Check it Out: Rape Jokes Edition

Kate Harding collected 15 rape jokes she found funny here. I didn't find all of them funny, but most of them made me chuckle. They all followed her two simple rules, "A) they’re constructed so that rape victims are not the butt of the joke, and B) they made me laugh." I do think it is sad that Dane Cook can tell a funny rape joke that isn't damaging to hear, but most other hacks can't. Get it together, comedians.


I also am going to repost the link to Lindy West's Jezebel article because it was helpful.


And in case you missed Jessica Valenti's article at the Nation, here it is again.


Curtis Luciani wrote about why only very skilled comedians are able to tell rape jokes and jokes about other very damaging experiences.


This one needs a MASSIVE TRIGGER WARNING. This is another Tosh.0 video showing a "prank" that involves two teenage boys and a large dildo. I kinda want to throw up now. 

Why I Should Avoid Reddit: Arguing Against Rape Jokes [Update]

*Trigger warning: This post discusses rape jokes and insensitivity to rape survivors.*
[Update: I added two links to other relevant and brilliant articles at the bottom.]

Thank you, xkcd. You have perfectly summed up my evening.


Last night I intended to go shamelessly promote my "Nice Guys" post over at Reddit, and when I go there, I always check out some of the other posts in the hot and new sections of the Feminism subreddit. Unfortunately for me, there was a huge debate going on on several posts regarding Daniel Tosh of Comedy Central's Tosh.O. 


In case you don't know Tosh or his brand of offensive slurs and homophobic rants strung together humor, here is a brief video:

Tosh.0
Get More: Tosh.0 Videos,Daniel Tosh,Web Redemption

Source

(Reason for the outrage after the jump)

Rape and the Language of Reporting

*Trigger warning: in discussing reporting, I quote some descriptions of sexual assault.*


I've been loosely following the Jerry Sandusky rape and sexual abuse trial. Since I have not been obsessively following the coverage, I don't have a whole lot to say about how the prosecution is handling the case. I do, however, have an issue with how the mainstream media has been covering the trial.


It all started when I read this article at FoxNews from Reuters reporter Ian Simpson. (I don't know how I keep ending up at FoxNews; I blame Google News.) The first thing that struck me was how offensive the idea was that the defense would be introducing testimony claiming Sandusky's letters to his victims were the product of his histrionic personality disorder, not pedophilia. What bothers me about this is pretty obvious--just because he had a personality disorder does not excuse his abusive behavior toward minors. 


What really struck me, though, was later in the short article. Simpson writes:

Prosecutors allege Sandusky had physical contact with the boys over a 15-year period that ranged from tickling and a "soap battle" in Pennsylvania State University football showers to oral and anal sex.

 Emphasis mine. Now, the defense attorneys are simply doing their jobs by digging up ridiculous excuses for the alleged sexual predator. Simpson, on the other hand, is not doing his job; he is misleading the public by not calling rape rape. The prosecutors are not alleging that Sandusky had sex with anyone: they are alleging that he raped and sexually assaulted minors. Assault and rape are not interchangeable with sex. 


(So much more after the jump.)