Piers Morgan Tells Rape Victim to Quit Begging for Attention

[Tsiolkovsky on the Moon]

You can find a number of news articles on this, as follows:


"Shia LaBeouf's claim to have been 'raped' is truly pathetic & demeans real rape victims. Grow up, you silly little man," Morgan posted on Twitter. "A Hollywood actor sitting with a paper bag over his head who did nothing as he claims a woman 'raped' him has not been raped. #labeouf."

"People are actually defending Shia LaBeouf. The world's gone mad. He's invented a supposed 'rape' for cheap PR – utterly shameful," he continued. "Shia LaBeouf should apologise for his outrageous 'rape' claim & those who defend him should be ashamed of themselves."


I think this is indicative of how our society does not take male rape seriously (Please bear in mind, I am not a MRA at all; female rape is much more endemic but that doesn't make male rape any less awful).

Also, fuck Piers Morgan.

[Sinister Intents]

Rape is fucked up no matter how you cut it. Rape disgusts me no matter how it is copied, cut, and pasted. Other than that I have no idea what to say on this other than to voice disgust for rape

[Redistribute the Rep]

Being raped carries a stigma, due to it being associated with femaleness, much like how people make fun of people for getting beaten by a girl at something, or how disorders like anorexia or depression are stigmatized as they are more common in females. You'll notice in the comments section, people say the same things about LaBouf that they say about female rape victims. They say things like he should have done something instead of just sitting there, when in reality due to the nature of this situation he probably didn't know what was going on until it was too late. Also, I would argue that her making those advances without his initial consent was wrong regardless of whether or not he consented later, of course by his account it looks like he didn't consent at any time, but the commenters seem to believe that if someone does consent later then that would make an initial unsolicited advance okay. This view I would argue arises from sexism, as it has been shown empirically that people are more likely to blame victims of rape (a crime associated with women) than victims of other crimes like theft.

I also find it interesting that rape accusers are the thought to be doing it for attention. This is just illogical, given the evidence that victims of rape are often blamed and even more so than other types of victimization and the stigma it carries. It would be reasonable to think that rape is underreported given the stigma, and the studies done on this back this up.

[RedWorker]

This is not opression of men; this is women being oppressed having a side effect which harms men. According to sexist notions, the man is "strong", and the woman is "weak and needs to be protected", so naturally only a man could rape a woman.

It is similar to the fact that thinking that violence against women is sexist (when gender and sex are not involved), is sexist itself, because of the same notions that are listed above. The same could be said of the thought that sex must be hidden because it is "the woman sacrificing herself for the enjoyment of the man", which is sexist itself, just like the objectification of women is also sexist. This is what many people don't get: it's BOTH which are sexist. People are employing a false dichotomy which goes from "sexualization of women" to "sex is hidden". Oppression against women in the ancient regimes was seen in the fact that sex was a thing that was to be completely hidden and banished from public life, and oppression against women today is seen in the fact that women are objectified.

In fact, sex being an open thing lowers the oppression of women, and objectification of women increases their oppression. But they are not directly connected, not part of the same scale. Sexist thinking could lead to thinking they are connected. Some pseudo-feminists fail to grasp these concepts.

[Redistribute the Rep]

In fact, sex being an open thing lowers the oppression of women, and objectification of women increases their oppression. But they are not directly connected, not part of the same scale. Sexist thinking could lead to thinking they are connected. Some pseudo-feminists fail to grasp these concepts.

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to argue here, so forgive me if I misinterpret this, but I would say that "sex being an open thing" and the objectification most certainly are related in the context of capitalism. Sexuality in today's society is not condemned in the same way it was centuries ago, in what Lenin called the "bourgeois emancipation of the flesh." Women are encouraged to open about their sexuality only to commodity themselves and reproduce capitalist relations of private property. In this sense, we are much more open to their sexuality than before. One might say they've been "emancipated" in a liberal sense, relative to the times when their sexuality was to be completely hidden from the public eye; however, this is not true liberation, as women only express themselves sexually in the ways men and capitalists want, and women are not in complete control of their sexuality, unless a man wants them to be, from which dominatrix porn and the like arise.

