Hi everyone,
I got a comment today on my post On Rape. I thought it was important enough to devote a post to the question and my response. Below is the comment, from a commenter who calls himself Future Rapist. Below that is my response. I invite you to read it through, and to join me in talking about this issue, because I think it is one of the most important topics we can ever talk about together.
Hi,
Actually I landed on this e-page while searching information, how to avoid women’s or girls? In my environment there are more women’s and girls with skirts and tops. I attempt many times to change the environment, as if my fate goes wrong where I go in some way or other way I have interact such women’s or girls. Most of time when self conious of herself, my mind never thinks of sex with her. But when women’s and girls are very open, I could hardly control myself. So far I am controlling by leaving the place of short time and join the work after sometime. On the other hand its not possible to leave such environment all the time.Anyways, I would like question the originator of the article and he/she defended the victim and blames fully on rapist.
My question is how he/she is going to mark a line in between seduction and attempt to rape or rape.
Your answer is highly appreciated for a guy like me who could be a future rapist.
Future Rapist
well, first of all, you’ve got a lot of guts to ask such a question. It sounds like you want to do the right thing, so I’ll answer your question, and hopefully it will help you, and the women you are in contact with.
First of all, you cannot assume that anything a woman does indicates she wants to have sex with you. Not the way she is dressed, not how she talks to you or acts toward you. Society puts a lot of pressure on women to be sexually suggestive, and that comes out in how women dress and act and talk. And even when you might be in an intimate situation with a woman, she might only be willing to do certain things and not be willing to do others. So don’t make assumptions about a woman’s desire by these things, as they are not necessarily indicators of what she wants.
The only way to make sure of what a woman wants is to ask her in a way that is sincere and not coercive. That means make it clear to her that you will not want to do anything that she doesn’t want to do. Let her know that it is important to you to
make sure she feels safe and secure and if she feels uncomfortable at any time that you will stop. Do not try to convince her to do something she has said she does not want to do. This is not seduction; it is coercion. If she says no, that is the end. NO MEANS NO. You must not continue to do anything that a woman has told you to stop doing. And here’s the trick: she might not tell you with words. She might tell you by moving your hands away, or trying to physically move away from you, or by not responding to you either verbally or physically. 70% of communication is physical, so pay close attention to what she is telling you with her body.
So, you have to respond to a woman’s “negative” body language that tells you she doesn’t like what you are doing, but you have to get confirmation from her in regards to “positive” body language that tells you she might want to be intimate with you. If you can’t get this confirmation, for any reason, then assume she does not want to be intimate with you. better safe than rape.
I’m a bit concerned with the way you seem to view women in general. Women are not objects to be used for men’s sexual gratification, or even just to be looked at and enjoyed, like pieces of art. Women are people who have minds and feelings and desires of their own. Women are not there to be used by or to serve men. They are not to be won over or convinced to do anything. Just removing yourself from the environment isn’t enough – you really need to rethink your attitude toward women. I suggest you seek out counselling to help you think about women in a more healthy and respectful way.
Sex is something that should be enjoyable for all parties involved, and something that all parties are comfortable with and want to do, at all times throughout the encounter. The idea that there is a point of no return is false: both men and women can stop at any time. It might suck, but it has to be done if consent is at issue.
Also, bear in mind that rape is not only wrong and immoral, but also ILLEGAL. You’re not just an asshole of you rape a woman – you’re also a criminal. Rape has consequences that are devestating to the survivor, both emotionally and physically. But rape also has consequences for the rapist. So if you’re not won over by appeals to refrain from hurting a woman in such a way, then perhaps you’ll be influenced by the legal consequences of rape.
I hope this is clear, and helpful to you. Please take this advice very carefully. Now you cannot say you didn’t know. Now you have the information you need not to become a rapist.
Thanks to Ruxandra for her help in formulating this response.
If any of my other readers have any suggestions for this commenter, please pitch in. I think this is an important topic – maybe the most important topic we can deal with on this blog. Violence against women is at epidemic levels, and it has to stop. One of the ways we can contribute to ending VAW is through discussions like this, so please, join me.
“better safe than rape”. Exactly. If you’re not sure, then don’t do it. I think thats a great general principle, although I imagine heat of the moment passion might threaten to overwhelm one’s better judgment, it must be resisted.
Thanks TG, and thank you Mr K for getting it. While I agree that passion can sometimes put on the “moral blinds” I do think that this can be overcome not only “in the moment” with a bit of consideration, but can be overcome in a broader way with the adoption of a more caring view of sex acts. If you enter a sexual situation with full and genuine consideration for oneself, and whoever else is involved, then making sure that they want what you think they want, or what you want, becomes part of the passion. I know that this is not present even in all consensual sexual encounters, but I do think that a reapproach to sex as something that is NOT shamefull or dirty, but rather something that two (or more, or one) person can enjoy with each other (or oneself) means that concern and respect for whoever else is involved becomes primary. Even if it is a one night stand, or even a twenty-minute stand, remembering that people are ends themselves, not just means to an end (ahh Kant) restructures the way that one engages in whatever it is that gets them off. In the short term however, a simpler “better safe than rape” rule is necessary.
OK – now I walk into a bar and there is a person who is “throwing money around” buying food and drinks for other people and being generally outgoing.
What is this person telling me? S/he wants me to take their money obviously – they are “talking to me” by their actions to others.
Did this person offer to give me – individually – a lot of money? No, but her/his body language told me a lot.
Scenario Two:
Now, this person bought me a drink. Well obviously this person found me attractive and this meant …..
Scenario Three:
Now I see this person driving this incredibly expensive car and wearing very expensive clothes and having very expensive jewelry on.
This obviously means that s/he is speaking to me and this means ….
Well obviously – it is different – When Sex may be involved! That plunging neckline – means that that young woman obviously wants ME (and specifically me) to “take care of her”!
Now – drinking – and hormones – may certainly affect behavior. One can always talk – ask questions – see where things may go.
Life isn’t always so simple and obvious, but often we can do better!
Thanks!
Am I missing something?
thanks everyone, for your participation.
Mr K
thanks. exactly. If you’re not sure don’t do it. better safe than rape.
M – I think your idea of approaching sex with respect is bang-on. I think it might help the situation if we all viewed everyone else with respect. The current social climate feeds into – has created? – rape because it does not encourage men to view women with respect. It’s strange the vascillation between treating women as objects and then asserting that women actively and autonomously choose to be treated like objects – ultimately making it seem like women are being used exactly as they want, and thus validating such treatment. The logic of rape is such that women’s purpose is to be available for sex at any time, and they either want to serve that purpose or they just need to be shown that they want it. So either way, it’s ok to rape women.
Geo
these examples and analogies are great, very useful in showing how ridiculous it is to read too much into someone’s actions. It’s crazy how much stock we put in someone’s non-verbal communications – so easily mis-read – and not enough in someone’s very verbal communication of NO. The old saying is so true “Which part of NO did you not understand?”
Human beings have very complicated mating rituals. It’s so much easier to be a cat or dog. If you were to sniff my butt and start pawing me, I’d know exactly how to respond. But those of us with larger brains have to acquire the careful ability to interpret each different signal in a way that brings rewards and pleasure, not punishments. Luckily, we also have the capacity for speech, so it’s really not that difficult after all.
In other words, if you’re not sure, ask. And if you think your signals might be misinterpreted, then clarify them. I sometime like to look sexy, but it doesn’t mean I want to have sex with every person who looks my way. I think I’ll put that on a t-shirt – a really sexy, low-cut t-shirt!
Yet, even as a feminist woman, I do understand that overwhelming feeling of compulsion when faced with a stunning body less than an arm-reach away. And I’ve had very open conversations about this situation with some male teachers who have serious problems teaching teenagers in tank tops. They don’t want to look, but struggle to look away. I don’t think we can judge that feeling, because, like all feelings, it just is. And I don’t think it necessarily implies an objectifying attitude (although the man writing you certainly seems to have some larger issues). When I find myself drawn to a person because of the way his/her clothes fit, or a gesture, or the way they walk, etc., I see it as a sign that I’m an animal too. Yet I’m a civilized animal who can think before acting.
I think we need to understand that feeling and work with it. I tend to just force my gaze away and keep the conversation from drifting into dangerous territory, but I’m lucky that I can keep my sudden arousal hidden until I can divert my line of thinking. The male teachers are not so lucky, but they came up with their own solution: think of dead puppies. Now in the warm weather, with classes full of explosed cleavage, they can confidently stand in front of the class by picturing carcasses strewn amongst the desks.
Some might find that image and solution disturbing, but I think: whatever works. I appreciate that they’re conscientious enough to find a solution that doesn’t attempt to change the behaviour or dress of the students, but instead works around the choices other people have made. They can’t help they way they feel when they see more skin than they’d like to in a work environment, but they CAN help they way they react to it.
I’m glad the writer has the sense to leave the room when he finds his feelings overwhelming. Kudos to him for that. And here’s hoping he can maintain his civility permanently.
i agree with sage that guys are to be congratulated for knowing it’s their responsibility to deal with their control problems and for the fact that they find ways to do so, if they continue to. even though it’s nothing more than the decent thing to do!
my advice to any man would be to ask himself, seriously, how they would view a situation in which it was him, or men in general, whose sexual integrity and agency was constantly threatened – if they were made to feel that they are and should be sexually available and vulnerable at all times… if say wearing a t-shirt or jeans (which we know are sexy!) was considered enough motivation for another person, a woman or a man, to force themselves upon them ’cause they couldn’t help themselves and their “natural” urges?
here’s something from a while ago: [prison] rape – it’s a poignant and thought provoking piece contrasting men’s outrage about rape of men and their lack of similar concern about rape of women (“What does it tell us that men’s most terrified reaction to the idea of prison is the fear that women experience all the time? What does it tell us that the worst punishment is to be made like a woman?”).
and i don’t know, to me it’s so obvious that there’s a difference between desiring something and feeling entitled to it! as human beings, we find ways to deal with our desires all the time; we have some definite rules and we know it’s not ok to encroach upon somebody else’s property, person, etc. – that if we have some desire it’s our issue, and our responsibility to deal with it. this is true for everything from wanting some object [given that stealing from somebody is wrong] to wanting to hurt someone we’re angry with [given that committing violence against somebody is wrong]… popular wisdom and laws tell us we need to negotiate and obtain consent and not hurt other people in these kinds of situations. yet when it comes to whether they’re simply entitled to sex – just because they happen to want it – men are generally taught something else completely. which is partly what the reminder that “rape is about power, not sex” is getting at, right? (that it’s an act of violence and it’s defined by lack of consent and not by its sexual nature!)
while it isn’t only men who rape (and/or sexually harrass), or only women who are victims, the thing is that on average, in our culture, women don’t think of other people as automatically sexually available to them. why? because we don’t get this societal sanction (and even encouragement) to view others as objects at our disposal, like men do. and neither do we learn to hold others entirely responsible for our own desires and to blame them for our reactions when they’re inappropriate!
i just think we need to point out, as much as possible, how ridiculous the whole “women dress provocatively so how are men supposed to help themselves?!” line of argument really is (though it sounds so familiar and most people totally buy it). those social constructions that allow us to expect people to be sexually available to us (or not) are actually pretty independent of this issue of momentary lust and arousal which of course we all feel sometimes ’cause we’re human. yeah, women as well as men can get aroused by certain sights and it’s completely natural, BUT we know that 1. anything can be arousing, after all (a fully clothed body sometimes even more than a naked one, etc.) and 2. at any rate, what we find arousing is heavily influenced by other factors, associations, images and ideas we already have. … we do know that “temptation” of all kinds is out there (see geo’s comment), right? and we deal with it. so why would sexual “temptation” be a special case? if we would never justify murder, for instance, how can one think about justifying rape in any way?
to quote propagandhi (some awesome canadian guys, btw), “if everything desired’s objectified, then maybe eroticism needs to be redefined.” i quote the lyrics to this song way too much in general, but in this case it’s particularly relevant:
[…] This email is from Thinking Girl, who posted the semi-literate would-be rapist’s psychotic remarks on her blog. These remarks reveal a chappie in a state of stunning oblivion; unable to distinguish between sex and violence, he views “women’s [sic] and girls in skirts and tops” as receptacles he’s just gotta penetrate, seems bummed that Thinking Girl does not advocate blaming the victim even a little bit, and asks “how he/she is going to mark a line in between seduction and attempt to rape or rape.” […]
Sex education in schools needs to be not only about birth control and how to put condoms on. It needs to be about feelings. When I talk to my 14 year old son about sex, I tell him that he needs to make that his partner is having sex for the same reason that he is. If you can’t talk about it, then you shouldn’t be doing it. Sex is more than just physical interaction … it’s about feelings and intimacy. It’s fun, healthy and A BIG DEAL!
