UNEQUIVOCALNESS

Though I won't post it here to protect her privacy, a video emerged on the internet around a month ago of viner Carter Reynolds attempting to force 16 year old then-girlfriend Maggie Lindemann into performing sexual acts on him, clearly without her consent. Despite her stating that she felt "really uncomfortable", Carter continued to pressure her for the duration of the video. He continued to ignore her lack of consent, and continued to manipulate her youth and her naivety to his own advantage. He continued to place his sexual pleasure above her will and comfort, stripping her of her rights in a way that cannot be excused, no matter how hard his "fans" try to brush it off as a "mistake".

Sexual assault, manipulation, and abuse is never a mistake. Abusers know what they're doing is wrong; they don't do it because they think it's right, they do it because they can, and the only way we can successfully combat it is by telling them that they can't. That they're wrong. That other people's bodies do not exist for their enjoyment and sexual satisfaction. Carter Reynolds does not need to be told that what he did was a mistake, Carter Reynolds needs to be told that what he did was disgusting and illegal and absolutely unjustifiable; not only his actions, but his response to the backlash.

Once Carter started receiving negative comments on Twitter in response to the footage, he immediately began to use his relationship with Maggie and his two million followers as a shield against abuse, from behind which he pulled the classic victim card, posting Tweets cleverly worded in such a way that his fans started to feel sorry for him.

Please, whatever your stance on Carter before the footage was leaked, do not feel sorry for this man. Playing the victim is a common reach among abusers, and your sympathy is what is allowing him to carry on manipulating people. He's manipulating his fans in the same way he manipulated Maggie. He's manipulating his fans to keep him out of jail so he can carry on posting nugatory vines that are all six seconds too long. He's desperate to be the victim, but why is it that 'victim blaming' only applies to those that have done no wrong?

You see, the constant manipulation of a two million strong audience has led Maggie to receive most of the blame. Maggie, the 17 year old (then 16) girl who was pressured into performing sexual acts, against her consent, on camera. It was well within her rights to refuse, and it was absolutely the right thing to do in the situation. Regardless of the fact Carter was pressuring her, regardless of the fact he was filming her, and regardless of the fact she was intoxicated, Maggie did not want to do what Carter was telling her to do, so she is in the right. Throughout this entire situation, she has been nothing but right. She deserves no backlash, yet she's getting the brunt of it, because victim blaming is ingrained in our minds.

We are taught "what was she wearing?" and "was she drinking?" and "was she out alone?" far sooner than we are taught "your body belongs to you". We are taught how to dress and how to act every day of our fucking lives so that our rights don't get violated, but our rights are our rights and they do not have conditions. Our rights are our rights and they are absolute no matter what. They are absolute however many talentless viners try to take them away. Maggie has done nothing wrong. She is not a "slut" or a "whore" and she wasn't "asking for it". She wasn't asking for anything then and she isn't asking for anything now. She isn't asking for brainwashed vine minions invading her Twitter interactions with "leave Carter alone". She isn't asking for the damage to her self-esteem and her mental health Carter has given her, but we live in a backwards world where victims get what they never asked for and abusers don't get what they deserve.

Maggie ended up in hospital because of Carter's abuse and the backlash it created. You'd think after the countless sympathy seeking Tweets he'd sent about how he still loves and cares about her, he'd be pretty worried, right? Wrong.

Not only did Carter change his tune immediately after he realised that there was no chance of him getting Maggie back, he yet again tried to play the victim card, as if this is a game. As if belittling someone you said you loved to the extent that they try to take their own life is a game. As if forcing yourself on someone you said you loved without their consent is a game. As if Maggie's entire fucking life is a game to him. Except he can't win. We can't let him win. He can turn this into Snakes and Ladders if he wants to, but we cannot let him go up any more ladders. We cannot let him get away with ruining somebody's life in the same way that we cannot afford to let anybody get away with sexually abusing and manipulating anybody else, regardless of their relationship status or the circumstances of the situation.

Carter thinks he can get away with what he did because he has seen others do the same. He watched youtuber VeeOneEye escape the blame for statutory rape; he watched Sam Pepper escape the blame for sexual harassment footage that he filmed and uploaded himself. Carter Reynolds is abusive and manipulative, and he cannot be allowed to escape the blame.

First, let me start off by saying that I absolutely do not believe that anyone 'famous' is under any obligation to act like a role model. People do not have to use their position as a platform for social justice, but all I ask is that they don't do the opposite. All I ask is that they don't take their 29 million Instagram followers and expose them to an agenda of unabashed ignorance; that they don't expose them to the appropriation of a culture that throws open a door into a world that most of them won't even understand.

