From the most read political blog in New Zealand (according to Tumeke, that is):
I hope he tears the French Rugby Union a new orifice
DPF commonly disavows his commentariat, known elsewhere in the NZ blogosphere as the sewer, but really, DPF, when you buy into rape culture like that, you have to start thinking that just maybe, you’re the one who is responsible for providing the cesspool in the first place. Since when has it ever been acceptable to wish that someone would rape someone else?
Political commentary laced with violence and misogyny. It makes me ill. And I should have thought that the National Party (in New Zealand) would be ashamed to be promoted by someone who advocates rape.
Update: And now the Standard is doing it too. Though to be fair they are not urging people to go out and do physical harm to others – they are describing someone’s actions in those terms i.e. “ripping an orifice in…”
[Redacted] is passionate about numbers and particularly about accurate and relevant ones, as he has proved over the years ripping various ministers and organizations spare orifices. [Redacted] has just ripped Nick Smith a new one…
Lose the language, Standardistas.
Edited to add link to the post on the Standard, which I missed because I was running late for a tutorial – sorry.
12 responses so far ↓
David Farrar // Friday 3 July 2009 at 8:11 am |
Good God Deborah. I may be guilty of using a common expression thoughtlessly, but I don’t think anyone takes it literally. The last thing that passed my mind as I typed it was the actual act – it is a common expression meaning a very stern telling off.
And when you consider I suggested the French Rugby Union be “torn” I really can’t see how anyone in good faith can take that to mean I am advocating rape. The Rugby Union is an incorporated society.
I regret you found the comment upsetting, but I never imagined anyone would take such a common expression for a stern bollocking to be intended literally.
To be honest I am pretty appalled on the basis of that comment you feel you can state I advocated rape. Maybe you have never heard the expression before but saying I advocate rape on the basis of it, is like saying someone advocates a golden shower when they saw we pissed all over them.
Deborah // Friday 3 July 2009 at 9:03 pm |
That’s okay then, DPF. It was just violence you advocated, not rape.
vibenna // Friday 3 July 2009 at 9:06 pm |
Hard to find definitions of this, but urbandictionary.com is quite informative on rip a new asshole/tear you a new asshole:
“To get beat bad, massacred, or just plain raped”
“In use can be verbal abuse or a threat to actual physical harm, or in some cases could be quite literal: see prison pussy”
“Tear a new asshole may refer to total domination by an opponent similar to a gay rape where the attacker didn’t even bother to find to the actual asshole”
“What the other guys do to you when you drop a bar of soap in the shower in prison”
Well, I’m hardly unbiased. But that seems to be evidence. Got any evidence for your position, dpf?
David Farrar // Friday 3 July 2009 at 11:18 pm |
Vibenna – yes the first definition provided at Urban Dictionary is “An abusive sometimes angry critique of the victim’s actions or work.”.
Deborah – No I was not advocating rape or violence. I used a slang term for a verbal bollocking. Again – I was referring to the rugby union – not to any individual. My point was numerous people in the rugby union conspired to cover up the lie, so the French PM should be very angry at the rugby union for what they allowed to happen, and let them know how unhappy he is.
vibenna // Saturday 4 July 2009 at 7:01 am |
DPF – Yes, and the first web definition of rape is
“Eurasian plant cultivated for its seed and as a forage crop”
I don’t think you can look at one meaning to the exclusion of others. Deborah’s point was not that it was the only meaning, but that it was a clear meaning. And that because of this clear meaning, using the term fosters a language environment of sexual violence. I think the definitions above support her point, notwithstanding your alternative definition.
… personally, I have grave doubts whether we should be sending people to prison for committing the cultivation of Eurasian seed and forage crops.
giovanni // Saturday 4 July 2009 at 8:19 am |
I frankly despise the guy and everything he stands for, but to suggest to that he was inviting the prime minister of France to do anything other than strongly condemn the French rugby board for its handling of the case seems quite extraordinary.
You can open the big can of worms of whether this is violence enabling language, buying into a culture of rape, but it’s something quite different from the accusation you levelled at Farrar.
(And if you did want to open that can of worms, I’d have to respectfully ask you if you ever invited anybody to fuck off in your life, and if so what you actually meant when you said that.)
Deborah // Saturday 4 July 2009 at 9:53 am |
Well, I suggest that “go fuck yourself” invites you to engage in quite a different activity.
I find the level of verbal violence and hatred expressed by the Kiwiblog commentariat quite repulsive, and I think that DPF enables it to an extraordinary extent, then disclaims all responsibility. The use of violent language like this, saying that he wants someone to be raped, or in his words, “tears the French Rugby Union a new orifice”, then walking away saying oh no, it was just common everyday idiom, is emblematic of that.
giovanni // Saturday 4 July 2009 at 10:10 am |
Well, I suggest that “go fuck yourself” invites you to engage in quite a different activity.
Fuck off means something else though. But the point is that when you say either of those expressions you mean neither of those things, I think you’ll agree.
The use of violent language like this, saying that he wants someone to be raped, or in his words, “tears the French Rugby Union a new orifice”, then walking away saying oh no, it was just common everyday idiom, is emblematic of that.
The problem with the Kiwiblog commentariat is the substance of what they say, not the manner in which they say it. DPF chooses not to moderate it, and that does wonders to his traffic numbers I’m sure. He deserves to be called on that, and harshly. But your claim, repeated here, that he actually meant that Sarkozy should rape the French rugby board and now he’s trying to walk away from it is really hard to support I think. He meant no such thing – I didn’t think I’d have to say this, but how do you even rape a rugby board?
Carol // Saturday 4 July 2009 at 11:32 am |
I’d give DPF credit for his commentary on the Weatherston trial – but not for much else.
roger nome // Wednesday 29 July 2009 at 2:58 pm |
Farrar just doesn’t get it – it’s the symbolism in the idiom that’s the problem, not its vernacular meaning. doh!
roger nome // Wednesday 29 July 2009 at 3:00 pm |
“I find the level of verbal violence and hatred expressed by the Kiwiblog commentariat quite repulsive, and I think that DPF enables it to an extraordinary extent, then disclaims all responsibility.”
Yes – he is so disingenuous, always. That MO, particularly in realtion to the overt mysogeny, racism and general violence at kiwiblog makes my skin crawl.
Deborah // Wednesday 29 July 2009 at 9:31 pm |
Me too, roger nome. I read DPF’s posts, but I very rarely go into the comments threads at all.