movie:law and order

voire aussi : Femmes violées : une affaire d’hommes
▻https://culturesgenre.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/femmes-violees-une-affaire-dhommes-12
▻https://culturesgenre.wordpress.com/2012/11/14/femmes-violees-une-affaire-dhommes-22

ainsi que « à toi l’honneur » sur Radiorageuses #radio
▻http://www.radiorageuses.net/spip.php?article384

Partie sur l’histoire du viol :

What we call rape is an entirely new phenomenon—barely 50 years old. For most of human existence, rape was not a crime committed against women but instead against the men who supervised them—husbands, fathers, brothers, lords, kings. The word “rape” likely comes from the Latin “rapere,” meaning to seize or abduct—to kidnap, to rob, to deprive another of property. Rape sullied a bloodline and damaged goods and/or services; it was a crime against private property. The implication of that language is also that rape happens to women, not men. Men might be violated, abused, tortured, yes, but not seized; they were typically not someone else’s property.

And though the Romans had their own word for sexual violation, “stuprare,” it was not necessarily immoral, criminal, or otherwise repugnant. Women were by and large not empowered enough to grant consent over their bodies, so the question of nonconsensual sex was rendered moot. Greek and Roman mythology is rife with gods raping maidens; in those stories, treated almost casually—an irritating fact of life, kind of like chicken pox.

The language of this era is extremely familiar, even today: Women invite sexual assault through their behavior; men have carnal urges they can’t control; people have to continue the species somehow. It’s reasoning that all hinges on the same logic—female desire is necessarily subordinate to male desire.

In 1975 Susan Brownmiller published her landmark work “Against Our Will,” which provided the foundation for the language of consent as a bulwark against the prevalence of rape. We rely on terms like “consent,” but consent can be silently or unconsciously given, and hard to prove after the fact. Intent is hard to prove in any context; the upside of a crime like murder is that at least there’s a dead body to point to. With sexual assault, it’s much harder to point to the aftereffects of trauma—either because the rape kit was mishandled or lost, as happens an awful lot, or because the aftereffects are more psychological than physical.

But primarily, what Brownmiller’s work did was center rape as a crime committed against women, not against property. “Against Our Will” fit into the feminist movement’s aims to recognize sexual violence and redefine it—both socially and legally. Before rape reform legislation of the 1970s, marital rape was an oxymoron, rape against men wasn’t illegal (or even acknowledged), and a woman’s reputation could be used as evidence against her accusation of rape in court.

It was a victory, but one with an upsetting aftertaste. A change in legislation cannot change social attitudes to sex and gender overnight. A prudent study of history asks us to not impose our own perspective of what people are like onto peoples throughout history, which could lead to the argument that because it so radically redefined the concept, before Brownmiller’s seminal work, rape as we know it didn’t exist. But that part of us that does identify with people from the past—that part of humanity that both spins tales and listens to them, rapt—is forced to acknowledge something much more upsetting: Perhaps, instead of there being no rape, there was only rape. Perhaps human existence is built entirely on intimate violence.

#histoire

Dans les programmes à destination des hommes voici comment se présente le viol :

Rapists are depicted as identifiably outside the mainstream through their language, clothing, habits, or attitudes. Each of these plot elements works to rein force sensitivity and desire for justice on the part of the male protagonist. In most episodes it is the male detective/ main character who provides the primary comfort and support for the victim. The stories end when the detective protagonist has completed his work, that is, when the rapist is caught or killed. The detective’s sense of morality, and often his need for revenge on the criminal, thus culminate in a successful triumph of the “good guy,” which is often accomplished through violence against the rapist. However, the further plight of the victim through the course of counseling or a trial are not included… In short, these plots are about the male avengers of rape rather than about the problem or crime of rape or the experiences and feelings of the victim.