–L
Hi folks,
Sage – thanks for your perspective, it’s always a pleasure. I think you make a really important point – it’s not about making the feelings themselves into something negative. The feelings of sexual arousal are an important part of being human, I think, and one of the last connections we have to those funny things we call our bodies. It’s all the things that go into informing sexual desire and arousal, and what you do about those feelings, that is where things go awry. It’s stressing that we are repsonsible, and we do have the ability to rationalize. We are not just bundles of hormones and nerve endings. We have developed morality, rationality, and we have to use them.
Ruxandra – everything you said. Totally. Brilliant. and love the song lyric quote. My best friend can attest to my penchant for song lyric quotation! I pretty much have to refrain from doing it in every post. 🙂
But seriously, why should sexual temptation be such a special case? I think it has to do with the privileging of biological models of what humans are like, should be like, cannot help but be like. Sex is seen as a biological function, as essential as kidneys filtering all the crap out of our systems, and our lungs breathing air, and our hearts pumping blood. It’s seen as a biological urge on par with these other bodily functions: something that can’t be helped, it’s just the way bodies are, the way humans are, we have to propagate the species, etc. What a load of CRAP. Consider how much societal influences sexual desire and arousal, and tell me it’s a purely biological function.
Laverne – thank god you’re talking to your son sensibly about these matters. I think sex ed needs a MAJOR overhaul in general, including discussions about same-sex sexual relations and non-reproductive sex from an early age by caring people whose job it is to educate about sex and sexuality. We need to stop scaring the bejeezus out of our kids and preaching abstinence as the only choice. We need to bring back petting, for crissake! There’s no first-base, second-base, third-base anymore – it’s straight for home these days (and by home I mean male orgasm)! There’s no exploration of sexuality, no way to express sexual feelings outside of sex these days – unless of course it has to do with girls servicing male pleasure orally. That’s just for kicks and laughs these days. Where is the intimacy?!?! I agree: sex is a big deal. Sex is everything and nothing in our society – everything in that everything is about sex, it’s everywhere you look and listen, and nothing in that it’s no big deal. Well, I think that’s not true, and very dangerous. I think sex is a big deal. There. I said it.
Guys are so separated from what real women are. Thanks, porn industry!
Twisty -thanks for the linkup!
The only thing I would have added to your letter is that in addition to feeling moved by the threat of legal consequences if he fails to read any “no”s in a woman’s body language, he should feel moved by the threat of physical consequences if he fails to read any “nos” in a woman’s body language.
It is extremely dangerous to have this dialogue with well-intentioned men, in front of an audience of women, and keep reinforcing the myths that 1) men have physicial power over women and that 2) women will never (or cannot) deliver painful consequences if their boundaries (that is, their various forms of “no”s) are not respected.
I just posted some comments on the subject over on my blog, and I’ll add a few persuasive points from the word document I attached to the letter I describe there:
Self-defense author Ellen Snortland (acclaimed by Gavin de Becker, author of The Gift of Fear) writes in her book Beauty Bites Beast:
“Perhaps when there is a critical mass of women who know how to fight, there will be fewer men who will even attempt to batter or physically threaten women.”
(I wrote:
From Gavin de Becker’s foreword to Beauty Bites Beast:
I think my favorite catchphrase from his foreword is “delivering consequences to deter unwanted behavior.”
That said, we do NOT currently live in a society full of women willing to deliver consequences to deter unwanted behavior.
Therefore, the bulk of your letter is fine as it is.
But if you have to do anything similar again, or if any readers here decide to engage in such a discussion, please include my point. The only way we’re going to make it so we DO live in a society full of women willing to deliver consequences to deter unwanted behavior is if we start making the behavior normal by acknowledging that it does happen. One important place to acknowledge it is in “raping-avoidance lessons.” It is in those lessons that we make some of the most harmful implications by omission.
Future rapist? That person is going to be a future ‘prison bitch’ …..the only answer is therapy, and/or castration for their kind.
Hi KitKat
thanks for your comment. You’ve got a good point – not all women are helpless victims. Some women are perfectly capable of doing serious damage to a man trying to rape her.
I see nothing wrong with encouraging women to learn how to protect themselves. The only problem I have with taking this tack is that it places a burden on women to avoid being raped instead of on men to not rape women.. Responsibility for rape does not fall with the victim – it falls with the rapist. I do worry that too much emphasis on self-defense will lead to more victim-blaming in the form of “why didn’t she defend herself? why didn’t she take a self-defense class? why didn’t she do more to avoid being a victim?”
blaming rape victims for rape is a complete contradiction in terms. I think we must be careful in terms of advocating self-defense for women – it cannot be the only action that we as a society takes against rape, and the onus has to be placed firmly on the shoulders of rapists for rape. Violence against women committed by men can only really be ended by men stopping the violence. We need to find ways to make that happen.
Latzelinc
Thanks for stopping in – it’s nice to have another man on the side of not raping women. I agree, therapy is a good idea. But also important is a shift in how women are viewed in society that has perpetuated the problem of rape. Treating this is an individual problem isn’t the ultimate answer – rape is a social problem. Rape is a hate crime, and the response society, including our laws, our juries, our elected officials, and our friends and neighbours, have to rape is a threat to women’s citizenship.
I would personally advise someone who feels he has to avoid women altogether to avoid raping them to get help. This may indicate a serious mental disorder which should not go untreated!
Djiril
very nicely put. thank you for your comment!
In my blog post, in that “point number 7,” I address that partially.
I’ll address it more fully here:
You are right, BUT…
We have been ignoring the important rape-reducing work that we need to be doing because of this fear we have about victim-blaming.
We need to be teaching men that women are something to be afraid of. We need to be teaching women that they can throw off their conditioning and become something to be afraid of. (Or just teach girls from the very start instead of letting them get conditioned that way.)
AND…AT THE SAME TIME…
We need to keep arguing for legal and moral judgment of rape victims who did not defend themselves according to the status quo conditioning of women. If someone tries to argue, “But women are dangerous! Why didn’t she make herself dangerous?” we need to say, “1) You’re still in the minority for understanding that women can be dangerous. Most women do not yet understand this. We are spreading this story trying to make it truer each year, but it is not yet true, and therefore, you cannot judge a woman for not yet knowing that she can be dangerous. She is still living under status quo conditioning and needs the full protection of the law as such a woman. 2) Even if she did know how to be dangerous, that is only one tool in the ‘toolbox’ of self-preservation strategies. [See my point #7 in my blog post.] Submitting and tattling later is another perfectly valid decision, even if the woman happens to be armed with the knowledge of how to make herself dangerous. She possesses fantastic intuition, like every animal, and it should be assumed that she was lucid enough to decide that this, not fighting, was the best option for her self-preservation. Therefore, she should not be considered any less ‘raped’ because she decided that she would submit and tattle later. This testimony right now IS her self-defense / self-preservation act.”
I know it’s long and complicated, but the best solutions to problems always are.
We have GOT to start doing this work and explaining how it doesn’t contradict our other work if we want to really reduce violence against women a lot. Avoiding this work because we’re too afraid people won’t buy the explanation and will reject our other work is NOT going to reduce violence against women as much.
regarding self defense: i agree with thinking girl, while it can only be a beneficial thing for more women to learn self-defense techniques, to feel strong and to project that (personally, i’ve taken self-defense and protest/rally security workshops that i enjoyed greatly – and i love knowing that i have some skills which i can use to defend myself and others…), the most important thing is for men to stop raping, not for women to learn to protect themselves from rape! and men need to stop raping because it’s wrong, not because they are scared that women might fight back.
first of all, i don’t think it’s generally true that women don’t fight back or that men don’t think women will fight back… just like it’s not true that the majority of rapes are committed by psychopaths (as many as 80% of aggressors are people whom the survivors know and/or trust), or that all rapes involve physical threats (verbal threats can be just as effective). plus, not all rapes are committed against women, or by men. and something like half of all rape victims are children. so really, given all this, i question the usefulness of the point that “propaganda that it’s normal and natural to ‘deliver consequences to people who disrespect one’s boundaries’ is going to prevent more violence against women than propaganda about the ‘right not to have one’s boundaries disrespected.'” sure, but the most violence will be prevented with propaganda that people have a responsibiltiy not to rape! which is what this post is about… in fact, i think it’s actually more dangerous to suggest that we could address the problem if only women learned how to fight back and made men aware that we could – as thinking girl said, that’s essentially going back to the problem of blaming the victim. after a certain point, it sounds like saying that “more murders could be prevented if people were better able to defend themselves” – which though true doesn’t help, you might as well say “if fewer people were alive there would be fewer murders.” it’s also very dangerous to keep promoting the myth that rapes are only stranger-on-stranger crimes committed by pshychopaths, when the bulk of the problem is actually our rape culture, in which all men are encouraged to view women as available sexually, and in which, for instance, so many (“regular”) people – men and women by the way – subscribe to the idea that a woman who dresses or acts “provocatively” was “asking for it” to a certain extent…
another thing that i wanted to mention was another lyric that propagandhi sometimes adds at the end of that song i quoted: “dead men don’t rape. a gender war in your f@#*ing face. a battle hymn to celebrate the fact that we don’t have to become or remain what we’ve come to hate…” it occurred to me that i hadn’t thought too much about it, but it makes me pretty uncomfortable. i agree with the basic idea, that violence against women and rape culture are a war, pure and simple, and besides i see “we don’t have to become or remain what we hate” – as a real solution for everyone, it’s so well put! but i’m a pacifist and i don’t like the language (“war”, “battle”, the whole “dead men” sentiment which taken as a slogan is just as gratuitously violent as those that propagate vaw, in my opinion), and i just don’t think it’s radical (in the sense of eradicating problems from the roots).
i read what was written over at i blame the patriarchy, and i have the same criticism: if we want to stop vaw, and all our culture of violence in general, we need something more than simplistic, black-and-white points of view, non-radical “radical” stances and violent slogans! anger is good, but violence is violence.
btw, i looked up “dead men don’t rape” because i know it’s something associated with andrea dworkin but not too much more about the history and use of the slogan, and i found this: dead med don’t: some trouble with feminist graffiti. i recommend reading the whole thing, it’s really really good and it touches on a lot of stuff that’s been said here and at ibtp!
(sorry for rambling on, i’m having a hard time articulating all of what i want to say on this topic, and i don’t have time to polish what i write at all.)
* and sorry for the errors: there shouldn’t be a link for “f***ing” 😀 (i guess it’s because i used the “at” symbol in it) and “dead med don’t” should of course be “dead men don’t” for the link to the mind the gap cardiff blog.
Ruxandra, I did not mean to imply that I am talking about women learning “to protect themselves from rape.” I’m not. I know that’s what self-defense talk is often associated with, and hey, I think it’s a great fringe benefit of learning self-defense, but it’s not why I advocate self-defense.
The reason I advocate “physical feminism,” as Martha McCaughey calls it, is because I want feminists to get behind the idea of women acquiring a whole new stereotype in society. Learning self-defense is not about “protecting oneself from bad things,” in my opinion–it’s about “transforming the stereotype of the average woman in the mind of the average man from the status quo of ‘relatively defenseless’ to ‘as defensible as any man I might meet’.”
This strategy WILL change the men and make them stop raping! YES, we should still try to appeal to men’s consciences–no reason to throw that advocacy project by the wayside–but we should ALSO focus more on our long-ignored project of trying to appeal to conscienceless men’s fear of injury.
