anti-violence activist, my views on the matter are clearly more ‘radical’ than others. Although I speak and work in many different forums that require different techniques and approaches, the truth is that all I really want to do is RAGE. Rage, rage, rage against the statistics, the bullshit policies and the apathy that I see around me every day.


It’s not healthy or wise to spend each moment of everyday telling people “Every 17 minutes in Ontario, a womyn is raped BUT that also means that every 17 minutes, a man is raping someone”. It doesn’t exactly make for great chit chat.


But what I really want to do and the message I want people to absorb is that rape is cancer.


Yes, rape is cancer. (Hear me out...)

People give a shit about cancer. Trust. People will wear a ribbon, join a walk/run/job/stroll, sign a petition, donate their pennies or ride their bike across the country. People will go around in public with signs saying that they are a survivor, or love someone who is. They will come up with clever slogans like “Save the Titties” and put pink on everything when dealing with cancers that deal with genitalia. Companies will jump on board, spread the anti-cancer cheer and rage, laugh and dance to cancer.


People will stand together and publicly raise their hands to say that they or someone they love was affected by cancer. And when they do, they will look around to see the vast majority of people with their hand up.


This is why rape is cancer.


If most people have been affected by cancer and are willing to publicly own it, why are they not doing this for rape and sexual assault?


If 1 in 4 womyn in Canada (with higher rates for First Nations, immigrant and refugee and disabled womyn) will experience sexual assault in their lifetime and that’s just the womyn, and when you consider that womyn make up 51% of the Canadian population, where’s my public witnessing?


“But FC”, I hear you saying, “Sexual assault is private”.


Why? Why do survivors of sexual assault live with a giant scarlet “S” on their chest and yet those with cancer are publicly defended and supported?


Rape happens to someone. Cancer happens to someone. Nobody with cancer deserves it just like nobody who is sexually assaulted deserved it.


People who lived with cancer are survivors. People who are sexually assaulted are survivors.


Rape is a societal cancer that we all live with, whether we know it or not, and it’s about damn time we end the shame. That's my hope for this month.


Can I get a witness?


Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Too Many Jerks, Not Enough Time

1- Ann Coulter was warned to watch her language for her talk at the University of Ottawa. Didn't like it and is now 'filing a Human Rights Complaint'. Except we all know that would require Ann knowing what human rights are. (And don't right-wing nutbags always bitch that the HRC is biased towards Conservatives? Pick a side and stick with it, asshats).

2- The Conservative Party wants to push "Maternal Health" at the G8 summit but refuse to consider abortion or birth control in their framework. The Liberals pushed for 'birth control' to be added and then when it went to vote, it got defeated... by fucking Liberals. Jesus H. Christ. I can't even form a sentence to comment on that, it's so bad

3- A bad story turned good: A Calgary Based Condo project promoted their project with some of the most vile and sexist advertising I've seen in a long while. It included gems like "A $20,000 down payment is as easy as a 25-year-old scotch, or a 25-year-old blonde on a 25-year-old scotch. Get on it." Yeah, just amazing. What is amazing though is that the ads were mostly posted in men's washrooms and *surprise surprise* some awesome men were incredibly offended.

And so, major props to Will Knoll from Calgary who took photos of the ads and posted them online to publicly shame the company and get people to boycott them. It worked and the ads were pulled.

Now I'm not usually a fan of raising a stink about advertising because it's usually offensive on purpose and all about giving them publicity, but in this case, the company was specifically targeting men and was not a major campaign and so 'being offensive' and 'cutting edge' was not their goal, necessarily. They honestly thought that dudes taking a leak in clubs would see this, think it's witty and clever and buy a condo. So raising a stink in this case not only had the ads pulled and therefore dudes didn't have to stare at their ignorant crap, but it's also a shot to PR and marketing folks who think that all men are ignorant chauvinists who fall for any BS advertising that talks about ladies and booty.

Thanks to that one particular man and all other men who took a stand not only against sexual assault and womyn (which is what 'getting someone drunk to fuck them' is - it's sexual assault) but also for taking a stand against the BS of hypermasculinity.

Friday, September 11, 2009

REAL Sexual Assault Prevention Tips

I shamelessly yoinked this from No, Not You. which I only found out about because of a dear friend. Thanks K!