#violeur #sauveur #nice_guy #chevalier_servant #victimes

Dans les programmes à déstination des femmes voila comment se présente le viol :

Daytime TV and made-for-TV movies such as those on Lifetime, in their low-budget, melodramatic glory, was far more likely to offer a woman-centric narrative of rape. Where mainstream TV ran away from topics like domestic violence, prostitution, abortion, and of course rape, soap operas and Lifetime films almost reveled in it; presumably there was some cathartic release in watching crimes suffered mostly by women in the real world play out in exaggerated glory on television. Lifetime’s films, then and now, were characterized by lurid titles and grim scenarios: “The Burning Bed” (1984), “She Fought Alone” (1995), “She Cried No” (1996), “She Woke Up Pregnant” (1996). On the abuse and rape survivor advocacy site The Road To Anaphe, the site’s creator includes an exhaustive list of Lifetime films, adding: “Lifetime Television may be a ‘women’s network,’ but it is one that shows a lot of good, informative movies on the subjects of child abuse, domestic violence, and missing children.” You could count on violence and exploitation in these films. The crucial difference is that you could also typically count on the point of view of the victim being central to the story.
Soap operas, unlike TV movies or even primetime TV shows, are not just serialized but heavily serialized. The short production time for soap episodes means that the shows can respond on the fly to audience interests, making the medium a fascinating one for measuring audience sentiment. And, uncomfortably, when rape shows up on soap operas, often those stories end up redeeming the rapist—indeed, in response to popular affection for those characters.

The best example of that might be the iconic Luke (Anthony Geary) and Laura (Genie Francis) on “General Hospital,” who have been one of that show’s foundational relationships. But their first sexual encounter, in 1979, was rape, when Luke drunkenly forced himself on Laura. She eventually fell in love with him and they were together for 37 years. Their wedding episode in 1981 remains to this day the highest rated soap opera episode in history. It was only in 1998, when their son learned of the rape, that the show really confronted the myth of “forced seduction” they had established nearly 20 years earlier, and reframed it as the assault it really was.

“One Live To Live,” in 1993-1994, focused much of its storytelling on the gang rape and subsequent aftermath of a college student named Marty Saybrooke (Susan Haskell). The football jock who instigated the rape—a tall, handsome guy named Todd Manning (Roger Howarth)—was originally intended to be a serial rapist. The brutal honesty of the scene inspired both audience and critical praise; the series won Daytime Emmys for the plot arc, which unapologetically framed Todd as a sadistic villain.

But then the story took a turn: Audiences loved Todd. Their enthusiasm spurred the writers to instead build a redemption arc for the character, even as Marty struggled to rebuild her life. Todd lingered as a flawed character on the margins as the writers of the show tried to reconcile their desire to maintain that the rape was reprehensible with audience enthusiasm for the character. The situation was settled (sort of) in 1998, when actor Howarth decided to walk away from the show. Unfortunately, I can only find this quote from Soap Opera Digest in Wikipedia, but it’s so compelling, I’m reproducing it:

If the rape had been an unrealistic, soapy thing, then it wouldn’t matter. But because it was so in-depth and so brutal, to show Todd and Marty having drinks together in Rodi’s — to show Marty feeling safe and comfortable with Todd — is bizarre… People have come up to me and said, ‘My 7-year-old loves you.’ What do I say to that? I’m not going to tell them, ‘Don’t let your 7-year-old watch TV.’ But I have to say, it’s disturbing.

Howarth’s departure from the show effectively scuttled any possibility of redeeming the character (though he did return for guest-stints on the show). Of course, this being soap operas, Todd was recast with Trevor St. John, who believed himself to be Todd but then turned out to be Todd’s twin brother, and in the meantime, Marty returned to the show with amnesia, and they had sex, which ended up getting dubbed “re-rape.” But it’s a plotline notable for never losing sight of the fact that what Todd did to Marty was unforgivable, in a landscape where, to quote the writer and unofficial soap expert Joe Reid, “The laundry list of incredibly popular soap characters who started off as rapists — or even just terrorizers of women — is uncomfortably long.”

Interestingly, by 2003, when the rape of Bianca Montgomery on “All My Children” dominated national conversation, the audience’s desire to see the rapists forgiven seems to have fallen off. Bianca herself, as the first openly lesbian lead on a daytime drama, became the subject of redemption; where some audiences had hated her for coming out of the closet, her rape—a “punishment” or “corrective” for her sexuality—and her subsequent struggle to keep her baby became objects of such audience fervor that the New York Times covered it in 2004.