(And, as I said in a comment that I’m waiting to have unmoderated, I do NOT think that our work to make that happen will undermine our our past, present, and future work to get good treatment for women who are victims of the status quo ‘relatively defenseless’ stereotype.)
I think you keep thinking that I want these arguments to happen as a replacement to our current arguments. I don’t.
I am saying that they need to be included in all our discussions. Alone, they would be no more effective than our current efforts to 1) appeal to men’s consciences and 2) get fair and understanding/sympathetic treatment for women because most of our ‘toolboxes’ only include the tools of the ‘relatively defenseless’ have been.
I am saying that our efforts are incomplete, and that the absence of the incredibly promising third effort–(really a 2-part strategy) a) appealing to conscienceless men’s fear of getting injured and b) helping women have the tools to make this new stereotype of women a well-known reality–is horrifyingly ubiquitous in our “#1” & “#2” advocacy efforts.
i see what you’re saying, but i think that it’s an argument that revolves around certain myths about rape, as i explained above. i TOTALLY agree with you that women in general should create a new “stereotype”, that we should make the whole “women are the weaker sex” idea as obsolete as possible. (i also happen to think that that‘s a very true stereotype – we’re not actually weak though we’re told we are and men tend to like to think we are.) i guess i just don’t particularly agree with making this point a major one in the context of rape and sexual violence, because of the whole “blaming the victim and holding the victim responsible for the acts of the aggressor” issue… and i guess i personally don’t think that threat of violence should form the basis of any justice work.
* “i also happen to think that that’s a very true stereotype” should read “i also happen to think that that’s not a very true stereotype”
But Ruxandra, if not in that context, then in what context? You said that “men tend to like to think we are [weak].” Doesn’t that imply that it’s quite an important strategy in the context of rape and sexual violence reduction, considering that these two types of violence are attempts at feeling a power differential?
What other context is fighting this stereotype important in?
well, in all contexts… it should be part of us breaking down “gender” as we know it. but i think saying that in order to eliminate rape women need to work to eliminate the power differential that exists crosses very quickly into letting men off the hook, both in the short and long term – it can come dangerously close to saying that taking advantage of a power differential (whatever it may be) is only “natural” as far as sexual violence is concerned, or to having it be interpreted that way, which it already is. and i find that problematic especially considering the actual statistics about rape (that stranger-on-stranger rape is relatively rare, that it’s not just physical force that’s used, that lots of children are victims, that we have the whole system of prison rape, etc.). you know? i think that the real power differential is not the problem – because it’s not an absolute or given thing – but the way men are taught to think about gender relations and/or their prerogatives as men in the patriarchy. more generally speaking, i think there’s a problem with the way we all are encouraged to go about creating all kinds of power differentials and for what ends we feel we are allowed to use them in society (which is a very gendered thing). something like that…
Well, hmmmm…would you get behind working to change this power differential for the sake of unconditioning women, Ruxandra? I mean, okay, you could say that goes back to “preventing rapes in the moment,” which we both agree is not a long-term strategy…but…I don’t know…shit…
Well, here…how about this…
Using it as a strategy to reduce individual instances of rape (yes, yes, teaching women to “prevent rapes”) in the short/medium term while we work on our longer-term goal of changing the way men are taught to think about gender relations. Because these rapes we’re talking about preventing happen to REAL PEOPLE who have to deal with the trauma of real rapes until we feminists figure out how to change the lessons men get. Can’t we take a few more hours a week and put a little more work into reducing their experiences of rape while ALSO keeping up our efforts on changing the way men are taught to think about gender relations?
Ooh! Ooh! Now I remember my stronger argument.
IMPACT and other full-force, adrenaline-state self defense classes always gets lots of students talking about how the way they interact with men in general changes afterwards. Less afraid of violent retribution if they anger a man, they can get closer to them and talk to them about more potentially angering things. They find that they can say things that need to be said that they were previously afraid to say because men were the “physically violent if offended” social category, but that now that was irrelevant.
Okay, most women report increased communication power with respect to how they deal with bosses, beggars, etc.
But some of them have reported being able to talk to their husbands, friends, coworkers, son’s boy scout leaders, etc. about things they’re doing that are hurtful to them as women or to women in general. They have reported that they are able to take the conversation where it needs to go because though they always knew that a violent reaction to the conversation was a low probability, now they know that this low-probability event is not even something they can’t handle. And so they end up doing important reteaching to men about gender relations because they no longer have that “What if this conversation doesn’t work?” fear keeping them from having the conversation.
I’ll bet that if lots and lots of women of a feminist bent had this kind of training (and had it because other women of a feminist bent pushed and pushed and pushed for it to become widespread and well-funded), we’d achieve our longer-term goal of reteaching men even faster…say…maybe in the short term.
I don’t quite know what you mean by “the real,” and if its opposite is the same as “not absolute” or “not given,” since you actually contrast “real” with “absolute or given,” but anyway…I think I kind of have enough gist of this sentence…I think you’re just again saying that you don’t think changing men’s perception of a [physical] power differential is going 1) make them rape less or 2) perceive gender relations differently.
I might agree w/ #2 when it comes to the conscienceless who couldn’t be persuaded by appeals to their consciences in a million years. On the other hand, changing perceptions of power differentials by gender might be a shortcut way to make more conscienced men reconsider gender relations. Might. I’m not sure. You might be right that that just ain’t happeninin’.
I disagree w/ #1, but I don’t care to try to convince you of it, because I’m happy just moving on and discussing the stuff I put in boldface. Thanks! You’re fun to talk to.
just a question… what are your views about kids born out of rape? esp. considering abortion is banned legally or religiously or morally.
Thinking Girl, kudos for giving a thoughtful answer to a question that you could have easily written off or made fun of.
It SHOULD go without saying that wearing provocative clothing doesn’t translate into promiscuity, that promiscuity doesn’t translate into forfeiting the right to say no, etc. Unfortunately, these things do actually need to be said.
At the end of the day, self defense classes are great, and realistically necessary, but the real way to prevent possible “future rapists” from becoming real rapists is to have serious discussions about the way that men think about women and sexuality.
http://phonelesscord.wordpress.com/2006/11/03/australian-cleric-sheik-taj-aldin-al-hilali-sucks-at-feminism/
I’ve never associated this admission with my wordpress.com account – nor – I don’t think – have I admitted it to strangers at all before. But I think there is another page to this book that needs to be said.
I am male. and
I was raped.
grandfather.
I know many theories of personalities, child development etc.. and none has helped me understand his state of mind more than face to face confrontation. No, it was not easy..far from it. But standing in front of him, grown up, 6foot tall and built like a rugby player, I knew his desire for control and power was diminishing in seconds.
I saw him scared from just looking in my eyes and I knew he would never have the power to do anything to anyone again.
Rape is an emotionally charged subject, and I do apologise to those posting lengthy replies as I do not have the ability to read through them comfortably. One day, I will return to this post and give your replies their due time and attention. I promise.
Thanks.
I’m not arguing about this “getting feminists behind physical feminism” thing because I think it’s “the real way,” but because I think it’s the too-long-understated-or-ignored prong of the multi-prong “real way.”
Do you really believe that there’s a “the” real way? That “the” real way isn’t actually a multi-pronged approach? 😦
Hi all,
Sorry, I’ve been at work all day and not able to moderate comments. Thanks for continuing in my absence.
Go KitKat and Ruxandra, go! You two are having a really great and interesting discussion. For my part, I get what you’re saying KitKat. I don’t think you’re advocating self-defense in place of the hard (er?) work of gender destruction. I understand your argument to be about reconstructing “women” as strong and capable rather than weak and defenseless. But I’m not abandoning my and Ruxandra’s concerns that this is not enough, and that it might slip-slide into victim-blaming.
What if the response men had to women being strong and able to defend themselves was to get more violent and more physically powerful?
Pegasus
thanks for your question. I have the greatest respect for women who *choose* to give birth to and even raise children that are the “product” of rape. I wouldn’t be able to do that. Of course, it is no fault of the child’s that its father was a rapist. However, I absolutely 100% support women’s rights to abortion in any circumstance. I happen to think that denying women who have been raped access to abortion is irresponsible and completely reprehensible, and maybe just as morally wrong as the rape itself. But then, I believe women must have access to abortion no matter the circumstances, and that denying any woman access to abortion for any reason is morally wrong and irresponsible and reprehensible.
Phonelesscord
your screen name is a tongue twister for me! I like it!
thanks for your comments. and for that link – made me laugh, in an ironic way of course. I agree with you all the way.
Matt
Thank you very sincerely for sharing your experience. I’m very sorry about what happened. You have my standing ovation (literally, I just finished) for having the courage to confront your rapist-grandfather like that. That took a lot of guts. Good for you. I hope you got – and are getting – the help and support you need to deal with your experience of rape and incest.
Rape certainly doesn’t just happen to women (overwhelmingly, but not exclusively). People of all genders experience rape, and people of all genders can be rapists. I think stories like Matt’s show that rape is inherently about power.
I can’t help but think that rapists must really hate themselves. I think we can all relate to the idea of a person with low self-esteem putting others down to make himself/herself feel better. Rape takes that toa whole other level. I especially don’t understand how many rapists dehumanize their victims (my friend MaxJulian at TheFreeSlave just talked about this in terms of white slaveowners raping black slaves) – and then have SEX with them, put their most prized possessions, their penises, inside of these beings they have just stripped of humanity and made into animals in their minds. That’s a whole lot of self-hatred going on.
Can I convince you to side with my concerns that “gender destruction” is not enough, and that ignoring reconstruction of “women” as strong and capable when we write about “gender destruction” and such might slip-slide into making lives worse…or at least making fewer better than we could?
(Oh, and I changed my display name from kitkatwp to Katie, in case anyone is confused. Seems WordPress can’t figure it out and has now put me back into the moderation-before-posting list. Woohoo! *snicker*)
Whoops, ThinkingGirl, missed your response here.
I don’t think that this is what the anecdotes & studies would imply. I suppose I can’t guarantee it, but I just…I don’t know…reading the physical feminist lit just gives me this hunch that that isn’t the way it’d work out.
Among the anecdotes I’m thinking of are the “Look at the way men act around each other” ones. Another set is the “Look at the animal kingdom” ones. I guess I feel like if we experienced what it’s like to be closer to a natural state for a while, the trend would be to stay that way, not for us to suddenly jerk the other way and start living in a farther-from-natural state in this respect. I mean, do males of other intelligent animals with societies go and powerlift to make sure that they can’t get their legs bitten off by females they attack, or do they just…I don’t know…treat all strong versus weak animals of their species according to non-gender-based tendencies of cruelty, because they’ve just been living with this assumption that strong/dangerous is strong/dangerous, male or female?
Meh. I’m getting too wordy here and risk detouring the conversation into a subtopic that I don’t even know how to respond to yet (haven’t gotten my thoughts together) and feel is unlikely to be a problem when I’d rather be talking about the subtopic I can speak a little bit more on and feel is likely to be a problem (that is, the question I just asked 2 posts ago).
Off work now…toodle-oo!
This thought provoking discussion has moved me to make several comments, the first being this:
We can judge a society, a culture, a religion, a people, but the way they treat their women.
That being said, I think, as some have said here, that we are in the middle of a war, of many wars at this point in our history on this planet. The war of VAW is not a gender war, however, but a war between those who condone and commit the violence, and those who are opposed to it.
It is important to recognize there are many levels and layers involved in implementing social change, and real change cannot be accomplished if we do not realize this and commit to seeing the stages through. We cannot have “peace” at this point if half of the parties involved will not stop committing violence. Therefore, as I see it, at this stage in the change, we set up our idealism of a violence free society as our end goal, and get to fighting the battles necessary to get there now. Embracing idealism at the wrong time leads to naivete, which leads to victimization.
