22

16 comments

[–] nemesis 19 points (+19|-0)

While she recognizes that “porn is a massive problem,” she observes that “many men think it’s harmless[…]”

Wild fact: studies show these men do know it's harmful. We need to cut the myth of men being oblivious to these things because it not only excuses their actions but places the blame on women for not "educating" them on it. Frankly, I don't understand why men themselves aren't peeved at these claims; it insinuates they're daft when it comes to basic cognition.

For example, a Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology study focused on claiming male insufficient knowledge of their own actions (i.e. in the case of rape) wrote:

In data reported briefly here, and more extensively elsewhere (see O’Byrne et al., 2006), we have shown that, as Kitzinger and Frith (1999) suggested, young men also can and do display a sophisticated understanding of subtle verbal and non-verbal means of communicating sexual refusal. However, despite the comprehensive ability that young men demonstrably have to ‘hear’ sexual refusals, which overwhelming include refusals that do not contain the word ‘no’, when the morally troublesome issue of accountability for rape arises, a rather different picture emerges. When asked to account for rape an interpretative repertoire reflecting the social structural explanation of rape was only once (and extremely tentatively) produced, and then immediately rejected. Instead, the miscommunication model of rape was overwhelmingly employed by young men in order to explain the occurrence of rape. Furthermore, the version negotiated did not reflect the different-but-equal stance that Tannen (1992) has proposed, but rather, in line with the concerns raised by Hare-Mustin and Maracek (1988), a ‘men-as-naive-and-confused-mis-hearers versus women-as-accountably-deficient-signallers’ model was evident. We suggest that the discrepancy between these young men’s showing of knowledge and their telling of ignorance lies in the need for them, as men, to accomplish the local management of (masculine) accountability for rape.

While explicit or implicit claims of insufficient knowledge may reveal unequivocally that speakers just do not know, a number of EM/CA studies (e.g. Beach & Metzger, 1997; Lynch & Bogen, 1996) have shown that such claims may often be strategically deployed to achieve specific rhetorical ends. For example in adversarial and hostile environments such as courtroom cross-examination or Prime Minister’s Questions, ‘not knowing’ works to preserve alternative and competing versions of (past) events by avoiding confirmation of information designed to challenge and discredit a speaker’s intentions, actions and reconstructed stories (Beach & Metzger, 1997). Here, the rhetorical effect of claiming insufficient knowledge of the subtle ways in which sexual refusals are normatively performed is to delete the accountability of men for rape. As such the data here suggest that, for these young men at least, the discursive resources of a rape-supportive culture (Doherty & Anderson, 1998) are readily available. Indeed, by maintaining the hegemonic repertoires of miscommunication and victim precipitation, the responsibility for rape that has long and widely been attributed to women is effectively sustained.