Pourquoi la TV aime le viol :

The book “Prime Time: How TV Portrays American Culture” makes a stark observation that Cuklanz, includes in her own book I quote above. The authors state that rape is “a crime ideally suited to television. It is violent and therefore action packed. The sexual nature of the crime can easily be presented as the act of a violent, mentally unbalanced madman.” And after noting both a study on sexual assault finds rape to be “the only violent crime to be a matter of universal concern among women of all class and ethnic backgrounds” and the role that detective procedurals in primetime played in shaping socially acceptable performances of masculinity, Cuklanz comes to a conclusion that is, in its way, astounding: Rape on television is used to, more often than not, to redeem masculinity,

by offering a subtle redefinition that frames masculinity as the means through which women are protected and avenged rather than brutalized and demeaned. At the same time, protagonist males can engage in violence within certain parameters, such as when they become so morally outraged at criminals that they can no longer contain their anger. Masculine volatility is harnessed for acceptable purposes and never used against women. … Rape provides a subject matter for which these stereotypes are easy to maintain. Not only are victims clearly deserving of protection and care, but the extreme evil and brutality of rape also serve as a clear contrast to the detective’s behavior and legitimize his use of force.

Rape on television is the theater through which both men and women grapple with masculinity—with the fact that in its most corrosive form, masculinity is a quality that wreaks violence on those closest to it. Destruction and power are built into our concept of maleness; rape plots on TV work desperately to allow men that access to power while also codifying when it’s acceptable to use.

I’m reminded of one of the most shocking and iconic rape episodes on primetime television—“Sylvia,” a two-parter on the family-oriented “Little House On The Prairie,” in 1980. The episode is horrifying, drawing on slasher-film imagery to tell a story of a girl whose “bosoms” came in “too soon,” resulting in horrific violence at the hand of a man in town. Sylvia herself is a one-off character who is introduced at the beginning of the two episodes and dies by the end. The episode is not about her; it’s about the men around her—her father, her rapist, her boyfriend, and most importantly, Pa Ingalls (Michael Landon), the show’s continued figure of masculine righteousness. What would have happened if Pa hadn’t been around is a chilling possibility left unrealized.

Underneath the archetype of the righteous man, the myth of the redeemed rapist, and the specter of the girl who was “asking for it,” in “Little House On The Prairie” or elsewhere, is a far greater fear, a far bigger problem. If good men don’t exist, if rapists can’t reform, if it’s not ultimately the woman’s fault, then something much scarier bubbles to the surface: This world, and masculinity in it, is very, very broken.

cc @supergeante
cc @mona

Cette partie spoile la saison 2 de « True Detective »

In this long examination of rape on television, it is hard not to think of HBO’s “True Detective,” which both consciously borrows the bones of the detective procedural and its unsubtle discourse on righteous masculinity. In the first episode of the second season, we learn Ray Velcoro (Colin Farrell) is a man tortured by the fact that his wife was raped; it is almost farcical, given the work we have done to center women in their own victimization. (I remain convinced, perhaps naively, that it is farcical, but that’s another story.) “True Detective” is a show with many faults, but it does attempt rather dramatically to tell a big story about masculinity in this world. And what it seems to tell is that the myth of masculinity we currently are all invested in is purely unsustainable. The men of “True Detective,” the ones consumed by the warring ideas of both destruction and violence but also righteous, proper violence, are erratic, addicted, and tortured; they fixate on violence done to the innocent because they know that on some level, they are responsible for that violence. The men of the first season of “True Detective” both have to confront their own monstrosity in order to come out the other side of a case that they could not solve; the confrontation leaves them both desolate and broken. If the mythos of masculinity is a beautiful, irresistible supernova, “True Detective” offers a vision of the collapsed, soul-sucking black hole it really is.

And if men struggle with it, women struggle with it, too; the story of soap operas and Lifetime movies is overall the story of women attempting to come to terms with the fact that that which they love is always capable of violating them. Women’s television offers either redemption for the abuser or an open-and-shut justice, via Olivia Benson (Mariska Hartigay) in “SVU”; neither happens with any notable frequency in real life. Rapists keep raping, with premeditation and without recourse, and we can barely admit it to ourselves.

There’s a point in Cuklanz’s work, which focuses on TV between 1976 and 1990, where she argues that as television is a more formulaic medium, it’s unsurprising how this standard detective-rape plot is produced and reproduced. It’s 2015 now, though, and we don’t live in a world of formulaic television. The past few years have yielded an incredible number of rape plots that often push the envelope in ways we’ve never seen before—exploring their violence, their frequency, the insidiousness of acquaintance rape, and the less-discussed phenomenon of male-on-male rape.