I see two strategies available to our side–the side against VAW. Our allies are most women, and men who support us. As women, we must fight to protect ourselves, and I myself carry a weapon with me wherever I go. I purchased my gun when I opened a storefront in my town only to find out a rapist ran a shop two stores down. This rapist had managed to get his victims to recant their testimony with intimidation, and local law enforcement officers whom I was acquainted with warned me about the fact that he was very dangerous and encouraged me to get protection. I learned how to use my gun, because one should never own one without knowing how to use it, and being certain that you can use it without hesitation if necessary.
How many women would not be raped and would be alive today if they had guns? How many rapists would hesitate if they knew that they would die if they tried to hurt women? Men who rape are operating from primitive levels. Men operating at these levels respond to pack mentality, which is well known in the male community.
Men who rape don’t care that women don’t want them to rape or that women tell them to stop. Men who rape won’t listen, or change because it is “wrong”, or they wouldn’t rape to begin with. Our male allies can exert peer pressure against these men, by making it unacceptable in their male culture to treat women inappropriately. It needs to be a joint movement of men and women if we are going to make a change. Men who rape have to be reconditioned, retrained, and will only listen, if they listen at all, to other men.
It is vital, if you are really interested in helping to create social change to study the parties involved in the issues you are concerned with. Look at how violent men are controlled in prison populations by other prisoners. Study their psychology, their backgrounds, their lives. We must all be anthropologists, sociologists, psychologists, and students of our culture if we are to be at all effective. So often people talk about what needs to be done, but fail to take the next step to make change.
Thank you to my brothers out there who embrace civility, love, union, and respect. So often you are not recognized for your loyalty, and the protection and support that you so want to give your sisters. I condemn all feminists who stereotype and lump all men into one category. They are as much a part of the problem as those who they seek to suppress them.
Sorry–an after-thought/comment as to the nature/mind of sex-offenders:
I used to be a child abuse investigator. I have been trained to understand (at least somewhat) the mind of pedophiles, and bring this up because some comments included sexual violence against children. In the case of pedophiles, there IS NO CURE–there is no conditioning, re-conditioning, educating, or changing their nature.
Pedophiles exist, and structure their lives, actions, and behaviors to the soul end goal of being child predators. Period.
I think that they should be in a separate discussion therefore from rapists who target adults because there is a different brain/thought structure more often in these two types of offenders, serial rapists aside.
This is not to at all imply that the victims of child sex crimes are any less effected or traumatized, and may, from my experience, be more so in many cases.
Matt–you’re a hero! I love you!
–Unknown Pundit
@matt: thanks for sharing your experience, i am so sorry you had to go through it. and i second what thinking girl said – congratulations for your courage, and i hope you have the support and help you need as a survivor!
@katie: first of all, i also can attest to the usefulness and “empoweringness” 🙂 of those kinds of workshops, so i know exactly what you’re talking about; but i think that stuff you put in boldface also answers the question you asked me: in what contexts it can be useful for women to feel stronger and more assertive, if not rape? i think we agree that in all aspects of life…
then, to adress your point that
yes, i absolutely agree with this, but:
– i don’t know if it’s more feasible (or faster) even in the short term to teach all women self-defense than to teach all people not to rape because it’s wrong, it’s despicable, it’s illegal, and to ensure and make it clear that in our society rapists will suffer consequences (sure, including the possibilty that the vicim will fight back and they will get hurt physically);
– if we put accent on learning self-defense, and make (some) women feel safer because they have a set of skills that might help them fight back, what about everyone else? what about children – and all those other people who for some reason or another will not have such skills and will be at a physical disadvantage in a violent encounter?
– again, the great majority of rapes are not “stranger rapes,” and in lots of cases the aggressors use threats and coercion that are not (only) physical in nature;
– in fact, there’s so many types of rapes, rape is so pervasive and culturally sanctioned, and the common denominator is not how the aggressor behaves or would/does react to the behavior of the victim, but the starting mentality that raping another person and thus asserting your power over them is somehow acceptable;
– thinking girl’s question is very good: “What if the response men had to women being strong and able to defend themselves was to get more violent and more physically powerful?” – who can know?!?
– and based on that last point, one personal problem i have with bringing self-defense to the forefront too much is that it seems to me that approach is ultimately about increasing aggression, in general, and not decreasing it. or about resignation to the fact that we’ll always have violence coming from men, and we might as well all learn to be violent. and that’s something i am very very weary of!
anyway, maybe this clarifies a bit what i meant with my comments regarding the “real”/strictly physical power differential?
i know that during my rape crisis training i learned that fighting back during an assault can be anywhere from life-saving to deadly, and that basically women need to (and do) use their best judgement as to what course of action on their part will mean they have to suffer the least harm… with that in mind, of course it’s true that many women don’t have the experience and skills to truly hurt someone back who’s attacking them, so we should try to change that as much as possible. this, for instance, supports much of what you’re saying, katie, and i think it’s a very strong argument for promoting self-defense courses! but when one talks about rape in general, one has to take into account the complexity of the issue. here’s a couple of other things i found that do that, but you probably have lots of information, i for one would be very interested in any additional resources:
source
source
[this was way too long… but i also liked this conversation even though it’s so rambling and disorganized, at least on my part!]
You wouldn’t feel that way if you sat in on one of the padded assailant / adrenaline state classes.
They do a lot of inspiring talking about how a huntress isn’t out to occupy her place in this world by taking from others…she just refuses to be taken from.
And actually, in the men’s self-defense courses that a lot of IMPACT-ish chapters run, apparently they focus on helping people learn to control aggression and relearn what its proper place is. (Actually, that’s something that the traditional martial arts have always focused on, which is another reason they’re a better starting place for men than for women–in general, we already know how to be restrained!)
Anyway, like any pursuit out there that people teach or do, it’s easy to worry about it until you see how all the existing practitioners are actually doing it. Then you just kind of don’t worry about it anymore. Like any pursuit out there, they thought of that concern long before any potential supporters did. Know what I mean?
Oh, and Shameless Magazine is a bunch of young women who have not studied the crime reports nearly as thoroughly as Ellen Snortland, Matt Thomas, this one other source that I can’t think of off the bat but will hunt down, etc. I love that magazine from the bottom of my heart, but I wouldn’t quote a bunch of twentysomething non-experts when there are experts available.
Ditto for Snopes, unless it was written by one of the above, but I really doubt it, since all the people I’ve read who’ve studied the tens of thousands of crime reports and studied the thousands of social-scientific survey answers disagree with what Snopes has to say. (That is, on average it does help or at least doesn’t hurt to fight back if your assailant is armed–and ESPECIALLY helps if you have just the little bit of adrenaline-state experience it takes to think through, “He’s not going to use that…it’s a fear prop like the words he’s shouting at me…knock it out of his hands when I get the chance, then kick him a lot.” And though it’s not quite as cut-and-dry, the data would indicate that a bit of adrenaline-state training–all that successful practice at letting cruel, degrading, or persuasive words go in one ear and out the other while focusing on your own work ahead of you–does help with acquaintance assailants, since they also use cruel, degrading, or persuasive words. It seems that it doesn’t necessarily help right away…it might be a while before the woman can decide that she’s going to attack someone she loves…but that when she gets to that point (and it might come faster after 30+ fights where she decided, “I will NOT let this happen to me”) she is actually able to use all that in-one-ear-and-out-the-other-before-I-kick-you-to-knockout-and-run-away experience effectively.)
well, my point with those quotes was to give the larger scope of existing views on “fighting back” – and i think they are pretty valid and reasonably informed (they reference studies and statistics). the blog entry from the shameless magazine site is the one that fully spports your own point of view, katie, and it’s based on various research and information from experts, so i’m not entirely sure about your argument regarding “experts”… but i for one think that it’s not only experts whose opinions are worth listening to – experts can provide data, but data are interpretable: lots of scientific studies contradict each other, it’s up to both experts and non-experts to make sense of them, use and apply them.
anyway, i really don’t disagree with you that learning self-defense is beneficial, that knowing how to defend oneself is good especially in a violent society and especially for women because we are not already raised to aquire such skills; yes, of course! i also agree that self-defense and aggression-control classes can work to limit and reduce violence to a certain extent. but my point about aggression was a larger one that is based a lot on my personal beliefs, like pacifism – that violence and the threat of violence are ultimately just that: violence.
more specifically, while responding to aggression with aggression is/should be pure common sense for those who are forced to defend themselves, if we want to curb violence we should make it clear to people that choosing to attack someone is not acceptable and will be punished (which in the case of rape remains a major issue). that people should refrain from committing violence because if they do it’s them who will be considered unequivocably quilty and held responsible, not the victim if she (or he) doesn’t manage to avoid or escape it (and/or fight back). that’s what we promote, as a society, as far as murder and other violent crimes – except rape! – are concerned, right? but because of our current culture of rape, that’s probably the strongest message that needs to be sent when it comes to sexual violence as well. and in this particular case, i would have to say that i just don’t see in what way thinking girl should have included something about women fighting back against their aggressors in a post about “how to avoid becoming a rapist” aimed at a guy…
along the same lines and to mention lulu malone’s comments, too, i guess i can see how owning a gun may be a solution for one person, in certain circumstances, but i would strongly disagree that arming women would be a (good) strategy and any kind of solution to vaw, short-term or long-term.
Katie
you asked, “Can I convince you to side with my concerns that “gender destruction” is not enough, and that ignoring reconstruction of “women” as strong and capable when we write about “gender destruction” and such might slip-slide into making lives worse…or at least making fewer better than we could?”
well, actually, I don’t think that gender destruction is enough. I also call for the destruction of race, sexuality, (dis)ability, religion, class, and all other binary systems of identity classification that privilege one and oppress the other. I don’t wish to reconstruct women or any other group as anything. I wish for all people to be able to choose their own self-directed identity discourse. AND, I call for non-violence and pacifism as the only feasible and responsible way to live. I believe society should be founded on these principles.
That said, I don’t have a problem with self-defense. I do have a problem with aggression, and there would be no need for self-defense if there were no aggression, so I think encouraging women to learn self-defense is worthwhile but ultimately a band-aid solution.
that’s it!
Lulu
thanks for your comments. As you can probably tell by what I said above, I don’t agree with the use of guns. I am a pacifist, and I believe in gun control. I do not have a problem with self-defense, as I said, and to be honest I don’t really blame you for wanting a gun for protection from a perceived real threat. so all I can say is I hope you never have to use that gun of yours.
I fully agree with you that men need to be involved in stopping rape. I also agree that child rapists are a different kettle of fish. I had a friend who worked at a sex offenders psychiatric clinic, and the way she described pedophilia to me was that it was a sexual preference, like being straight or gay. Pedophiles sexually prefer children. There is no “cure” for sexual preference. In the case of being straight or gay or bisexual or any shade in between, there is no need for a cure, and there is nothing wrong with sexual preferences, fetishes, S&M, whatever – but in the case of pedophiles, it’s a different story, because we’re talking about children who cannot give consent. Pedophiles rape children, just like the cases of men raping drunk and drugged and unconscious women – no consent can be obtained.
I’d like to feature this in the next Carnival of Feminists (see http://feministcarnival.blogspot.com/ ).
Hi Sandy D.
thanks very much. I’d be happy to submit it.
