The purpose of Bwog’s comment section is to facilitate honest and open discussion between members of the Columbia community. We encourage commenters to take advantage of—without abusing—the opportunity to engage in anonymous critical dialogue with other community members.
A comment may be moderated if it contains:
A slur—defined as a pejorative derogatory phrase—based on ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, ability, or spiritual belief
@Erm Did nobody understand what’s wrong here? Every single post seems to be wrong. HINT: It’s the word between “their” and “attempted”.
@sad bwog, you just lost another reader. this was in horrible taste.
@Are you telling me that the man who tried to put a rubber fist in my anus was a homosexual?
@also, bwog, i find this post very tasteless. would you point out a typo in an article about the VA Tech shootings? is this really the level of debate you want to foster around rape & sexual violence?
@Not the same Bad example, barnard student. A better example would be “would you point out a typo on an anti-gun poster?” The answer, if the typo was hilarious, would most likely be yes. You’re treating the Take Back the Night poster as if it was specifically related to the J-School case. Stop looking to be offended: Bwog did nothing wrong.
@Taste level i’m not sure what posting this online accomplished.
@Sprinkles I think the people who speak at Take Back the Night are incredibly brave, but I think that the event would have a lot more meaning if the women actually marched in places that had a significance to the idea of females being able to go where they want without fear of assault. When TBTN started in the aftermath of a spate of murders in Northern England in the 1970s, women marched through public parks where the victims had been found brutally murdered by a man known as the “Yorkshire Ripper.” Their point was to show that they would not be intimidated in their own hometowns by one maniac who was hell-bent on killing women. I think Take Back the Night has wonderful intentions, but why do they march on some of the streets that are already the safest places for women to be? If they were to walk en masse through Riverside Park it would have a more symbolic impact – that women should be able to feel safe in their own cities. Again, not to cheapen what they do, because it’s very admirable – just a thought. If we as women are to truly “take back the night,” we need to stare our fears in the face.
@well... if you go to the speak out at TBTN you will notice that the majority of instances of rape/sexual violence/coercion take place not as violent attacks on the street, but from people the women (or men) already knew, or even were dating. and those are often the ones that don’t get reported.
& when you consider those statistics, it makes sense that they’re marching around CU. i think that for many women, they don’t need to travel to riverside to stare their fears in the face.
@once and for all “rape survivor” doesn’t mean they’re a special group of people who didn’t die after being raped. it just means they experienced rape; it’s a more empowering way of saying “rape victim,” as #13 said.
@dude yeah! jokes having to do with rape are soooooo hilarious!
@McFister No, but fisting jokes are hilarious.
@Yeah but It’s not a joke about rape, it’s a joke about strange wording.
@except I have no clue if they were referring to bwog’s post, but they still could be referring to #6:
“How do you know when the rape has been ‘completed.’?
someone should come up with a good punchline to answer that.”
@Well, this just proves that spellcheck can’t catch ’em all…
@i assume that it uses the term “rape survivors” because they want to avoid using the word “victim”
@hrm so i’m guessing they aren’t excluding those who don’t survive being raped?
might that group technically include next to no one, since people die as a result of an act of ‘murder’ and less so as a result of an act of ‘rape’?
@umm the take back the night people are making a mockery of themselves. don’t take bwog to task because they don’t take their own event seriously enough to proofread.
@well... I don’t know who makes the posters, but errors show up in places where people seem to take themselves seriously (e.g., the Times), so I don’t think it’s an indication of seriousness as much as it’s more directly an indication of not being very good/attentive proof-readers (assuming their copy place didn’t screw up or something).
@Well I think they do take their event pretty seriously, hence the incredible number of posters they’ve blanketed campus with. It just seems like a post about the incredible prevalence of sexual violence in our community could have been more beneficial – and more tasteful.
@you from round here? Bwog? tasteful? seriously?
I think a lot of their readership sort of depends on that hint of dirty B@B-ness.
(see: pretty image of gun after Virginia Tech shooting)
@Honestly Some things you shouldn’t joke about. This is one of them. Seriously.
@Anonymous no one is joking about rape, we are poking fun at terrible, terribly writing.
@umm the fist thing isn’t even the weird part. “half of female rape survivors are younger than 18 when they experience their first…rape”. how can you experience your first rape if you’re already a survivor? I know what they were going for, but, um, no.
@stickler So it should (1) either be in past tense (“were younger…they experienced”), or maybe it should say “survivors-to-be”.
Nonetheless, I don’t find it “weird” at all; using a category in such a temporally ambiguous (or “weird”) way is incredibly common in English.
“Most bwog posters are over the legal limit of intoxication when they make their first post.”
It should be “were”, but if this historical trend seems to be ongoing (and Dr. Z. wants to emphasize it), then the present tense is not that weird (at least compared to how advertisers butcher the English language).
I still think the “fist” oversight seems much more weird.
@yo stickler The difference is that the condition of being a “rape survivor” is reached at some point after the rape, while “bwog poster” is a condition reached simultaneous with posting.
Of course, if “rape survivor” is a euphemism for “rape victim” then it makes more sense since one becomes a victim simultaneous with being assaulted.
@yo yo stickler I can agree with the difference you point between being a survivor and a poster, namely under conventional usage of “survivor.”
Indeed, however, I think it’s being used more as a euphemism.
@took me a while fist=first
@anon seriously guys, these rape jokes have me rolling on the floor. so funny!
@How do you know when the rape has been “completed.”?
someone should come up with a good punchline to answer that.
@Easy Obviously, if the guy finishes up, the rape is completed. Otherwise it’s just to be continued.
@but The poster only mentions “rape survivors”. That implies some women don’t survive rape. Why aren’t these women included in the statistics? Are they not legitimate rape victims?
@look at 13 yeah, i think it’s an empowerment thing.
@i don't get it where’s the typo?
@noitslavender No-no-no…it’s just too easy.
@Good God Everything inside of me is laughing at that typo, and everything outside is trying to cover that laughter up.
@Riven typos ftw… who double checks these flyers?