My complaint with these plots, over and over, is that the stories—usually written and directed by men, despite progress in gender equity—is that so often they focus on the feelings of the men in the story, at the expense of the victims’. But I can see why they focus on the men; the men, as the overwhelmingly more likely perpetrators, present a greater puzzle for us. It would be simpler to dismiss all rapists as monsters, but when so many are fathers, brothers, friends, boyfriends, it becomes harder and harder to do. Sexual assault has only existed the way we think about it for a few decades, and we are still trying to figure out how to address it—how to change the way this world functioned for millennia, and still functions in pockets of untouched refuge all over the world. I don’t particularly have a solution for how to “fix” rape on television; it’s graphic, brutal, violent, and horrible, to the point that it is very difficult to watch, hard to explain, confusing to discuss.

But one thing is clear: I’d rather we dealt with this than we didn’t. I’d rather discuss rape on every TV show than not discuss it all. I’d rather see the world convulsing with outrage over Sansa or Anna or Mellie or Claire or Pennsatucky— who are all, by the way, white women, suggesting an erasure of experience for women of color that has yet to be addressed —than pretend that this isn’t a crippling social problem, an epidemic that we appear to lack the political will or interest to fight. This is what we do with stories; we imagine not just what happened then, and what happened now—but what happens next.

et pour la saison 2 de true detective, je suis d’accord avec le fait qu’elle soit ridicule aussi bien le perso de Colin Farrell que l’autre gangster est aussi incroyablement cliché. Il n’y a que le générique qui vaille la peine pour cette saison à mon avis.
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJJfe1k9CeE

RFE/RL
Opposition Party Office In Kharkiv Attacked
▻http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-opposition-party-office-attacked/27167147.html

At least 50 young men, many in balaclavas, have attacked the former office of the Party of Regions in Ukraine’s eastern city of Kharkiv.

The office is currently used by Ukrainian lawmaker Mykhaylo Dobkin, who represents the Opposition Bloc in parliament.

The attackers destroyed a minibus parked near the office and smashed the building’s windows with stones on August 3.

The attackers said they were representing the Ukrainian right-wing nationalist group Right Sector and an organization called Public Guard.

They said they gathered at the site to protest against the Opposition Bloc’s participation in local elections in October and attacked the building after Dobkin’s people started shooting at them with firearms, wounding one activist.

Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, is only about 20 kilometers from the Russian border.

… sous les yeux de la police (vidéo incorporée)…

Masked gang attacks office of pro-Russian party in Ukraine’s Kharkiv - watch on - uatoday.tv
▻http://uatoday.tv/society/masked-gang-attacks-office-of-pro-russian-party-in-ukraine-s-kharkiv-468173.

Some 70 youths throw stones and set off explosions at ’Opposition Block’ building

Police have launched an investigation after the group of men in Kharkiv vandalized the office of the Opposition Block political party, an indirect successor of former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions.

No injuries were reported.

TASS: World - Ukraine’s opposition activist kidnapped and beaten up in Kharkiv
▻http://tass.ru/en/world/812297

KIEV, August 3 /TASS/. An activist of Ukraine’s Opposition Bloc who was taking part in a pro-party rally in Kharkiv, a city in eastern Ukraine, was kidnapped on Monday. The party’s press service said that its office had also been attacked.

“The activist was standing outside the Kharkhiv regional justice department where the Opposition Bloc was planning to hold a picket when, according to witnesses, he was grabbed by unidentified persons who threw him into a camouflage range rover with the Azov [volunteer battalion - TASS] inscription on it,” the Opposition Bloc said in its statement.
The man was then taken to a cemetery where he was undressed and beaten up. The kidnappers also took away the activist’s cell phone.
“Four people in balaclava helmets questioned and bullied the man for forty minutes. They asked him why he had come to a rally and where his parents worked. After that, they beat him up and left him at the cemetery. At the moment, the man is receiving all the necessary medical help,” the Opposition Bloc said.
Ukraine’s Opposition Bloc headed by Deputy Mikhail Dobkin rallied outside the Kharkov regional administration on August 3. They want the region’s justice department to register the party’s Kharkiv branch so that the Opposition Bloc could run in the local elections. At the same time, activists of another organization called Gromadska Varta gathered outside the justice department to protest against the Opposition Bloc’s registration.