Yeah, it’s time for me to comment again…. I’m not trying to set a fire with this or anything.. But a few times (upwards in the comments) Some of you are actually giving some sort of credit to the “rapist” in my opinion, by suggesting that a woman or anyone who may fall victim to rape needs to be better prepared via the discussed means above. Please do not think for one minute that it is a shared responsibility. What I mean by that, it is NOT your responsibilty to learn how to fight, carry a gun, or anything if you do not want to. If you want to, or already do that’s great. But why have to change your lifestyle to cater to mentally deranged individuals who decide to commit these acts. (I’m finding it hard to word this to convey how I really feel, without getting trampled in here) I just think those of us who have to change ourselves..how we live..or even what we do..because of a bad apple (hold your tongue and say ‘apple’). I had a friend who was raped, and just beside herself, paranoid, and completely screwed up for the past 6 years now. And I am beginning to understand. I just wish all the responsibilty of this action (rape) would fall upon the person who commited the rape. Have you heard some of the stories of the BS cops and prosecuters have said to people who have been raped? NO I’ts not your fault. No you DO NOT have to take measures out of anything considered ordinary for you and YOUR life! Take condoms for instance: People who practice safe sex by using condoms are sharing the resposibility. One partner is just as equally important in making sure that puppy is used, or intercourse just doesn’t happen. NO QUESTIONS ASKED. Very few people I have ever met stick to that..but that’s my example of a shared responsibility (that may even be controversial to the ‘safe sexers’) But rape shouldn’t involve both of you taking action for a certain cause. It just seems so damn wrong to me. I hope you understand what I’m trying to say..I just can’t spit it out right.. And here’s the kicker. Shouldn’t attempted rape be punished the same as rape? Say that you DID take those self defence courses and you did in fact prevent yourself from being raped. You are STILL a VICTIM…and the other person needs to be punished as if they commited the crime, because Mr. Raper didn’t get full punishment..He’s out raping others. I just don’t think you should have to adjust your lifestyle for scum like that. I am looking at the dead bolt on my door…it just keeps honest people honest. That’s it. If someone wanted to harm me they would come prepared to do so – to counter the measures I have taken to prevent them. That’s my take on it.
actually, latzelinc, i think that was very eloquent and it’s something i was trying to get at too. i at least say thanks for articulating it so well and giving your point of view! personally, i’ve been trying to think of a way to convey the idea that one consequence of putting too much stress on women learning self defense could be, in fact, that then rapists might be able to argue that “well, the victim didn’t protect herself, and since she could’ve because she knew (or might’ve known) self-defense, then who’s to blame?” – that since she could’ve defended herself doesn’t that mean it wasn’t actually rape?! and it’s not like it’s at all hard to imagine that argument being made, considering the preposterous ways in which survivors have been blamed in the past and are still blamed now.
Morally, I agree with you, but in the real world, where cops act as you say they do, I think that by hurting the rapist for attempting to violate you, you’ve actually just made the chances of him getting punished 100%–because it happened–even if the punishment was a lighter one than he would have had a 2% (or whatever the conviction rate is) chance of getting had you not done something that simultaneously punishes him and prevents as much injury as possible to yourself. (And yes, the studies show that even untrained fighting back, as long as you don’t stop until the fight is done, decreases your chances of being hurt worse than either a) not fighting back at all or b) starting to fight back and stopping mid-fight)
I agree with the whole legal punishment for an attempted rapist on the basis of victimization and whatever thing…hey, let’s get some lawyers to help us put it into legalese and push it through if we really want to put our money where our blog-commenting mouths are! There are people who would help us do it.
I strongly disagree with you, though, that an attacker who has been injured in a rape attempt is equally likely to attack again as an attacker who was not injured in a rape attempt. I firmly believe that for the raping kind of conscienceless bastard, the memory or threat of physical pain actually is a deterrent. If it weren’t, we would see crime reports of rape against equally sized men. But that’s not the case. What we see are crime reports of people who wanted a “win” without getting hurt (or caught…but “hurt” is even more immediate and harder to talk your way out of than “caught”).
I agree that adding “caught” to the “hurt” would be even better and stop even more future attacks than are stopped by hurting alone, but I disagree with you that hurting attackers doesn’t stop a significant number of future attacks.
Ruxandra, this is why all the physical feminist literature and all the practicing full-force self-defense teachers in the country keep on saying over and over and over (and frequently!) that hitting is just one of many tools in the toolbox for self-preservation, and that though we could reduce a lot of rapes and change the odds of a “self-harm-avoiding win” in the minds of potential rapists by adding this tool to the toolbox of every woman alive, it still doesn’t mean that in the moment of the attack, anyone but the woman can know what was the best tool to pull out.
The reason practitioners and people writing the literature say this so much is that they’re trying to set a precedent that if this “equipping every woman alive” idea catches on better, it will have to catch on with the part of it that they’ve been saying so much for so long (because they wouldn’t let it catch on any other way).
And I think that supporters definitely should take a lesson from the way the practitioners teach and authors write and do the same thing–every time we talk about it and advocate it, we need to make sure that we also mention the whole “no one can know which tool is right in the moment except the woman” idea so that that idea is as universal as the whole self-defense-spreading idea itself…which will help when a defense attorney is researching self-defense and rape. She/He will see that caveat next to every mention of it and say, “Aha! This is what all the self-defense people say, so you can’t use that excuse! It’s a well known principle of self defense that…”
Supporters of changing gender relations and thus the frequency of violence against women via undermining the myth of women’s defenselessness definitely have a moral obligation to keep that message at the forefront of their speech.
ok, we’re agreed on that – but as i tried to comment before that’s precisely why i don’t think that it’s particularly useful to bring the point of undermining the myth of women’s defenselessness to the forefront of the discussion for this particular post, which is about how a man should “avoid becoming a rapist.”
other than that, i still think that your arguments work best for some types of situations and people involved, and not so well or not at all for many others – which is of course true with any approach (so in my opinion we should try out all potentially useful tactics and approaches, while always keeping in mind that we do have that obligation to make sure that we leave no door open for any kind of victim-blaming, ever).
Okay. One more little thing, though.
Do you think the bit about warning him to be afraid of legal trouble was useless to bring to the forefront of the discussion about how a man should “avoid becoming a rapist?” Should that part have been excluded?
(And if you don’t think that it was at the forefront of Thinking Girl’s letter, remember that my original contention was that I’d like to see an afterthought–not a forefront mention, which you imply I wanted–included in the letter warning him to be afraid of physical trouble.)
no, no, i’m honestly not implying anything; when i made the “forefront” comment i was referencing your own comment about keeping “that message at the forefront of their speech” which i agreed with. but basically i was still just talking about the danger of bringing shades of victim-blaming to this… and i’m not saying that you did, but that it could be taken there in this particular context.
and to explain, no, i don’t think that the part about legal trouble should be excluded (i actually suggested that it be included 🙂 ) because i see warnings about consequences that have to do with the responsibility of the criminal different from warnings about consequences that have to do with the abilities of the victim. and in fact, now that i think about it this way, wouldn’t it be strange, actually, to assume that this guy could be threatened with the prospect of physical trouble from his potential victims? maybe he can’t… for a variety of reasons. i just can’t know for sure.
…that’s essentially where i’m coming from.
Whoops! I guess I did say forefront.
*blush*
(Okay, not forefront…at the…back-but-present of speech. How’s that?) 😉
it’s ok, you said it in another context, and i just took it to use for my point. 🙂 but keeping self-defense talk at the “back-but-present” while always specifying that no matter what “no one can know which tool is right in the moment except the survivor” sounds quite good, i think!
you guys make me smile. Thanks so much for participating in this discussion.
latzelinc – I just wanted to say I also agree. I think you articulated your point very well, and put it in a different sort of frame that really drives the point home. Awesome. Women shouldn’t have to change because of rapists. Women aren’t the ones doing anything wrong. And I agree about the idea of doing things that are outside one’s “normal” comfort zone in order to play into, recognize, validate the threat of rape. Doing this reinforces male dominance simply by reacting to it. (which is a philosophical point that I’ve recently become very attached to in other contexts; I think it applies here as well.)
Katie – thanks for that link to Sailorman’s. I’m going to check it out, he often has interesting (and challenging) things to say.
Ruxandra – you’re my hero. thanks buddy!
I totally agree with you.
there are so many pressure put on women to be sexually suggestive.
One cannot jump into conclusion that a woman wants to get raped if you see her with a short skirt.
Two weeks ago, i went out with my colleagues and her spanish friends to a bar and there was a hong kong chinese girl, aged around 35, was dancing to the core (it was just 9pm) and she had her tight short shirt showing her belly and then blue jeans but you can see her G string and when she danced you can even see her crack…the spanish guys found it disgusting and said it is not even provocative…but a french guy said that this might lead to a rape if any desperate fustrated old and drunk guy around there…
Freud said that, it is a woman’s choice to get raped or not…if she lets the guy to get raped..it is not called rape…I totally disagree with Freud. Do let me know what you think about this.
prash
If I were any ordinary citizen who worked at a factory all day, and decided to dress up like a police officer….make my way to the annual theme party I like to attend…. and someone runs up to me in need of help as I am walking to the party: They are screaming frantically, “My friend was involved in a shooting! They can be found a block or so around the corner!” Now..whoa..I can’t help them. I am at a party, or maybe walking home from the party. Just because I dress a certain way does not mean I am an actual cop. (may be legality issues for dressing like a cop, but that’s not my point) But since I chose to dress this way, people may approach me for various reasons…but that does not warrant any unnecessary action from them, and in no way justifies that I am going to carry out a duty that one may think. Because one may be ignorant to the fact that I just came from a theme party, I may be ridiculed after explaining that I will not and can not help them.
Now, relate that to a person who wants to go to a bar, club, party, any other social gathering, or is just going for a walk. This person may have attire that makes them blend in, stand out, or just feel good wearing it. That could be their going out ‘uniform’, so to speak. Regardless of someone else’s choice of clothing, they should not be pre-judged. So one may associate someone dressed a certain way, with their possible intentions…This should not be done in my opinion. I may get thrown out by saying this, but thinkinggirl, you know I am not the best at wording things to get a particular point across so I hope you understand. (that goes for anyone else who might find this offensive) Let’s say that an individual is driving up to the particular place you and your colleages attended. On their way, they positively identify, beyond a shadow of a doubt…a prostitute a few miles earlier…wearing a certain code of dress. The same individual attends the event you are speaking of and sees a person dressed the same way as the prostitute amongst the people at this particular gathering. Dancing wildly…letting loose. This person just may work as a victims advocate for your local court system who is just there to have a good time, is confident in themselves, their dress, and their conduct…and plans on going home ALONE..just as they arrived. And wow..we just prejudged that person, because first thing monday morning they are back in the office, helping others, and conducting themselves tottally different. Did that situation warrant any lude conduct? In my opinion no. Just because they were wearing the ‘uniform’ to go out and have fun, doesn’t mean a thing. And it certainly doesn’t give anyone the right to disrespect them.
**ducking in fear** “Don’t shoot!”
ha ha latzelinc!
naw, I’m not going to get mad at you for that. You’re saying, you can’t judge a book by its cover – and you can’t judge anyone by how they dress, or assume that they “are” a certain way, or that they “do” certain things, etc. And that’s absolutely right in terms of rape – just because a woman dresses provocatively, doesn’t mean she is ASKING for anything – for men to hit on her, for men to buy her drinks, for men to ask her to go home with them, for men to put drugs in her drink, for men to force them into the alley out back and rape her…. On the other hand, she may very well be willing to have drinks bought for her, and be hit on by men, or even go home with someone she meets. BUT. No matter how a woman dresses, and no matter how she might be acting or what kind of behaviour she might be engaging in, she is NEVER asking to be raped. Nobody asks to be raped. That’s why it’s called “rape” and not “sex”. (Before anyone jumps in about “rape fantasies” – fantasy is not reality, and even acting out rape fantasies with a lover/partner is not really rape unless he refuses to acknowledge your safe word and continues when you’ve asked him to stop.)
Now, the sad part of all this, Prash (hi cutie, nice to see you!! xo), is that the ideal of not judging a woman by her clothing or how she is dancing or acting is not the reality. Women are so often treated like objects to possess, and are encouraged to ‘dress up’ and practice all sorts of beautifying feminizing rituals to their bodies like styling their hair and wearing makeup and short skirts and tight dresses and high heel shoes and all sorts of restrictive clothing that makes it difficult to get away from an aggressor – just like real life Barbie dolls, objects that someone can go to the store and buy. And hence, we have women being raped and men blaming women’s Barbie-fied appearance, all the while saying it was that individual woman’s CHOICE to dress that way, do her hair that way, wear that makeup, act like that. And we have men like ‘Future Rapist’ who can’t genuinely tell the difference between our Barbie, pornified culture and what a real woman might actually want to do.
How about this for a clue: this feminine behaviour is so widespread among women, and yet not complete and utter among ALL women (so therefore not “natural” to women), how can the social pressures to mark one’s body in this way (like an object) be ignored?
laztelinc–great analogy! Thank you so much…I’m going to use the cop analogy in the future.