Sexual Assault Prevention Tips Guaranteed to Work!


1. Don’t put drugs in people’s drinks in order to control their behavior.

2. When you see someone walking by themselves, leave them alone!

3. If you pull over to help someone with car problems, remember not to assault them!

4. NEVER open an unlocked door or window uninvited.

5. If you are in an elevator and someone else gets in, DON’T ASSAULT THEM!

6. Remember, people go to laundry to do their laundry, do not attempt to molest someone who is alone in a laundry room.

7. USE THE BUDDY SYSTEM! If you are not able to stop yourself from assaulting people, ask a friend to stay with you while you are in public.

8. Always be honest with people! Don’t pretend to be a caring friend in order to gain the trust of someone you want to assault. Consider telling them you plan to assault them. If you don’t communicate your intentions, the other person may take that as a sign that you do not plan to rape them.

9. Don’t forget: you can’t have sex with someone unless they are awake!

10. Carry a whistle! If you are worried you might assault someone “on accident” you can hand it to the person you are with, so they can blow it if you do.

And, ALWAYS REMEMBER: if you didn’t ask permission and then respect the answer the first time, you are commiting a crime- no matter how “into it” others appear to be.


Doesn't this seem like the most logical way to approach the issue?

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Because You Can't spell "Blame" Without "Lame"

Now it's time for my favourite part of the evening: The Blame Game!

First on the list, Carleton University and their epic fuck-up: "Carleton University Accused of Victim-Blaming"

Next up: "9 year old initiated sex acts, child molester claims". He claims that she came on to him and he didn't want her to feel "rejected".

And finally: A cab driver in the city of Ottawa has been charged with sexually assaulting a passenger. The driver claims the womyn, who had 10-12 beers before getting into the cab, "came on to him" and he didn't want her to tell his boss that he had failed to "please her". He was given a whopping 2 months of house arrest. The sentence was so low because the judge "considered" that "the sexual assault Majli was convicted of was not the most serious"' and because she was drunk, they couldn't "prove" that he had not only kissed her, but penetrated her as well.

And the winner is... The City of Ottawa! The Capital of Canada; bastion of all things democratic. Yet in the past 2 months, all of these amazing victim-blaming stories have come out.

Studying at night? To blame
Being a regular 9 year old in the presence of a child molester? To blame
Taking a fucking cab home because you're aware that you're too drunk to drive? To blame.

In the City of Ottawa, that's how we roll.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Federally Funded Journalism at its Best

Anyone who follows my blog here knows that I'm a pretty die-hard CBC.ca reader; it is typically my biggest source of news. But were it not for my years of dedicated CBC.ca reading, I'd throw in the towel on the whole thing today.

This lovely headline appeared on my sidebar today:

Others in Courtepatte case were suspects in prostitute's death, documents reveal

(Trigger Warning)

As someone who studied journalism, there is so much wrong with this picture.

1- This case is not exactly well known and so simply using a name like this does not conjure up an instant recognition for people.

2- If you're going to use the name of one victim, why not use both? Oh yes, because apparently "prostitutes" are not people; they're just prostitutes.

The entire article is convoluted, confusing and needs a major trigger warning. The article goes on to list all these "unproven in court" details that should leave the reader wondering "Why the hell are they even reporting this then?" The details are gruesome and even if they were proven, are completely unnecessary and inappropriate.

The story itself is telling: A man is accused of murdering a 13 year old girl and in a separate case, another womyn in Winnipeg. The man is described by police as a "serial homicidal sex offender" and also, an idiot. He was in custody for the luring/kidnapping/sexual assault/murder of a 13 year old girl but mixed up the details of that murder with the then-unknown murder of another womyn.

If you're going to write an article about this loser and highlight this case, these are the only details one would need. By including the other horrific and graphic details, CBC.ca is pandering to the Perez Hiltons and "National Inquirers" of the world and I call bullshit.

This story on its own is one more example of the war on womyn in this country and around the world. But the way in which this article is presented further demonstrates the point, too. Which blows.

Stay classy, CBC.