This post of course should not be interpreted to mean that women should go back to hiding their sexuality. That would be a pre capitalist and reactionary position. It is meant to recognize that emancipation of the flesh, or "sex being an open thing" as you said, in the context of capitalist relations has not and will not liberate women in any meaningful sense. Therefore, "sex being an open thing" does not always "lower the oppression of women" as your last paragraph. seems to suggest. Your previous paragraph ostensibly supports what I've said, so I'm not sure I quite understand the position you take in the last paragraph

[RedWorker]

That's exactly what I said, minus your point that involves the notion that women are not more free now than before. (which is ridiculous)
What bourgeois society calls "sex not being hidden" is not what I call sex not being hidden, of course. I also stated that.

[Sasha]

one of the best articles on this so far; http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/02/shia-labeouf-sexual-violence-male-victims?CMP=fb_gu

[RedBlackStar]

This is not opression of men; this is women being oppressed having a side effect which harms men. According to sexist notions, the man is "strong", and the woman is "weak and needs to be protected", so naturally only a man could rape a woman.

I find your example confusing comrade, so I'll just address this.

Is it your claim that the harm done to men by perceptions of gender (which is possibly the significant way that gender inequality is still present) is only a side effect of the damage done to women? If so I'd be interested to hear your logic because my thinking was that we shouldn't think about men as a group or women as a group, but as individuals, as the dynamics of the situation are different. For example, more "feminine" (to use current implications of the word) men are damaged by gender stereotypes, whereas "masculine" men will be assisted by them; the same way that a woman who enjoys being "feminine" will likely remain unhindered by, and therefore uninterested in, gender stereotypes, whilst a "masculine" woman would be effected in the same way as the "feminine" man, likely being judged based on their choices of how to live their life, which is of course unacceptable.

It simply seems counter-productive to view the situation as one based on two separate collectives, which is how the conclusion I think that you've displayed comes about.

But then again I might have totally misinterpreted you, in which case apologies.

[Lily Briscoe]

I made a comment in this thread the other day but deleted it. I don't follow stuff like this, so looked it up after initially seeing the thread, and have seen it being discussed elsewhere since then.

I don't really see the relevance of this to anything at all. A multimillionaire male celebrity got raped by a woman during an art exhibit that consisted of him sitting in a room by himself with a bag over his head and whips as props, where people entered the room one at a time. That doesn't make the fact the he got raped any less fucked up, but this is just so insanely far removed from the circumstances of virtually all rape victims ever, that I just find the attention it's receiving kind of frustrating. Celebrity gossip is a pretty lame topic for political discussion imho

[synthesis]

one of the best articles on this so far; http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/02/shia-labeouf-sexual-violence-male-victims?CMP=fb_gu

The thing I thought was most interesting about this article was this observation:


Feminists, it should be noted, are also the only ones I see defending LaBeouf. The scant response from “men’s rights activists”, supposed champions of male victims, seems to mainly revolve around how effeminate LaBeouf is for not fighting his attacker hard enough.

You'd think they'd see this as an opportunity.

[BIXX]

While I fucking hate LaBeouf (he's a real shithead, complaining about how hard his life is and shit) I will say its fucked that he was raped and that its also fucked that he is catching shit for it. He should be catching shit, not for being raped, but for being am asswipe.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I agree that its frustrating to see this get so much attention while so many other assaults go completely unnoticed, but what does him being a celebrity or a multi-millionaire have to do with him being raped? Aside from coverage, would it have been different if he was a broke artist that no one cares about?

[Creative Destruction]

one of the best articles on this so far; http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/02/shia-labeouf-sexual-violence-male-victims?CMP=fb_gu

thanks. i usually like Lindy West. she's a really good analyst.