I changed how my name will display. From latzelinc to my full name, James Latzel. So, please note that latzelinc and James Latzel are one and the same! Look forward to more interesting dicussion here for years to come (possibly?) Thanks!
Thanks James.
Thanks also to the ladies at Feministing for linking to this post!
aw, thinking girl, thanks – right back at you. and anytime! 🙂
and i agree, that’s yet another great analogy, james – it’s very clear and logical and i’m going to use it in the future, too! i think that when it comes to what women wear and how that can possibly “invite” rape it all becomes so foggy for most people because the idea that women are the sex class is so deeply rooted and pervasive (and what can that mean if not that all women are things to have sex with, so if the “costume” fits then there can be no doubt that the already prescribed role must fit, also). or something along those lines…
Thinking Girl, thanks for posting this item.
However, I think you’re missing the main point of Mr. Could-be-a-Future-Rapist’s message…
Your reply to him seems to be all very true… and you’d likely have a very hard time finding anyone — including me — who would disagree with what you are saying. It is the conventional wisdom of the day, in fact.
HOWEVER… I think that the point that Mr. Could-be-a-Future-Rapist is making… or, rather, asking about… has gone completely unanswered…
It is NOT a matter of what the woman wants. That’s not what he is asking about… He is not asking if the woman WANTS to be raped, or even to have sex with him at all… That is not his point.
In our modern culture, and more and more in recent years, women are intentionally dressing more and more provocatively… More and more sexy… To the point that today’s ‘norm’ in young women’s fashion… is MORE provocative (sexy, sleazy, etc.) than yesteryear’s ‘norm’ in street hooker “fashion”…
Who can deny this to be true?
If you put a mound of sugar out on your back patio in the summertime, you are going to attract ALL of the ants.
You can tell the world that it was not your intention to attract ants. Or you can tell the world that it was your intention only to attract CERTAIN ants, but not ALL the ants…
The world would then know that you are a fool.
Put out sugar, and you attract ALL ants. Simple.
To then claim that YOU have no responsibility for the ant situation on the patio… And that it is the ants, in fact, who are responsible… would further confirm your status as a fool. (by the way, when I refer to “you” here, I am not referring to you…. but to “one”, anyone, in general…)
Adult men DO have ultimate responsibility for their own behaviour, obviously. They are not ants.
However, most women have ABSOLUTELY NO CONCEPT of the POWER that sexual attraction has on a man. Women are not men. Men are driven by sex first, feelings second. Women are driven by feelings first, and sex second.
Dressing as sexually provocative as a streetwalker who’s late on the rent…. and parading around in front of men in public like this… Can be like smoking crack in front of a crackhead. Or at the very least, playing drinking games till everyone is in a drunken stupor… in front of a recovering alcoholic.
Sorry, I don’t drink in front of alcoholics in recovery. I DO claim some responsibility for being a thoughtful compassionate human being. I don’t GET MY JOLLIES TRYING TO TEMPT PEOPLE BEYOND THEIR HUMAN ABILITY TO WITHSTAND THAT TEMPTATION… Only to watch them cave…. And then to declare them weak… And criticize them and blame them and laugh at them…
I think MANY women get their jollies — cheap thrills — playing with the sex drives of healthy adult men. They play with them as if they are teasing the animals at the zoo with hints of food…
And then laughing at them… for the sake of entertainment.
And if they get raped…
They had no responsibility for it whatsoever.
Because politically correct society in 2006 gives them blanket immunity to blame.
Bruce Wagner
http://brucewagner.com
[…] I was just browsing around the world of blogs and came across this post on a feminist’s blog site. Apparently, she wrote an item about rape… And someone left the following comment: Hi, Actually I landed on this e-page while searching information, how to avoid women’s or girls? In my environment there are more women’s and girls with skirts and tops. I attempt many times to change the environment, as if my fate goes wrong where I go in some way or other way I have interact such women’s or girls. Most of time when self conious of herself, my mind never thinks of sex with her. But when women’s and girls are very open, I could hardly control myself. So far I am controlling by leaving the place of short time and join the work after sometime. On the other hand its not possible to leave such environment all the time. […]
Hi Bruce
thanks for your comment.
Of course, I completely disagree with you. And I must point out some inconsistencies in your comments.
First, you confirm that what I have written in response to “Future Rapist” is not in dispute. Including that one cannot judge a woman’s intentions or desires by what she is wearing or how she is acting, and including that social pressures on women to act and dress provocatively exist.
Yet, you are saying that women who dress provocatively are intentionally enticing male attention, and that they should then share responsibility for the consequences. So basically, by dressing provocatively, some women are complicit in their own rapes? Asking for it? Desiring it, even? Isn’t that what you’re saying? Following your logic, this is indeed your end conclusion. Because women should know that men simply can’t control the wild animal that sleeps inside their pants.
Your argument hinges on an essentialized view of men – namely, that men’s biological sexual urges control them to the point that they are powerless to resist… even as you affirm that men do have responsibility for their behaviour. In our society, we don’t consider it acceptable to hold someone responsible for something that is out of their control – for example, people with mental illnesses are exempted from criminal punishment and instead treated psychiatrically. So, which is it? Are men helpless, or are they responsible? Are men really as helpless as crack addicts in terms of controlling themselves around women who are dressed provocatively? Considering that not all men rape women who are dressed provocatively, I think we have our answer.
Your argument has a corollary, concerning women – women are cast as temptresses, aren’t they? These provocatively dressed women are catering to male sexual fantasy, by default, because men simply can’t control themselves. Yet, you say that “most women have ABSOLUTELY NO CONCEPT of the POWER that sexual attraction has on a man.” So, once again, this is inconsistent. Why should a woman who has no idea how helpless men are to their sexual impulses be held responsible for their own rapes, should rape occur? Are women purposely tempting men, or are they clueless? Or, perhaps, women are intentionally trying to entice men only to a certain point, but then they don’t realize when they have crossed some imaginary line beyond which men cannot control themselves?
And of course, since men are not all the same, they do not all find the same type of behaviour or appearance attractive. What is sexually exciting to one man is repellant to another. So, perhaps it isn’t even dressing provocatively that will be the stimulant that a rapist is unable to resist. Maybe it’s a certain perfume, or a shade of lipstick, or a certain turn of phrase, or a particular (dis)ability, or that a person has a vagina. But somehow, each woman should be responsible for knowing where the ‘point of no return’ is for each man she comes into contact with? Correct me if I’m wrong, but that seems like an awful lot for a girl to try to figure out. Perhaps it would jsut be better if women stayed at home. Maybe they would be safer then. But wait! We do hear reports of crazy men breaking into women’s homes and raping them there…
Your view of “what men are like” and “what women are like” is seriously flawed. Not all men are driven by “sex first, feelings second” – and not all women are driven by “feelings first, sex second.” There are lots of men out there who are more interested in a loving relationship than with sex. And there are plenty of women out there who are far more interested in sex than they are in a relationship. Men are certainly capable of controlling sexual feelings of attraction. Rape is not about sex; it is about power – rape is the act of taking someone’s body as an object for one’s own use without consent. It may be driven by sexual arousal, but it is ultimately an act of perpetrating power upon another. Society generally treats women like objects to be used, consumed, bought, etc., so it’s not so much of a stretch for the average male to view women in this way – he’s been indoctrinated by the media, by the advertising industry, by music and movies and magazines, by the fashion industry, by the beauty industry, by the pornography industry… you get the point. Women are practically edible. They are certainly disposable.
Of course some women dress provocatively on purpose, to attract male attention. This most certainly does not mean that she is asking to be raped, or that she should share responsibility for her own rape. Rapists are responsible for rape, pure and simple.
For further reading, check out Latzelinc’s cop analogy 8 comments up from your first comment, and my earlier post on social constructionism. If you really want to challenge your preconceptions about the “naturality” of identity, check out Michel Foucault’s History of Sexuality, Vol.1, Denise Riley’s Am I That Name?, Anne Fausto-Sterling’s The Five Sexes, and Marilyn Frye’s Sexism – for starters. There really is no biological reality about anything – race, gender, (dis)ability, sexuality, not even sex itself. Really. Identity is historically and discursively constructed.
I am not sure what century Mr. Wagner is referencing when he mentions “yesteryear,” however, having grown up in the vicinity of several neighborhoods legendary for prostitution [hello Hollywood] I can say with certainty “young women’s fashion” is not as provocative or sleazy as “street hooker fashion.” If he would like this corroborated, some of the “girls” are hanging out at the corner of Highland and Santa Monica these days.
A great deal of thoughtful, extremely polite consideration is being paid into Mr. Future Rapist’s, what? Plea for help? Permission? Justification? [You do realize he was probably masturbating as he wrote that right?] In a situation which to me is pretty clear cut. Mr. Future Rapist should immediately seek employment at the nearest male correctional facility. This will familiarize him with the concept of rape from a potential victim’s perspective, [broadening the mind is always a nice perk to employment opportunities], and also remove him from a work environment fraught with pesky temptation. Problem solved, Future Rapist Guy. Don’t forget your pepper spray.
I find Bruce’s words both “true” in a certain sense and very scary in another sense. Now IF I were to walk down some streets in the dark in many US cities I (a Man) might well be robbed. Having been held up at gunpoint twice in my life, that really is scary to me and I’d certainly try to avoid this.
I don’t feel like I’m ever asking to be robbed and yet I’m a “realist” at worst in trying to be careful.
I do though have a freedom as a man in that no matter how I dress, in most places I’m not likely to attract attention except in the manner described above from someone who might harm me.
Now assume instead that I were female, for purposes of this example “relatively young” and “physically attractive”.
How do I suddenly lose the right or freedoms to simply “be” without being assaulted or harassed?:
a. Must my clothing not be “revealing” – and who defines and what is “revealing”?
1.) Breasts partially visible or tight top?
2.) Length and tightness of skirt, pants, etc.?
3.) Shoes – high heals?
4.) Make-up?
b. Does how I walk matter?
c. Is it different – IF I’m in a bar – vs. on the street?
d. What happens if I’m quite thin or am very busty or something else that makes me “very, very attractive”?
I feel like I’m missing something! It seems to me that We Men – should be locked up.
I recall reading of how – in some Muslim Countries – seeing a “bare female face” – could somehow “incite” men to lose control – and thus women’s faces need to be covered.
I, naively I guess, thought that we in the U.S. and others in Canada, the U.K., etc. – were somehow seen as “more civilized”. I guess not!
Seriously, I may be attracted by how a young or older woman looks to me. I am responsible for what I do or don’t do. It seems unfortunate and seriously Criminal to me that We Men are not seen as accountable – as Bruce aptly describes.
No – Means No! IF/When we don’t ask – it’s our Fault. IF She “changes her mind” – she should, of course, tell us – but “the raging hormones” – are our responsibility.
I also think that because Acquaintance Rape is far, far, far more common than assaults upon strangers, that somehow – some dialogue generally occurs – where somehow Men should perceive whether their attractions are reciprocated.
Obviously, there are – ambiguous situations – where Young Women want male attention and get it. We, as Men, need to be aware in such situations – and not be controled solely by our anatomy and hormones. This may be difficult for some!
I like to think that we have brains and some understanding of others.
Thanks!
Thanks Max and Geo for your perspectives.
I know what you mean, Max. We have been very polite about this guy. If you want some not-so-polite conversation about ‘Future Rapist’, head on over to Twisty’s at I Blame the Patriarchy. She wrote a post about this that included a lot of comments about castrating the guy. Your suggestion he go work in an all-male environment is, I think, not at all a bad one. What was that line in the lord’s prayer? remove us from temptation, or some such?
Geo
point well made. Although I don’t care for referring to muslims as less civilized than we westerners, you’re right to point out that the logic used here in Bruce’s comment parallels the logic used around various veiling traditions. Lock up the ladies, cause the wild animal men can’t control themselves, and it’s the women’s fault for tempting the men.