Saturday, May 23, 2009

Why I'm Pro-Choice

It seems a little late for me to be writing this now, seeing as though I’ve been blogging here for a few years now. And reproductive justice should, I believe, be a goal for anyone who calls themselves a feminist. However, in having recently witnessed the large-scale “March for Life” anti-choice protest here in my adopted city, and therefore having been very publicly (and harshly) challenged on my view, I felt it important to spell it out.

I could make it snappy, Ă  la Letterman and make it a top ten list, but I hope it doesn’t take that many reasons to make my point (and convince you).


I am Pro-Choice because…


1- I think bodily autonomy is a human right. I think that the right to control what one does and does not do with their body is a human right that should be accorded to all people. I think that once we take away someone’s bodily autonomy, we are going down a very slippery slope and quite frankly, I don’t want to see where it leads.


2- I think that pro-choice is the most democratic choice of all. As the old feminist adage goes, “If you can’t trust me with a choice, how can you trust me with a child?” I truly cannot understand how a democratic state/nation/territory/etc could have any other stance.


3- I believe that pro-choice is not pro-abortion. I know and love people who got pregnant unexpectedly and thought long and hard about their choices. In the end, they either chose abortion or they chose to keep the child. They weighed the options of adoption and in one particular case, seriously explored that option. But in the end, they chose what was right for them. None of these womyn regret their decisions. And I imagine that even if they did, they would have been grateful for the ability to choose what was right for them, whether they felt the same way about that decision or not.


4- Although I believe in the myriad of choices that the pro-choice stance includes, I am not naĂŻve about adoption. Let me start off by saying that I know many people who are either adopted themselves or have siblings that are. I am a big supporter of adoption and an even bigger supporter of open adoption. I think adoption is one of many great choices for the pregnant womyn and the adoptive family. However, in speaking about adoption, I think it’s important to include a caveat about the realities of pregnant womyn and the adoption system. Anti-choicers are always quick to point to adoption as the ideal situation for an unexpected pregnancy. “You don’t have to raise the child and you are giving a gift to a family that is unable to conceive”. Sounds great, doesn’t it? And I’m sure it is for many, many people. Without getting into the pain and hardship that pregnant womyn must go through when deciding to give up their child to adoption (especially, I would argue, in closed adoption situations), I think the anti-choicers *surprise surprise* forget that choosing adoption is not as simple as giving birth to a happy awaiting adoptive family.


As a white, educated, able bodied womyn with a white, educated, able bodied partner, I am well aware that if I were to get pregnant today, I could have a wonderful, police checked couple (and possibly established family) waiting for me in 9 months to adopt my child. The truth is that people line up and wait years for newborn, white, able bodied children. If I were Aboriginal, disabled, uneducated, a substance abuser, etc, it is quite possible that my child would be in the “System” for quite some time before it possibly settled into a great home. Do I think this is fair? Hell fucking no. But by the same token, I don’t think it’s fair for me, as a privileged individual to make a broad statement like so many anti-choicers do, that adoption is a great choice awarded to all. That is not always the case.


5- One size does not fit all. Similar to the above point that adoption might work for me, but it might be a horrible idea for you. I might want an open adoption and seek to maintain some sort of contact with the child but you might need complete anonymity. I might have gotten pregnant through rape or coercion and you might have gotten pregnant in a loving and happy relationship. And so I’m going into my decision making with a different set of circumstances than you. Why should there be one cookie cutter solution for everyone?


6- It has been proven time and time again that when abortion is criminalized, womyn will continue to seek out abortion. And they’re not exactly getting prime care. Below are the number of people hospitalized for illegal abortions:


Bangladesh: 71,800
Brazil: 288,700
Chile: 31,900
Colombia: 57,700
Dominican Republic: 16,500
Egypt: 216,000
Mexico: 106,500
Nigeria: 142,200
Peru: 54,200
The Philippines: 80,100


7- I think that being anything else would put me in the crazy “pro-life” camp and those people are fucking scary. Need I say more?

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Creeps and Cameras

Let us take a break from the chaos and confusion of Canadian politics to shift gears to..

Upskirting.

Ahh, “upskirting”. Which for the uninitiated, is when someone (typically a dude) uses a cellphone camera (or real camera, if they can manage) to take a picture up a womyn’s skirt/dress. Upskirting has become an umbrella term for also taking pictures down someone’s shirt, or just a general picture of their body in a sexual way.

