Revised and extended, in reply to the American Power post Realities of War? An Update:
---
One or two more bits about Cassandra.
1) I'm not seeing the hard-left, radical feminism in either of her arguments that Donald says he does. While I'm sure Donald's actions & reactions would likely've been different, does anyone doubt that Cassandra would've reacted any differently were it hottie sports reporter "Eric" Andrews who was videotaped in a hotel room naked, and fellow conservatives like Donald (though more likely "Donna" Douglas) were providing links to the illegally shot video in hopes of increasing their blog traffic?
Does anyone think that Cassandra's arguments about rape & incest victims would be any more or less forcefully argued by her if the majority of victims were men & boys, rather than women & girls? After reading a good deal of what she's written before and since, I sure don't.
While gender absolutely does play a part in sexual exploitation--be it voyeurism or rape--I submit that Cassandra's arguments against re-victimizing Erin Anderews and against photographing rape or incest victims are not based on the gender of the victim, but on the fact that the victim is a victim.
2) Cassandra's argument in the Erin Andrews matter is not inconsistent with her position here. In both (and seemingly all) cases, she believes that newsworthiness is not a sufficient argument for publishing photographs/videos of people against their (or their family's) will. That is true whether the person is a famous sports reporter, a member of the military who was injured or killed in the line of duty, or a rape/incest victim, or whether the person in the photograph is male or female.
While I don't agree with her argument equating soldiers with crime victims, her argument is consistent, and at least as rational as it is emotional.
Of course YMMV...
---
Sunday, September 6, 2009, 3:01 AM (AmPow blog time)
8 hours ago
.gif)
No comments:
Post a Comment