Pour les (gentils) assaillants (de Secteur Droit), ce sont, évidemment, les (méchants) assiégés qui ont commencé…

Dobkin’s office in Kharkiv : Opposition Bloc MP Dobkin’s office attacked with firecrackers as shootout occurred. VIDEO - Dobkin, assault, Kharkiv, titushki, Right Sector, Dobkin’s office in Kharkiv, Attack (03.08.15 15:39) « Video news | EN.Censor.net
▻http://en.censor.net.ua/video_news/346263/opposition_bloc_mp_dobkins_office_attacked_with_firecrackers_as_shooto

Several dozens of young men wearing camouflage and balaclavas attacked a building previously used as a Party of Regions office and being an office of the Opposition Bloc MP Mykhailo Dobkin at the moment.

As reported by Censor.NET citing Interfax, the people broke the windows in a van parked in front of the building. They also hurled stones and firecrackers at the building with gunfire being heard.

Police are holding 20-30-meter perimeter, though without intervening. They refuse to give any comments on such a behavior.

As reported, the attackers were activists of a reserve battalion of the Volunteer Ukrainian Corps (DUK) “Right Sector”, as well as activists of Hromadska Varta. Kharkiv (Public Guard. Kharkiv organisation - ed.).

According to them, the first to use force were Dobkin’s titushkas barricaded in the office. They started firing traumatic weapons. After that, according to activists, they responded with stones and firecrackers. Source: ▻http://en.censor.net.ua/v346263

(photos et vidéos)

Kharkov branch of Opposition bloc was denied registration
▻http://news.rin.ru/eng/news///123060
(traduction un peu défaillante…)

The justice Department in the Kharkiv region refused to register the regional organization of the Party " Opposition bloc, said on the first day of the week the head of the regional Department of justice Yury Georgievskiy.
“I have decided to refuse the registration of the regional organization of the Party” Opposition bloc “, ? the news Agency the words of St. George. George recalled that on 24 July Authorized Deputy from the Opposition bloc Mikhail Dobkin filed in the Office of the documents with 2 requirements. First ? note conclusion about stop the legal entity of the regional organization of the Party” Law and order “, which last year was renamed the” Opposition bloc “. Second ? take note and register the regional organization of Party” Opposition bloc ".

The Minister explained that the Office could not fulfill the Second requirement, because you are running the destruction of the regional organization of that political Party, and as long as it will not be completed in Accordance with applicable law, registration is not possible. According to his statement, the liquidation procedure will take More than 2 months, for this reason, the Opposition bloc will not have the opportunity to participate in the elections.

George also said that the Management of four refused registration of the territorial organization of the “Opposition bloc” because of deficiencies in the documents submitted by the Authorised Party “Law and order”. For its part, the Opposition bloc said about the readiness to ignore local elections." We refer to all democratic countries and international organizations not to recognize the elections, which is not allowed opposing political force", - has told in the Party.

Remember, in the centre Hurikova Monday riots were started after the meetings at the County courthouse on Sumskaya street, where on the first day of the week heard a case on the registration of the regional branch of the Opposition bloc. Authorized Mikhail Dobkin several times submitted documents, but the justice Ministry denied registration, indicating the number of observations.

About 50 people in the shape with black and red stripes stormed the office of the former Party of regions. Unknown in balaclavas began to dismantle paving under construction near temple of the Holy myrrh-Bearers and throw in the house, and smashed parked near the office of the minibus. Later it was claimed that the battalion of special purpose of the Ministry of interior of Ukraine East building surrounded the office of the “Opposition Party” in Kharkov, where he barricaded unidentified, one of which was called as the assistant Deputy Opposition bloc Mikhail Dobkin. Later the young men who were in the Kharkiv office of the Opposition bloc, escorted to police stations. The events in Kharkiv qualified as “hooliganism with a use of weapons”, what happened on the first day of the week clashes in the city opened two criminal cases, said the Prosecutor’s office of Kharkiv region of Ukraine.

Riots in Kharkiv, unknown people in Balaclava attacked the office of the Party of Regions 03/08/2015

▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaGlCZkMkMk

La page est accessible.

Violence erupts after rival Kharkiv rallies
►http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/violence-erupts-after-rival-kharkiv-rallies-2-394928.html

Special forces were deployed along with police negotiators on Aug. 3 when a rally in Kharkiv erupted into violent clashes, with pro-Ukrainian activists driving supporters of the Opposition Bloc into a building in a scene frighteningly reminiscent of the May 2 Odesa tragedy.

La suite reprend les éléments déjà exposés ci-dessus. Dommage qu’elle n’ait pas été accessible, cette une synthèse assez claire dès hier soir.