The “key” to quality upskirting is going unnoticed, so these creeps pretend to send a text message or even just keep the thing hidden and snap away while you’re walking up the stairs, sitting on the bus, bending down in a store, etc.

Sounds like fun, doesn’t it? Especially when they post it online for the world to see. Put “upskirt” into Google and you’ll see what I mean. Entire sites dedicated to the stuff.

A recent article in Salon magazine outlines the legal ramifications in the US of A and how the laws, like the pictures themselves, aren’t very clear.

Most places have laws allowing anyone to take a picture of anyone “in public space or domain”. But like the article says, its one thing to take an artistic photo of pedestrians crossing a bridge and it’s another to take a grainy photo of someone’s ass.

Upskirting is a HUGE problem. I know people who do it. I’ve seen people do it and I can guarantee that someone’s done it to me. But how will I ever know? There are millions and millions of these pictures online and I don’t have time to go through them all. And besides, how will I even know if it’s me? And then when I find the pictures, then what?

There are little to no legal ramifications for this type of thing in Canada.

My issue about upskirting goes beyond that, though. Upskirting is like construction-worker-harassment to a whole ‘nother level. When I’m walking down the street and some asshat yells something at me or honks, I see them, I flip them off and I get pissed off.

But in today’s world, womyn are walking around and being monitored 24/7. And often times, have no idea. Foucault is rolling in his damn grave.

The fact that this exists and is such a huge phenomenon is reason number 81789032 for why I’m a feminist. If you needed any more proof that womyn are objectified and commodified, then you’ve got it, Buster.

I’m not saying that dudes don’t experience street harassment or that someone isn’t taking pictures of their asses either. Hey, I’m sure it happens. But the numbers don’t even compare. And so it’s about more than just the fact that North American womyn wear skirts/dresses and men typically don’t. It’s about the fact that time and time again, womyn are viewed as ready for the taking and that if they don't like it, they have to do something about it.

So what do we do? Do we call a moratorium on dresses in the summer? Ban cellphone cameras? As the Salon article outlines, upskirting is such a problem in Asia that all new cellphones have a loud and distinct shutter noise that goes off with each click, to alert people that a picture has been taken. Should this be mandatory for all new phones?

Will anything really solve the problem? I’m sure there are things that can be done but until womyn are seen as human beings with all the rights and responsibilities allocated to you know… human beings, I don't think a whole lot is going to change.

UPDATE: Thanks to MH for the heads-up about this case. It's mentioned in the Salon article above but this article lists the details. I'm giving a major trigger warning to any readers of this article.

Thursday, July 3, 2008

Oh Canada...

Around the same time as Canada Day, comes a major victory for pro-choice advocates in this lovely country of mine. Henry Morgentaller was awarded the Order of Canada this week, which is a huge dropkick to the anti-choice crowd. I say HUZZAH! The man is a Concentration Camp survivor who performed abortions and advocated for their availability, knowing it would get him jailed (which it did, several times). He fought the good fight and he’s getting some serious recognition for it.

The awarding of Orders is usually pretty quiet and only when bigwigs like Morgentaller get one do people pipe up and have an opinion. And of course, on this one, the opinions are just rollin’. CBC.ca has this great PRO – CON thing on their site which I love. Mostly because Heather Mallick *swoon* actually writes about the pros of giving him the award whereas batshit crazy Stephanie Gray (I’m not linking to her, feel free to Google her yourself) goes on about the perils of abortion and how Canadians need to answer whether “It is right to do what is wrong”. She makes the ABORTION IS MURDER argument but is smart enough not to follow that line of reasoning and flat out call Morgentaller a murderer because well… he isn’t one.

But quite frankly, without calling Morgentaller out his so-called murdering ways, her entire article is ridiculous and out of place. Mallick states the pros of his award and Gray goes on a rant about… zygotes. Smooth move, sister! But I gotta give Gray some credit because she at least follows through on her crazy logic. She thinks that abortion is wrong in all cases including rape and incest. I’ve seen her speak at a campus “debate” and she came out and said it there, too. It’s a ridiculous line of argument and it’s not often spoken because it’s so contentious so I honestly give her credit for stickin’ to her guns. Even if her guns are way, way, way off.

