I am not interested in getting into the invariable shitstorm that would take place on Facebook if I wrote about it there, which would similarly invariably remind me how many appalling people there are in my enviornment.
But long story short, there is this professor at my school. Name’s Landsburg. Last year there was a scandal, in light of the Sandra Fluke case, where he implied that she should be mocked and ridiculed for her views and implied that she deserved to be called a whore.
Now, in light of the Steubenville case, he has proposed a thought experiment that asks what is the different between the psychic damage of knowing someone is destroying the environment knowing someone is watching pornography, and knowing you have been raped if you have no physical damage. He says that he cannot see a logical difference between the three. [You can find the gawker article on this scandal here, which links to Landsburg’s full article on his blog.]
And lots of people will agree or disagree with arguments that Landsburg doesn’t consider valid because he will hide behind the idea that it’s all a thought experiment and that he’s asking the big questions and a thousand other despicable statements.
And that’s disgusting. It’s disgusting that he feels that drawing these comparisons are acceptable, that he calls rape of unconscious victims “reaping the benefits.” He compares it to having his neighbor turn his porch light on and being “assaulted” by the waves.
And he hasn’t been fired. Last year, after the Sandra Fluke incident, the University released a statement that they don’t agree with what he says but that each professor is entitled to his or her own opinions.
There’s a statistic that gets thrown around, that something like 20% of women in college get sexually assaulted or raped. I believe that figure is often disputed, but that’s not my point. My point is that by not firing him, the University ensures that each year women who have been sexually assaulted or raped, probably some of whom underwent these attacks while unconscious, that their rape was a “benefit” and should be no more illegal than pornography or damaging the environment, because their psychic damage isn’t any more valid. And by not firing him, the University basically says what while they don’t necessarily agree with his actions, that they’re not really that bad, and not bad enough to fire him.
Maybe if I were less angry I could articulate my anger better and get deeper into why all of this is just so, so disturbing. But thanks for the rape culture in my life, University of Rochester, for not standing up to a vicious, dangerous misogynist who clearly despises women and thinks that raping an unconscious women isn’t a big deal because she didn’t know it was happening.
The fact that he still works here is a travesty, and makes me honestly disgusted that this is where I chose to go to school
endnote: more disturbing things here that am too overwhelmed with feelings to figure out how to phrase atm but this is not all that is wrong here just a disturbing taste