I’m being sarcastic, of course, and I don’t particularly want to start a discussion about veiling practices, which are heavily contested by feminists and defended by muslim men and women (some of whom are also feminists). I will however say that in some cases, veiling has been used for subversive purposes: I received a report from a classmate who had been working in Afghanistan with a development group that during elections there, women used their burqas to vote multiple times for the candidate they felt would be most beneficial to returning them to their previous freedom. Also, burqas were used commonly by the western women in her organization when travelling from place to place in order to remain safe from the bounties that were placed on their heads as western development workers.
Where there is power there is always resistance.
Well, yeah. If the guy cannot work with women without indulging in criminal fantasy and behavior, he should not work in an environment that contains women. He is a threat to his co-workers and needs to find an environment to work in in which he is not.
And before one more person hops in here talking about how women are just such tempting creatures poor men cannot contain their sexual urges, [please, you were toilet trained at two, if you can prevent yourself from peeing on the floor, you can prevent yourself from the much more arduous task of attacking and physically overpowering a fully grown adult human being], ask youself this. Do you want your mother working with this guy? Your sister? Your wife? Your daughter?
You wouldn’t send your six year old to a child molestor for piano lessons and I am sincerely hoping you would not knowingly send your mother, wife, or daughter into a work environment with this guy so don’t justify him by saying his [deviant] impulses to physically attack and overpower women he works with are in any way womens’ fault for wearing make up to work. For all you know he works at a bank. When is the last time you found yourself overcome by violent lust in line at the bank?
Thanks for the invite to Twisty’s by the way. I get a little het up about this subject so must think about whether I should really be there. [wry smile]
Thinking Girl! I’m in no way meaning to imply that Muslims are “less civilized” that any other people in the West. I believe that statements that unveiled women – bring about their rape to be uncivilized. I doubt that very many Muslim Feminists would support that type of logic.
Choosing to be veiled or not – is a totally separate issue from Threats towards unveiled Women or similar.
Sorry – If I inadvertently – brought in another issue.
Thanks!
Hi again Max
thanks for joining in, it’s great to have your down-to-earth perspective!
It hadn’t occurred to me that he was masturbating while he was writing his comment… maybe while he was excusing himself from his working environment and returning later on… The poor guy just needs to get a handle on how to interact in a mixed-gender world, or just work from home. Now there’s an idea – maybe it’s the RAPISTS (and potential rapists) who should stay at home until they learn how to control themselves, NOT the women who are passively inciting so much lust! God forbid that the RAPISTS should have THEIR freedom interfered with when instead we can just make women feel like shit about what they wear and how they walk and how many drinks they have at the club and how they dance with their friends. Like James L. said earlier in this thread,
Yowza!
Hi Geo
no, I know you didn’t really intend for it to come out like that. I know what you’re saying! I get you!
speaking of all that, and about what men are supposedly driven by as opposed to women and this idea that we need to keep all non-male sexuality under control while accepting that “healthy adult men” can’t be expected to control their “sex drives” so it’s only natural that when they’re “tempted” (whatever that means), they are going to rape (thank you, bruce, for proving that this sick, crazy mentality is still going strong), here’s a statement read at take back the night marches in champaign-urbana, illinois, by an ad-hoc group called “sluts against rape”:
What concerns me about “polite” rape “discussion” is, in a conciliatory, polite abstraction of rape, what is really going on during a physical attack is not acknowledged. Rape is a physical attack. A rape victim has to be subdued. Forced, physically, to participate. Often at a secondary location. Somewhere where there are no witnesses or intermediaries who might interrupt or witness the attack. This is not “sex.” And it is not pretty. It is a physical battle between a larger, stronger attacker and a physically smaller and weaker attackee. It is violent. Full of threat. And often leaves a dead body behind.
I was abducted at the age of 14. I lept out of a moving vehicle to escape. That would not have saved me. He was turning around. I could hear myself breathing, it was hard to get enough oxygen, I was pushing so hard, I could hear tires burning asphalt behind me, knew that car was spinning around, coming back for me, to run me down or catch me I was not sure, but I was sure I was odds are not going to make it, I could not outrun that car. There was a ditch up ahead, if I could make it to the ditch and jump it, maybe. He’d lose an axel in that ditch trying to slam the car over it. But, if he was smart, if he stopped the car, he could outrun me on foot and drag me back —
A motorist seeing a body launch out of a vehicle going full speed and come up running hell bent for leather stopped. That is what saved me. One lone car that should not even have been on that road was there, and stopped.
A friend, who attended high school with me, was not that lucky. There was no car on her road. Her vagina was cut out, with a knife, and stuffed into what was left of her mouth. Her eyelashes were burned off. Her fingers were cut off. I do not know how much force and effort it takes to cut a finger off with a knife. He took all ten. And when he got done, all that was left was bloody meat – and braces.
That is how they identified her. The braces.
Six women died that year. Six women they found. I do not know how many bodies are still out there. Still “missing.” They were found by roadsides, in abandoned lumber yards, under trees, in ditches. Burned. Stabbed. Butchered. Mutilated. Destroyed. Unrecognizable. Barely identifiable. Unless, like Sherry, they were wearing braces.
Pay attention to that name. That was a person. She had a name.
Sherry.
She died before she was old enough to vote.
I didn’t. I’m still here.
Do not be too polite about rape.
Max
thank you.
That guy who wrote the potential rapist questions is from India or around there, I bet you a million bucks. I live in India and that is how they talk in English. He’s not semi-literate or illiterate, English is just not his first language. Skirts and tops are not common in India, so they are seen as “tempting attire”. From the first sentence I could tell I was reading the writings of an Indian guy who is sexually repressed but wants to do the right thing. Cut him some slack and pity. They don’t have a dating culture over there.
Max
sorry, I wrote that simple “thank you” much earlier today, and wasn’t able to get back till now but I wanted to add more.
I’m so sorry about your friend, Sherry. I’m sorry about what happened to you when you were young, it must have been terrifying. Thank you deeply for sharing both of those stories.
There is definitely a phenomenological aspect that is missing from this discussion, and other “abstract” discussions of rape. You’ve brought home a really important thing to remember, in all these discussions about hypotheticals on this post on on the other post, On Rape. And that is: rape is real. it happens everyday to women, and it is a physical, visceral, violent, tangible, brutal expression of power and hate. And too often, those who experience rape do not have a voice, and nobody is willing to speak for them.
So Max, thank you for speaking for Sherry.
Pardesi
I figured that english wasn’t this guy’s first language. I figured there were likely some differences between my culture and his – and maybe his native culture and the culture he now lives within. In any case, sorry, but I have cut this guy as much slack as I can, considering he identified himself as a ‘future rapist.’ I have no more slack left.
The living are shamed. The dead are silent. Someone must speak for the dead. There are so many of them.
OUTSTANDING response! I read his email first and had two feelings towards this guy – outrage and protectiveness. I was outraged at his victim-blaming and his sexism, but then felt that he *was* being sincere and I hoped you’d treat him with dignity. You did! Thank you so much for the wonderful work you do – I’m just learning about it.
@max: i also want to say thanks for sharing those stories with us, and sorry that you had to go through that experience when you were 14, thank god that you escaped! about what happened to your friend, there are no words to adequately express sympathy… thanks for writing it down, i know it couldn’t have been an easy thing to do, but it matters: her name, her story. she matters.
and thank you for making the point about the reality of rape and importance of acknowledging it. sometimes the very talking about it distances us from it, while letting yourself be dragged into tangents and trivialities makes you trivialize the subject, too, which is terrible.
i actually had been getting increasingly less patient (as you, and thinking girl, seem to have, too) with discussing rape/vaw here and elsewhere while real-world examples happen all around us, all the time. bruce’s comment from this thread and some of what was going on at the “on rape” thread made me finally explode yesterday. so i wrote among other things: “we’re talking about sexual violence, which is a major problem in the world around us… it’s not taken seriously, not talked about enough in its actual manifestations and implications as opposed to based on (patriarchy-supporting) myths. we can (and do) come up with various scenarios, we like to stick to myths and argue theoretically about all kinds of things. but in the meantime the problem, and the statistics, are there. they’re not hypothetical! and they’re not “fun” or for your fun…” which was me officially losing my patience. not surprisingly, that comment was considered too aggressive and deemed “worthless” by the guy i was replying to. (actually, i was surprised, because i still used what i’d call very mild language… simply because i didn’t want to waste too much energy.) but it reminded me of another discussing on thinking girl’s blog where i got pretty mad about the trivializing and ignoring of facts regarding vaw, and as a result i REALLY hurt some men’s feelings. yeah… well, it’s very important to me that we do talk about the issue, educate (ourselves and others) and try to bring about change [along the lines of the mission statement of the rape crisis center that i used to volunteer at, which i always loved: “to eliminate violence against women and children and, until that happens, to provide safety and support to survivors of that violence as they take control of their lives”]… BUT! there’s also a lot of pure anger that needs to be let out, from women and survivors and on behalf of women and survivors. people (men) need to get used to it, and learn to find it useful, not worthless – to learn and be supportive!
and right now i’m angry about a disgusting article on the ipswich murders from a british newspaper… because, apparently, “in the scheme of things the deaths of these five women is no great loss!” i don’t understand, how can somone actually say that, and be published?!? how is that acceptable in our society? how can the murders of five (now six) women be no great loss? how can the fact that these women were prostitutes make it ok to use that kind of hate speech? it’s NOT ok! and “prostitutes” and “innocent victims” are NOT mutually exclusive terms when refering to women who were killed!
Wow. That guy so needs to go to confession. He is not just denigrating the dead. He is defending and glorifying the murder of women. He is a bad bad man.
Funny how the guy asks what’s the difference between rape and seduction. In India most males are socially inept around females they would like to get to know in a romantic sense. 95% or more of the people have arranged marriages. I’ve been in situations where the guys literally do something so uncuth because they think it’s the way it’s done in “the west”. They don’t know how to approach women and gradually build up a relationship with them. They have alot of pent up sexual energy and no healthy way to release. Even marital sex is still a sense of shame to some couples over there.
Like over here if you’re in a bookstore and you see a guy reading a book you read, you might strike up a conversation with him that might end in a shared latte at the cafe. That could then lead to a great long term friendship or even romance. Not so in India. So this guy is trying to figure out how to act around women he is obviously attracted to but has no way of even establishing a normal friendship with.
Hi Ben
Thank you, and welcome! Thank you for the wonderful work YOU are doing – more men have to get involved in anti-sexual assualt work, and it looks like your approach is really accessible. Thanks for sharing!
Max
Exactly. Someone has to do this, someone has to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves. I do not want them to be forgotten, or ignored. I want them to be heard, listened to, remembered – for the vital, wonderful people that they are, and for the violent and senseless way in which they were victimized. It’s just so very important, and I don’t care who feels uncomfortable about it. It has to be done.
Ruxandra
Yes, I know, that pissed me off too. Which is why I quoted Mary Daly. She’s pretty good for keeping things in perspective. Like, this is a feminist, pro-woman space. I love getting diverse viewpoints, and my method of interaction has at top-of-mind trying to hopefully gain allies. BUT. It is so important to have space for discussion that isn’t going to be overtaken, misdirected, and infiltrated by discussion about men and men’s issues. Women don’t have enough spaces like that. We need them. We don’t need to have our issues taken over and our energies diverted away. It happens SO often at blogs that I read. annoying, and undermining.
Have you been to Feministing lately, read the post about virtual rape – these video games that include rape, and being able to buy virtual rape experiences? Here’s the link. What you’re talking about here, the abstract removal of the phenomenology of rape, the lived experience of rape, the real lived effects, just SO reminded me of that post. The idea of removing the act of rape so far out of reality, beyond running scenarios and hypothetical thought experiments, to an animated and simulated virtual event is insane to me. it’s gross.
And the Ipswich murders, just… shit. I don’t think I can even start, it makes me tremble with rage. thank you for adding to that – great post by phonless cord.
Pardesi
yikes. thanks for the perspective on that.