[Creative Destruction]

I made a comment in this thread the other day but deleted it. I don't follow stuff like this, so looked it up after initially seeing the thread, and have seen it being discussed elsewhere since then.

I don't really see the relevance of this to anything at all. A multimillionaire male celebrity got raped by a woman during an art exhibit that consisted of him sitting in a room by himself with a bag over his head and whips as props, where people entered the room one at a time. That doesn't make the fact the he got raped any less fucked up, but this is just so insanely far removed from the circumstances of virtually all rape victims ever, that I just find the attention it's receiving kind of frustrating. Celebrity gossip is a pretty lame topic for political discussion imho

It seems like you want to eat your cake and have it, here. You concede that he's a victim of rape, but then you write it off as gossip, which is asinine and is functionally the same as men writing off women who have been raped. Either we treat rape victims on equal terms or we don't. There's no in-between here; the act itself does not depend on the personality of the person or their stature in society. Describing his surroundings as they were just serves to minimize what happened, just as when a woman is raped, it is brought up that she was drunk that night, too.

[Lily Briscoe]

I agree that its frustrating to see this get so much attention while so many other assaults go completely unnoticed, but what does him being a celebrity or a multi-millionaire have to do with him being raped?

I was just highlighting the disconnect between this situation and the vast overwhelming majority of rape victims, who don't tend to be multimillionaire male celebrities, let alone multimillionaire male celebrities who get raped by a strange woman while putting on an art exhibit.

[Creative Destruction]

I was just highlighting the disconnect between this situation and the vast overwhelming majority of rape victims, who don't tend to be multimillionaire male celebrities, let alone multimillionaire male celebrities who get raped by a strange woman while putting on an art exhibit.

What was the function of highlighting this? Are millionaire women not deserving of the same kind of consideration, just because their financial situation sets them apart from the overwhelming majority of rape victims?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

The specific context of any rape is going to be different from one instance to another, I agree its a truly unique set of circumstances but I don't see why its relevant aside from news coverage. Its actually surprising how similar the responses to his claims have been to any other rape: He's making it up for attention, He's crazy, Why didn't he just stop it, What did he expect from such an exhibit, etc, etc.

[Lily Briscoe]

What was the function of highlighting this?

To explain why I find the amount of attention this is receiving so frustrating? And the talk about him deserving "the same level of consideration" seems a bit strange, since most people who are raped don't receive international news coverage about it.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I don't think he controls the news coverage, it seems like an odd thing to hold against him personally. I agree its frustrating that he's getting so much attention compared to others but I mean does the lady who did interviews about her assault from Bill Cosby deserve less consideration than the other 19 women who haven't been interviewed on tv about it?

[Creative Destruction]

To explain why I find the amount of attention this is receiving so frustrating?

Okay, well, I hope you can go back over your posts and see how this sort of highlighting is incredibly dumb.


And the talk about him deserving "the same level of consideration" seems a bit strange, since most people who are raped don't receive international news coverage about it.

Good lord. I meant his status as a victim of rape. We (as in, people who think this is a serious issue and need to be addressed) either recognize it with the same seriousness that we treat any other rape victim, or we don't. Again, there's no in-between here. Media recognition is something different and generally problematic, but that's not at issue here. The language you're using here effectively minimizes what happened to him and is close to the same minimizing efforts that men do when they talk about a rape victim.

[synthesis]

To explain why I find the amount of attention this is receiving so frustrating? And the talk about him deserving "the same level of consideration" seems a bit strange, since most people who are raped don't receive international news coverage about it.

I think it's receiving so much attention precisely because he is a (wealthy, famous) man, but probably not for the same reasons as you do; remember the etymology of "controversy" here. In other words, it's not the act itself but rather the discussion it has engendered (about the validity of a [wealthy, powerful] man alleging rape by a woman) that has propelled it to become a prominent news item.

People who don't think it's a big deal, relatively speaking, and saying such, are basically inviting the sort of dialogue that causes something to become a big deal in the first place. In still other words, it's understandable that you'd want to "explain why [you] find the amount of attention this is receiving so frustrating," but that sort of thing is, to me, the main reason why this is receiving the amount of attention that it is.

