“A rape culture is a culture of intimidation. It keeps women afraid of being attacked and so it keeps women confined in the range of their behavior. That fear makes a women censor her behavior—her speech, her way of dressing, her actions. It undermines her confidence in her ability to be independent. The necessity to be mindful of one’s behavior at all times is far more than annoying. Women’s lives are unnecessarily constricted. As a society, this one issue hampers the best efforts of half our population. It costs us heavily in lost initiative and in emotional energy stolen from other, more creative thoughts.”
—Emilie Buchwald, “Raising Girls for the 21st Century,” Transforming a Rape Culture
Yes, officer -- there's a huge, systemic, oppresive problem.
So I went shopping today — as I foresee a potential for me getting sick due to weather + stress — for vitamins. After locating the vitamins I require, I made my way up to the cash register. As I walked up, I noticed the person in line in front of me happened to be a police officer. No big deal (not that I enjoy seeing dogs of the state out and about, but I’m not intimidated by them).
The cop turns around, gives me a once over, and I see his eyes fixate on my chest. Now, as it’s cold here, I wore my jacket which is adorned with a small triad cluster of anarchy pins on the right breast side.
Snorting, the cop looks me in the eye and says “Is there a problem, little lady?”
Taken aback, I shrug and shake my head and say “No.” I wasn’t quite sure what he was on about at this juncture.
Here is the following conversation:
Cop: If there’s no problem, then why are you showing gang symbols?
Me: I’m sorry?
Cop: The pins on your jacket, do you have a problem?
Me: Oh. Yes, I have a problem.
Cop: And what would that be.
Me: I have a problem with a system that propagates intimidation and censorship of alternative ideas.
Cop: Are you trying to say I’m intimidating you?
Me: Take it as you will.
Cop: You should be thankful for people like me, we protect your ability to have an alternative idea.
Me: Well, gee whiz, thanks. I’m sure glad you’re protecting my varied viewpoints while simultaneously accusing me of being in a gang.
Cop: You kids are all the same with your pathetic idealistic world views. You’ll come around one you’ve been raped.
The cop proceeds to turn around, finish paying for his purchase, and hastily storm out of the store.
Fun times!
BP accused of attack on academic freedoms after scientists subpoenaed
guardian.co.uk“A pair of scientists have accused BP of an attack on academic freedom after the oil company successfully subpoenaed thousands of confidential emails related to research on the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.
The accusation from oceanographers Richard Camilli and Christopher Reddy offered a rare glimpse into the behind-the-scenes legal manoeuvring by BP in the billion-dollar legal proceedings arising from the April 2010 blow-out of its well.
It also heightened fears among scientists of an assault on academic freedoms, following the legal campaign against a number of prominent climate scientists.
In an opinion piece in the Boston Globe, the scientists, from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, said they volunteered in the early days of the spill to deploy robotic technology to help BP and the Coast Guard assess how much oil was gushing from the well.
The two researchers turned over some 50,000 pages of research notes and data to BP. But BP demanded more, and obtained a court subpoena for the handover of more than 3,000 confidential emails. The scientists handed over the emails last week – but with severe misgivings, they wrote.
“Our concern is not simply invasion of privacy, but the erosion of the scientific deliberative process,” they wrote. They feared the email exchanges, in which the scientists discuss hitting dead ends or challenging each other on their conclusions, were open to deliberate misinterpretation.
“Incomplete thoughts and half-finished documents attached to emails can be taken out of context and impugned by people who have a motive for discrediting the findings. In addition to obscuring true scientific findings, this situation casts a chill over the scientific process. In future crises, scientists may censor or avoid deliberations, and more importantly, be reluctant to volunteer valuable expertise and technology that emergency responders don’t possess.”
The struggle over the emails indicates the looming legal significance of any data related to the flow of oil from the stricken well.”
