“It cannot be that bad,” an editor at Daily Beat professed when he explained they have not received any emails of messages complaining about the content of the article “How to be a Classy Female in Today’s Ever Demanding Club-Centered, Binge-Drinking, Drug Consuming Generation.” Bitchtopia already offered a direct response to the author of the article, but I had a conversation with this male editor in hopes he would recognize this piece was promoting victim blaming. Admitting he didn’t particularly like the article, he felt he could not infringe on the author’s 1st Amendment rights by removing the post. With all due respect, this article is not helping anyone except for those profiting from the page views.
Daily Beat responded to the critiques with:
“Hey Guys, Let’s just all lay this to rest and move forward. Daily Beat supports the American Constitution’s 1st amendment of freedom of speech. We appreciate the dialogue between all parties, but this article won’t be taken down. I don’t have anything else say on this matter.
Myself and Daily Beat”
As avid internet users, we are constantly being plagued with click-bait articles. These works, being titled and written by trolls, only have the end goal to outrage, insult, and drive page views upward. More clicks, more comments and eventually more profit. In fact, at Bitchtopia, we’ve decided to never link to the site “Return of Kings” again. The material exists to let audacity turn into a stream of viral content. Click-bait is not part of our dialogue. The equation is both clever and abusive. What about articles that are not intended to stir up controversy or drive clicks? What of the articles that, intended or not, promote problematic thinking? How “bad” do these posts have to be to be “that bad?” How does the Daily Beat distinguish between the two?
I understand Daily Beat’s right to keep their contributions public, but I do question their decision to keep this particular article in the public sphere because it is not giving anyone a good impression of the community being discussed. I do not participate with the EDM scene, but regardless of the music you dance to, the outfit you wear, or the amount of body glitter you douse yourself with, nobody has the right to mistreat you. The author of “How to be Classy” insists that “as a female you either accept that’s how club life is and stifle your freedom of expression, or you accept the treatment you’ll receive for how you present yourself.” I disagree wholeheartedly; no one should ever be told they must deal with being treated badly.
Another article, “10 Safety Tips Women Should Know When Going to Their First Music Festival,” addresses the same topic, but takes a much different stance than that expressed on Daily Beat. It address the kind of approach that should be taken to sexual violence in music venues. The author quotes a professor of his, “‘I’ve gone up to rooms alone with a guy. I have never been raped because I have never been with a rapist.’ It is not about the victim, the perpetrator makes that choice. Most men don’t rape, those that do usually have multiple victims throughout their life…Rape is a societal problem, not a self-help issue.” Try comparing this to Daily Beat’s article which states, “I am very sick and tired of girls calling guys pigs, because when you make yourself look like a cheap whore, guys will treat you like that.”
The main difference between these articles is the allocation of personal responsibility. The author of “How to be Classy” suggests that men do not have the mental capacity to respect someone who is dressed differently than themselves. Men are not responsible for their own behavior, it is completely dependent on the visual stimuli presented to them at the moment. This article suggests that men are incapable of treating people properly. Does this sound fair to anyone? I didn’t think so. Women should not have to carry the responsibility of other’s actions. We should be in charge of our own reactions and bodies, and men should be invited to do the same. The burden to make our club culture a safe and enjoyable space for all genders should be shouldered equally. I really don’t think it would be “that bad” at all.