[The Feral Underclass]

one of the best articles on this so far; http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/02/shia-labeouf-sexual-violence-male-victims?CMP=fb_gu

This is also a fairly interesting article on it all: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/hekate-papadaki/shia-laboeuf-rape-i-am-sorry_b_6248218.html

[Creative Destruction]

This is also a fairly interesting article on it all: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/hekate-papadaki/shia-laboeuf-rape-i-am-sorry_b_6248218.html

that was a good example of redirection.

[ColumnNo.4]

Since when is an accusation sufficient enough to be rendered guilty?

[Lily Briscoe]

The specific context of any rape is going to be different from one instance to another, I agree its a truly unique set of circumstances but I don't see why its relevant aside from news coverage.
This is the thing, though. I don't think the circumstances do tend to be so wildly different from case to case as far as rape goes at all.

Lefties talking about the Bill Cosby thing doesn't irritate me in the same way because the situation in that case is actually reflective of a very common social phenomenon: men in relative positions of power sexually abusing women. So it isn't just about those incidents and those individuals, it's about something broader/structural. The situation being discussed in this thread is very different imo; wealthy men getting raped by strange women is more along the lines of a freak occurrence.

To use an imperfect analogy, obviously racially-motivated hate crime is all bad. But frankly I'm not that interested in discussing, say, a white American man who gets assaulted due to his race. Not because I can't sympathize with the guy or whatever, but it's just that it's not reflective of any wider phenomenon, so I just don't really see it as being particularly significant, and would honestly be a bit suspicious of people who felt that it was.

I'm on break at work so sorry this is really rushed.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

On one hand I get what you're saying but at the same time it's off base. The wider phenomenon is rape not specifically male on female or male on impoverished male, but rape as a whole. Or to take your example, racially motivated crimes as a whole is the wider phenomenon. Obviously when you talk about rape more often then not the victim will be a women or in the case of racially motivated crime the victim will more often than not be non-white. I mean sure it would be ridiculous to create an organization based on protecting wealthy men from sexual assault at the expense of everyone else. Or to pass laws that give some sort of protected status to white victims of racially motived crimes. But no one is suggesting that. It's wrong that he's getting extra attention for sure, but rape is rape even in incredibly unlikely scenarios

[Redistribute the Rep]

Since when is an accusation sufficient enough to be rendered guilty?

Since when has anybody implied such?

Actually what we're discussing is the reaction of people to this alleged incident, and to rape victims in general. You'll notice that many of the responses of the public to this guys allegations involve some form of blaming him for what happened, saying he should have "manned up" and gotten himself out of the situation. I suppose he could do be making all this up (not sure why given the negative reaction he's received and the stigma associated with rape), but people's responses to this imply that they would blame him even if it was proven to be true. This is concerning that out society views victims this way

[ColumnNo.4]

Since when has anybody implied such?

Actually what we're discussing is the reaction of people to this alleged incident, and to rape victims in general. You'll notice that many of the responses of the public to this guys allegations involve some form of blaming him for what happened, saying he should have "manned up" and gotten himself out of the situation. I suppose he could do be making all this up (not sure why given the negative reaction he's received and the stigma associated with rape), but people's responses to this imply that they would blame him even if it was proven to be true. This is concerning that out society views victims this way

There's somewhat of an acceptance that he's being truthful.

As soon as someone accused Cosby the consensus was he was guilty and society essentially strung him up. I think the reaction to alleged rape depends on the status of the accused. Football players are given a pass, Cosby is strung up, the same is somewhat true when it comes to shootings.

[Redistribute the Rep]

There's somewhat of an acceptance that he's being truthful.

As soon as someone accused Cosby the consensus was he was guilty and society essentially strung him up. I think the reaction to alleged rape depends on the status of the accused. Football players are given a pass, Cosby is strung up, the same is somewhat true when it comes to shootings.