But you know what, the fact that Morgentaller is in need of constant security and the opposite equations like Stephanie Gray are not just goes to show who the crazies really are.

And while we're on the topic of crazies, check this guy out. A Priest who is returning his Order of Canada because he does not want to be associated with Morgentaller. Like Gray, I say word up on stickin' to your convictions. But the guy is a priest. Who is associated with Catholicism. Yeah. Okay.

So this Canada Day, I say congrats to Morgentaller and his hard work and constant dedication. And boooo to Stephanie Gray and her desire for “Bio-Ethical Reform”. Oh and while I’m at it, word up to CBC.ca for creating a forum on the issue and booo at the same time, for the lovely heading “Missing Escort Found Buried in Yard”. Do you people know nothing by now?

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

People are People, So Why Should it Be?

In Canada, the federally funded collection of data tells us delicious stats such as the fact that womyn are more likely than men to be the victims of the most severe forms of spousal assault, as well as spousal homicide, sexual assault and criminal harassment. Or the fact that in 2004 alone, 52,127 womyn were admitted into shelters. This does not include the amount of womyn who were turned away from shelters. And well, in Canada, in 90% of the cases, the perpetrator is male.

I’m not a big statistics junkie and I refuse to play into the “BUT MEN ARE ABUSED TOO” rhetoric because yeah, you know what? They are abused. They definitely are. And definitions of masculinity often hinder men from being able to speak out about that abuse and that really, really sucks. BUT! That doesn’t change the fact that the numbers speak loud and clear about the fact that men are most often the perpetrators of violence, against womyn and men.

And although womyn as a whole are continuous targets of male perpetrated violence, marginalized womyn are even more vulnerable. This is rather common sense. And if it wasn’t common sense to you already, then the recent headlines screaming across Canada have made it abundantly clear.

Prostitute killer to serve 17 years in prison before parole (CBC)

Svelka Found Guilty of Murdering 1 Prostitute (CTV)

Prostitute killer Thomas Svekla sentenced to at least 17 years in prison (The Canadian Press)

Prostitute. Prostitute. Prostitute. If you aren’t 100% sure by now, the womyn who was killed? Prostitute. Not a plumber, a doctor, a cashier, an artist. Nope. A prostitute.

You mean to tell me that if an electrician gets killed, the headlines will scream ELECTRICIAN KILLER SENTENCED TO 17 YEARS?

I realize that it is not that simple and that often times, the occupation is associated with the person’s identity because their murder was somehow related to their work. NURSE KILLED BY PATIENT. You know, shit like that. But according to moi (which is what you get when you’re standing near my soapbox), this is part of the systemic nature of violence against womyn. A system that continuously perpetuates the idea that violence against womyn is somehow okay, normal, accepted. “She was a prostitute? Oh okay.” Like somehow that puts the pieces together and justifies it all.

She was a human being for Christ sake. Last I heard, so are all sex workers. For a country that is so adamantly against the death penalty, we still seem to pass judgement on who will live or die.

*For all you skeptics, all Stats info found on official StatsCan site.

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Hey Minister, you ain't foolin' me!

While Canadians are getting pounded by the snow and pounded by news of the US elections, a sneaky and very important Bill is being debated in the House of Commons.

Ken Epp, a Conservative MP, put forward Bill C484, also known as the “Unborn Victims of Crime Act” which “seeks to make it an offence for injuring or causing the death of an unborn child during the commission of an offence against the child’s pregnant mother.” (This was taken directly from Epp’s website).

Translation? Killing a pregnant womyn would legally be considered killing two people: the womyn and the “unborn child”.

On the surface, who doesn’t agree with this? Pregnant womyn are called pregnant because they’re carrying a child! Many pro-choicers argue that a fetus is not a person, it’s a potential person, etc. I am pro-choice and believe that what a pregnant womyn carries is indeed a child. A human being. HOWEVER, I am pro-choice because I believe a womyn’s choice and rights trump those of the child that she carries. Without her, there would be no child, in every literal sense.

Furthermore, pregnant womyn are at an increased risk of abuse and assault and there are various reasons for this that I won’t get into here. But statistic after statistic demonstrates that womyn who are abused are even more abused once they are pregnant. This is a sad state of affairs.