In order to explain cultural appropriation, one must first explain cultures, and the ways in which cultural symbols were repurposed into symbols of defiance against systematic and institutionalised discrimination. Perhaps the example that causes the most uproar is "n*gger". There's an abundance of uneducated human beings who don't see the problem with white people with white skin and white agendas and white ancestors using a term that has been used for centuries to place anybody that isn't white below those that are in an unjust racial hierarchy; a hierarchy that justifies racism and racial exploitation, with whites at the top and blacks at the bottom, and everybody else in between.

"But it's just a lyric!" is one of the most common arguments for the justification of the use of the word by white people, when quoting the lyrics of singers and rappers that are, ahem, black. It's okay for black people to use the word because, culturally, it represents a symbol of defiance against its derogatory usage by racist whites. It's okay for black singers and rappers to use the word in their lyrics because, culturally, it represents that same symbol of defiance. 'N*gger' is a symbol of defiance; it isn't just a word. It was taken and adopted by white supremacists and abused in such a way that it can never be 'just a word' again. So it's okay for it to feature in the lyrics of black artists, but it's not okay for you to stand in a crowd at a concert and impertinently shout it back to them. Let them have it. Let them take the term that your ancestors used to belittle them, and let them use it to empower themselves. Stand back and let those that have been oppressed show a symbol of their defiance against their oppressors.

Let them have their terms, and their hairstyles, and their clothing and accessories, because they are not yours for the taking. Cultural appropriation isn't speaking a language, or following a religion, or eating foreign food. Cultural appropriation is taking an accessory that minorities have, for hundreds and hundreds of years, been ridiculed and oppressed for, putting a sequin on it, and calling it 'festival fashion'. Cultural appropriation is taking a hairstyle that black women have been told looks "messy", "gross" and "unprofessional" on them, manipulating the way your hair grows so you can wear it, and calling it a 'modern trend'. American actress Amandla Stenberg gives a perfect description in saying that "appropriation occurs when a style leads to racist generalisations and stereotypes where it originated, but is deemed as high-fashion, cool or funny when the privileged take it for themselves."

In the same video, Amandla hits back at socialite Kylie Jenner regarding this photograph she posted to her Instagram account of her wearing cornrows - a black hairstyle - stating that "braids and cornrows are not merely stylistic. They're necessary to keep black hair neat."

"I woke up like disss"

You don't have to be the biggest Keeping Up with the Kardashians fan to know that Kylie doesn't have "black hair". She has no necessity to wear her hair in braids or cornrows, whereas a large proportion of black women find it a must in order to keep their hair from matting and forming unmanageable knots. Of course, Kylie isn't the only white celebrity to have been seen wearing cornrows - her sisters Kendall Jenner and Khloe Kardashian have also been photographed wearing their hair in less obvious but still recognisable cornrows, with their faux-undercut styles being described as a "trend" originating in 2014. Cultural cornrows, though, can be identified in paintings of women that date back as far as 3000 B.C. - the Daily Mail was only 5000 years off, then.

"But it's just a hairstyle!" But it's not just a hairstyle. It's a symbol of defiance. You can eat Chinese food because Chinese food isn't a symbol of defiance. You can speak the Spanish language because the Spanish language isn't a symbol of defiance. But you can't wear cornrows because that's exactly what they are. Black women have been minimised and brushed under the carpet for wearing their hair the way they do, and for somebody at the top of the racial hierarchy to reach their hand under the rug, take their hairstyles, but leave behind the racist and life-threatening issues faced by these women, because that's the only part of black culture you want - the part that won't get you killed - is like a huge "fuck you" and probably the least helpful thing somebody can do to "fight racism". Appropriating minority cultures isn't giving them representation; it isn't giving them positive attention, it isn't giving praise to their culture, it's spitting on the centuries of work they've done to reclaim it and use it to empower themselves. It's spitting on their struggles and their hardships and their difficulties.

If you want to give praise to their culture, bring attention to the magnificent things those from minority cultures do that is of benefit to themselves and to our society - trust me, there's a lot to choose from. If you want to give them representation, give them representation, not their hair on your white head, or their terms of address coming out of your white mouth, or their defiance coming from somebody who does not need it. Being an ally doesn't mean giving white people the features of blacks and other minorities, being an ally means reaching out a hand and pulling them up the racial hierarchy so that they are at the same position we are; so that there isn't a hierarchy any longer, and being an ally is knowing when to take your hand away, knowing when your 'help' isn't needed, and knowing that it isn't always needed. This isn't our fight.

Subscribe to: Comments ( Atom )

Carter Reynolds

Cultural Appropriation