There's no shortage of people who defend Cosby

[ColumnNo.4]

There's no shortage of people who defend Cosby

No, and there never will be a shortage of people who will defend rapists however in Cosby's case he was considered guilty after a week or two.

[Redistribute the Rep]

No, and there never will be a shortage of people who will defend rapists however in Cosby's case he was considered guilty after a week or two.

There will be a shortage of rapist defenders when there are no longer the conditions from which their apologia for the rapist and disdain for the victim arise, this statement is asinine, it sounds like you're just saying this to diminish the fact that droves of people are defending Cosby. And it's a bit unparsimonious to think that all the women accusing Cosby got together and decided to make the whole thing up, so the assumed guilt doesn't seem very problematic to me.

[ColumnNo.4]

There will be a shortage of rapist defenders when there are no longer the conditions from which their apologia for the rapist and disdain for the victim arise, this statement is asinine, it sounds like you're just saying this to diminish the fact that droves of people are defending Cosby. And it's a bit unparsimonious to think that all the women accusing Cosby got together and decided to make the whole thing up, so the assumed guilt doesn't seem very problematic to me.

If you think that the number of rape defenders and victim blamers can reach zero then you're a fool, those types of people will always exist.

What I don't like is finding society or myself convicting someone without evidence.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

My general impression of Piers Morgan is that he deserves a good beating.

[Loony Le Fist]

My general impression of Piers Morgan is that he deserves a good beating.

I second that. You can get the first beatdown, I'll get sloppy seconds. :laugh::laugh:

[Hrafn]

I hate you all. Except for the people not being fucking idiots in here. Christ, how much rape apologism do I have to see in one day.

[Lily Briscoe]

This is also a fairly interesting article on it all: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/hekate-papadaki/shia-laboeuf-rape-i-am-sorry_b_6248218.html

I think this article is interesting in that it dismisses official statistics on sexual violence against men (that 0.3% of men in the UK experience sexual violence) due to this individual having too many conversations with males about things like schoolgirls sneaking into boys bathrooms to make fun of their genitals to find the figures believable, and then goes on to cite the figure that in 40% of domestic violence incidents, men are the victims. Now it doesn't actually say where this figure is from, but it is hyperlinked, and when you click on it, it turns out that it's from a study done by a men's rights campaign group. Which I think is consistent with the overall tone of the article, that rape and sexual violence are just random acts of violence that can happen to everybody regardless of gender, rather than something that is directly connected to structural violence against women.

[ColumnNo.4]

I think people lose sight of the fact that sexual abuse and domestic violence is not a female issue or a male issue but a human issue. We should be driving home the message that neither are acceptable under any circumstances.

[Lily Briscoe]

I think people lose sight of the fact that sexual abuse and domestic violence is not a female issue or a male issue but a human issue. We should be driving home the message that neither are acceptable under any circumstances.
I certainly agree that neither are acceptable under any circumstances. But it isn't just an abstract "human issue" that has nothing to do with gender. Rape/sexual violence is very much a gendered phenomenon.

[ColumnNo.4]

I certainly agree that neither are acceptable under any circumstances. But it isn't just an abstract "human issue" that has nothing to do with gender. Rape/sexual violence is very much a gendered phenomenon.

I've read my fair share of articles and whatnot that claim male-on-male sexual violence is even more underreported than male-on-female sexual violence. I know for a fact that it's grossly underreported within the military.

I'm not sure what the statistics are when it comes to domestic violence however as someone who was in a relationship with a violent partner I tolerated the violence because I believed as a male it was something you accepted. How many men still believe that I can't say but I would guess quite a few.

[synthesis]

No, and there never will be a shortage of people who will defend rapists however in Cosby's case he was considered guilty after a week or two.