So in a perfect world, I say right on Epp! Sign away on that Bill and let us stick sick, abusive bastards in jail for even longer! However, when you take off your rose-coloured glasses, you see that this Bill is really just a sneaky anti-choicers attempt at taking away a womyn’s right to choose.

If this Bill goes through, we will be forced to re-open the age-old abortion debate. Why?

Well you can’t say that a fetus is a “person” onto itself when it is murdered along with its pregnant mom, but that it’s not a person when a womyn has an abortion. If this Bill passes in the House, the Canadian Government will be saying that a fetus is an unborn child in the case of murder by a stranger. Anti-choicers will shit their pants with glee and then run to the courts calling every womyn who has an abortion a murderer, because “Hey there Judge, you just said they were people and that killing them is a separate offense that should be recognized under the law!”

See where I’m getting at? Now Mr. Epp realizes this and keeps saying that it will not interfere with a womyn’s right to choose and for the sake of the argument, let’s just say he really believes that. Well sorry Mr Minister Man, but we will have a legal contradiction in Canada and you know some Smart Ass lawyer is going to rip it to shreds and open up the legality of abortion. And considering abortion is only decriminalized in Canada, this can of worms very well might open.

Putting aside the abortion issue, how about the implications for the valuing of womyn’s bodies?

So killing a young womyn of reproductive capacity – bad. Killing a womyn who is currently reproducing – very bad. Killing a young womyn is killing a future mom too, isn’t it? But they aren’t actually giving us babies right now, so it’s not that big of a deal, right?

Think I’m an exaggerating feminazi? Well how about the fact that it’s called “The Unborn Victims of Crime Act” and not the Fetus Act? Or better yet, “Pregnant Victims of Crime Act”? It’s obviously not out to address violence against pregnant womyn. It’s about giving fetuses full personhood rights while under the guise of “saving pregnant womyn”. To me, this is a whole lotta “Let’s go save the Afghani womyn!” when really it’s a matter of “I could care less I just want oil for my SUV.”

This Bill is HUGE and very important. And in the world we live in, with anti-choicers waiting on baited breath for any opportunity to revoke womyn’s reproductive rights, Minister Epp is on a slippery slope. And I pray to God, Goddess, Allah, Jehovah, whoever, that he falls down that slope and forgets this whole thing. But I won’t hold my breath.

Monday, February 11, 2008

Lullabies for Sexist Criminals

Sometimes, I'm rather naive. I read that a Canadian womyn successfully sued her Meth dealer and thought "Good Lord, the courts can't get any worse than this!" Oh, how I was so, so wrong.

Crown prosecutors are currently attempting to have sexsomnia declared a mental illness. Sexsomnia is pretty self-explanatory. Apparently some people sleep walk and well.. screw. They get out of bed, completely unaware and boink somebody (or something).
The reason why this is in the courts is because an Ontario man sexually assaulted a womyn and then claimed that he was suffering sexsomnia and had no recollection of the event. Yeah. Pause on that one and read it again. Done? Okay, let us move on.

Luedecke alleges that during a party at a Toronto home in 2003, he got drunk and fell asleep on a couch.His lawyers maintained that while Luedecke was in a dissociative sleepwalking state, he went over to a woman who was sleeping on an adjacent couch, lifted up her skirt, put on a condom and began sexual intercourse with her.

Okay.. it clearly states that he was drunk. Now maybe he doesn't "remember" because he was three sheets to the wind? Or maybe it's just a convenient goddamn excuse? Yeah, I'll choose option B for 500$ Alex.

I'm not a psychiatrist or a Crown prosecutor, but I am a support worker who works with sexual assault survivors and I can tell you that these kinds of bullshit excuses are used all the time. Mostly because there's way too much evidence to disprove that it happened so they come up with some kinda crap story about being asleep, too drunk to remember or in some sort of trance.

Who exactly is our justice system protecting?

Seriously. This is 2008. In Canada. And we're going to declare sexsomnia a mentall illness? This is such a slippery slope. We acknowledge that and then we'll be acknowledging "Your honour, I was listening to some really intense Backstreet Boys music and I just got so into the music, I couldn't help myself". Give it a year. It'll happen.