Damn, dude, that's so off base. Public accusations of drugging and raping women have been leveled against Cosby for at least ten years (http://www.salon.com/2014/11/30/bill_cosby_and_drugging_my_34_year_old_secret/) now. Probably longer, but that's the earliest I've come across without actively searching. Really, what pissed a lot of people (http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/11/13/bill-cosby-raped-me-why-did-it-take-30-years-for-people-to-believe-my-story/) off is that nobody really gave a shit until Hannibal Burress's comedy clip blew up.

[jullia]

There's somewhat of an acceptance that he's being truthful.

As soon as someone accused Cosby the consensus was he was guilty and society essentially strung him up. I think the reaction to alleged rape depends on the status of the accused. Football players are given a pass, Cosby is strung up, the same is somewhat true when it comes to shootings.


It's decade that there are rumors about Cosby. It's the same stuff with DSK. A man have power and popularity and he think he can make everything he wants. Probably a lot of people knew about it and no one make a move due to the popularty of the agressor. It's really a shame.

All case are different but for football player, sometimes there are some legitimate doubt that the victim is a golddigger who wants to take advantages of the situation.

Anyway it's always good that victim of rapes talk about it. It makes move the things.

[blake 3:17]

Anyway it's always good that victim of rapes talk about it. It makes move the things.

I used to be embarrassed about having been sexually assaulted as a child and a young adult. Since I've been very open about it, and talking to mostly women but a few men about it -- We're just these scum can get lost.

The attacks on Laboeuf were disgusting and immoral.

From the article Sasha linked to:



Men are just as capable as women of being taken advantage of during emotionally fragile moments. Men are just as capable of freezing up and going into shock. And men are just as likely not to report their assaults, because of exactly the backlash that LaBeouf is facing now. And if he still just seems “crazy” to you, remember that mental illness makes a person more likely to be the victim of sexual assault, not less (http://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2014/sep/04/mental-illness-sexual-abuse-rape-victim).


The one time I was sexually assaulted as an adult, was right after having spent months in group therapy. I was very depressed, got some help and was too relaxed.

[Loony Le Fist]

I...
The attacks on Laboeuf were disgusting and immoral.


It's good to hear someone use the term immoral to describe something. Not common on a board with quite the proliferation of moral nihilists. :grin: I feel the same way--totally immoral. Not to mention, totally demented and crazy.

[Loony Le Fist]

I find it amazing how feminists are first to rise to defend LeBeouf, despite the way female rape victims are almost instantly denounced as asking for it the minute they open their mouths. Bravo to the feminists on this board and elsewhere for their integrity and strength on this issue. I always find feminists are first to defend men who find themselves in that position.

[Lanfear]

Piers Morgan is a tool

[GaggedNoMore]

I really hope the MRAs are paying attention to this. And I honestly hope some of them will reconsider their worldviews in light of it.


The thing I thought was most interesting about this article was this observation:


Feminists, it should be noted, are also the only ones I see defending LaBeouf. The scant response from “men’s rights activists”, supposed champions of male victims, seems to mainly revolve around how effeminate LaBeouf is for not fighting his attacker hard enough.


You'd think they'd see this as an opportunity.

Yes, you'd think so.

Unfortunately I think most of them are so blinded by their rage and bitterness that they're past the point of no return. I doubt if they could see another side to this even if they wanted to at this point. :(

[GaggedNoMore]

While I fucking hate LaBeouf (he's a real shithead, complaining about how hard his life is and shit) I will say its fucked that he was raped and that its also fucked that he is catching shit for it. He should be catching shit, not for being raped, but for being am asswipe.

I'm curious...what exactly do you mean by "complaining about how hard his life is" ? Are you referring to him talking publicly about his battles with addiction and mental health issues? Or is there something else he talks about that offends your particular sensibilities?

[Lanfear]

I'm curious...what exactly do you mean by "complaining about how hard his life is" ? Are you referring to him talking publicly about his battles with addiction and mental health issues? Or is there something else he talks about that offends your particular sensibilities?
Im not a big fan of him but I havent heard of this, whats the deal

[jullia]

Maybe it's just legend/bullshit use to improve his picture. But i heard he grow up in a poor family and fought to get succees.