Free will is so cliche. Respect the will of G-d and you will never go wrong. Marriage before sex, and if you desire sex, get married. It should kill all urges of raping women, or at least dull them to a point that’s bearable. Marriage is the ultimate example that you love a woman and respect her before you go to poke her.
Republicanite
well, I know a lot of people feel the way you do, but I’m certainly not one of them.
I don’t believe in god, for starters.
and I don’t believe that sexual repression is a good idea, either. I think in some cases that can lead to increased incidence of rape, molestation, and abuse. like, you know, all those catholic priests.
Nor do I think that marriage is the ultimate example that you love and respect a woman. Marriage has a history of men abusing women, controlling women, treating women like domestic servants – basically owning them, not respecting them.
thanks for stopping in, but I heartily disagree.
Free will is the covenant between God and man made in the New Testament and the foundation of Christian teaching, Republicanite. Before you lecture persons about religious piety, you should brush up on your subject.
That’s what the theologians want you to believe.
No. That is what the book itself says. It is available at a book shop near you if you would like to read it sometime.
I think the verse you’re talking about is…and I quote: “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?”
You can interpret that into sexuality. I think it’s related to a potter and the vessel he or she is making.
No, pumkin. That is about the potter having the ability to make a pot for good or for bad purposes. There is nothing about sex in there. Keep working at it though. It was a real nice try. Now I do not want to clutter up nice Thinking Girl’s blog with religious chatter with you that would be rude and very off topic. You just keep sounding out those words.
A few things:
Telling me that women should learn how to be a heptathlete so we can deck anyone who tries to rape is doesn’t do me much good — I’m disabled. My mother isn’t, but she IS 72 years old. (And PLEASE don’t pull up some BS tokenism argument about some weightlifting granny someplace like that’s ANYTHING like a disproof.) I guess my weak little body with its girlie connective tissue will just have to be my Achilles heel and a symbol of all that is wrong with women and an anti-feminist symbol, huh? SCREW that. It’s not my fucking job to walk the streets being ready to deck some son-of-a-bitch.
And it won’t help anyhow, nor will firearms. (And I’m a gunowner, so don’t go there with me.) What the hell good are firearms when most rapes are pepetrated by someone the woman knows or is related to by blood or marriage? Oh okay — I suppose we should all have sex with our husbands with a loaded gun pressed to his forehead or easily to hand for us (not for him, though — try working that one out and let me know how far you get).
This crap about being a bodybuilder of heavily armed accomplished nothing. Right now, sex between men and women is all too often an experience of suspicion, bargaining, and resignation on the part of the woman, with not a little fear.
But if we buy a gun or learn how to karate-chop wooden planks in half, then sex will still be a situation of suspicion, bargaining, resignation, and fear only this time we’ll all be ready to blow his head off. Hey, that’s MUCH better and more fun, thanks! With “anti-rape” advice like that handed out, I’m sure we’ll have that pesky female orgasm stamped out in no time.
No, the quote is about free will; not right or wrong. But far be it for me to set right that which are wrong… and you’re right we’re off topic. ttyl. mmmaaaxxx mmaaaaxxx maaxxx. max. there i got it!
… and by the way Ms. Smarty pants: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06259a.htm#pro
perhaps you should read a bit about both sides of the argument before criticizing the faithful.
Republicanite
Enough about jesus. we’re here to talk about RAPE.
Janis
thanks for your comment. I’m hugely glad you spoke up about the whole “self-defense” thing. The thing about self-defense is that it’s not foolproof, and to make it so that every woman has the responsibility to learn how to fight off a man twice her size or more simply doesn’t work for people who, like yourself, your mom, and millions of other women, are not fully able-bodied. I mean, for christ sake, women who are in COMAS get raped. The ELDERLY get raped. women who are in varying states of PARALYSIS get raped. women with MENTAL ILLNESS get raped. All kinds of women get raped; not every woman can defend herself adequately or successfully against an attacker – some women who have had self-defense training and are abled are not successful in defending themselves against a rapist.
which is why it is the most important thing to stress that rapists are responsible for rape – no matter who the victim is!
Your point about sex being a negotiation is also important, and hasn’t been discussed here at all. Women are cajoled, coaxed, coerced and otherwise pressured to submit to sex-rape all the time. There is often a dynamic of negotiation, bargaining, etc. involved in sex… and it is important to point that out, so thank you. I don’t think that’s what sex should be about, personally. Call me an idealist or old-fashioned if you want, but I’d prefer that sex be about pleasure, enjoyment, reciprocity, enagement, dignity, respect.
thanks for your comment, Janis, and welcome.
It’s the point about not being able to defend ourselves, yes. But the sex thing is also about the fact that as long as I must expect that every man around me is a rapist and be justified in doing so, as long as men do not change their behavior, as long as I must be vigilant and suspicious during the one act in life aside fmo using the toilet during which all humans simply want to relax and enjoy themselves … it’s just another way for my life to suck.
Basically, as long as men are to be reasonably approached with suspicion and fear (and yes, I’m standing behind that), why the hell do I want one in my bed willingly in the first place? Either sex stinks for women, or sex stinks for women and we’re armed. Either way, until MEN TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR STOPPING RAPE, and until we stop saying “X was raped” instead of “A man raped X,” my life hasn’t fundamentally changed. I’m still jumpy and suspicious if I invite a guy over.
And even if he’s a decent chap and we have fun, I can’t know that initially. And what if the next time I might invite someone over, I do get raped, and the judge and jury talk about my having invited Mr. Decent Chap over to have casual sex and if that’s supposed to mean I’m a whore who has no business saying no to anyone?
In that vein, until and unless rape is stopped BY MEN, even having nice, fun sex with Mr. Decent Chap involves a ton and a half of risk for any woman.
NONE of this is helped by just learning model mugging or buying a firearm.
Men must be reasonably approached with suspicion and fear. One in six U.S. women have been a victim of sexual attack/assault. There were over 199,000 sexual assaults/attacks in the U.S. in 2005 alone. That is in one year. One. How many football stadiums does that fill up? It is five times the number of women who die of breast cancer each year. So what should I be worried about most? Breast cancer? Or a man? I know which one I have to come in contact with every day. At the store, at the park, at the mall, on the sidewalk, in the parking lot, at the post office — every day, I will encounter men. And every one of them is a potential threat.
The only way to lessen rape statistics in this or any country is to make the crime punishable by death.
Believe you me, there will be a SHARP decline.
Hi Janis
thanks, actually your second comment brought a bit more clarity to what you were saying for me.
Excellent, excellent point. You’re right, it’s not as if rape is taken as a single act of sexual violence. Women’s entire sexual history (among other things) provides the context within which rape is judged. So every sexual act a woman WILLINGLY participates in (not that rape is a sexual act, but you know what I’m saying) is part of a body of behaviour that holds risk. Because that one night stand two years ago might come back as evidence of a woman’s slutitude after some pig rapes her. It amazed me that the moral character of the survivor is questioned, but the moral character of the RAPIST is hardly discussed in these cases.
Hi again Max
yes, you’re right – men should be approached with care and suspicion, and this is a model that we teach girl children and practice as grown women everyday. I recently began testing myself as I walked down the street, to see just who I feel comfortable engaging with. I found that I rarely look men in the eyes when passing by. I looked at women far more often (but not always: not women begging on the street, even as I slipped money in their cans – shame on me). Anyway, I began to wonder about why I hardly look men in the eye in the street, or in line at the ATM, or at the movies, or wherever I went. I came to realize that it was because I didn’t want to give any impression of encouragement to interact with me. I have been taught that any little bit of body language might be interpreted by a man as a “signal” that I am interested in them. I have been taught that any such signal negates my “NO.” And so, even as I have been taught to walk a certain way to engage male attention, to dress a certain way to gain male approval, to position my body in ways that delineate my subordinate status – I have also been taught that I must not actively engage. I have been taught to objectify myself – that is, turn myself, my body, my face, into an object for male approval and appraisal. And objects do not engage. People engage with objects, but objects do not engage with people.
So yes, it is proper to view men with suspicion. Women have been taught to do this for our whole lives – mostly by men. makes perfect sense to me.
Hi Pardesi
I don’t believe in capital punishment, so I can’t go along with that one. And actually I don’t think that capital punishment is much of a deterrent – I think it only really serves to push perpetrators to be more clever so they don’t get caught. I also just think that if the state has deemed murder unlawful because it is morally wrong, it is entirely hypocritical to sanction murder in the form of capital punishment. Wilfully taking a life is wilfully taking a life – unless it’s in self-defense, I can never support it.
Janis: In a way, it sort of is. I mean…just as far as being alive and wanting to stay alive, well, nature made that your job, same as nature made it your job to walk the streets being ready to find food.
You might have reasons to do so or not do so…but…I’m not quite sure of what you mean by “my job.” I know it’s got moral connotations to it, but seriously, it’s also a phrase frequently used to talk about what one just has to do to live one’s life. And being ready to deck predatory attackers is something that all animals on this earth have the “job” of doing. Humans are no exception.
Now…is predatory human-against-human, one-social-category-against-another-social-category predation something nature intended? Heavens no!
This particular type of predator should not exist. Its existence is immoral.
But the idea of not “having to” be ready to attack predators is…unnatural. It’s dangerous. This dangerous and unnatural idea is an idea that we women, children, etc. (I won’t mention elderly & disabled explicitly because I can’t speak from experience) have been taught by our current society. It’s a pervasive idea. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t go against the grain of the idea behind the life of every animal on earth.
Have you read “Beauty Bites Beast?” Absolutely inspirational…and it has stories of disabled people being as vicious as disabled animals. Stories of disabled people who indeed had physical disadvantages but who had been able to get over their socially conditioned disadvantage of believing that it wasn’t the proper natural function (that is, the “job”) of every living creature on earth, no matter how disadvantaged, to deck nasty predators to the best of one’s capability.
Oh, by the way, Thinking Girl, you inspired me.
Katie, if it ISmy job, then why not just shoot them? Seriously. If these are predators, wild animals who threaten me, then why aren’t we exterminating them or rounding them up in live traps and getting them neutered?
Perhaps I should say that it’s not my damend job to betold at every turn that I am supposed to “love”and “forgive” these creatures at the same time as they overwhelmingly threaten my life and limb. Okay, okay, not ALLLLLLLLLLLLL of them — only 99%. Yeah, I’m sick of that excuse anymore.
Again, you’re going a little outside the bounds of what just goes on the world over in the natural world.
When’s the last time you saw a bunch of deer cooperate to round up wolves and neuter them?
Now, again, this has a completely different element to it than “acceptable” predation in the natural world because, as I said, there is nothing acceptable, moral, or natural about one social category of a species predatorily attacking another social category of the same species.
So actually, well, I can see how doing something unnatural might be an appropriate response to something unnatural.
Therefore, I’m not saying that your suggestion is inappropriate for the situation–just that it isn’t a logical extension from my argument.
What you suggested isn’t a logical extension from, “All animals, weak or strong, fend off predators, like it or not, so if you want to survive, you might as well be prepared to be such an animal, too.”
However, it might be a logical corrective to a socially-caused and socially-approved unnatural problem that we have within our species. After all, it’s a group action for a problem that was caused by the group.
Anyway, just wanted to make that distinction.
Well, if we were ocelots and had to drink out of watering holes prowled by lions this reasoning might be even mildly rational. But. We are not ocelots. We are human beings. Human beings are not curbed by or dictated to by a natural order. Take a look around. Asphalt roads. Whoa. Now that is nature in action. Bridges. Buildings. Automobiles. And there. On the horizon. That great big cement structure surrounded by all the barbed wire. Could it be? Yes. A prison.
People round up members of the pack and incarcerate them all the time. Ocelots do not and maybe we should start handing out tasers to ocelots because those poor bastards do not stand a chance. But. People do. So there is no reason to consider ourselves ocelots and say it is unreasonable to expect predators to be rounded up and locked up just because that does not happen with lions and ocelots. We are not ocelots. Those are not lions. [Who you better bet would be hunted and killed for attacking women and children in a village full of people.] We are not natural. And members of the pack are rounded up and locked up every day.
Just not for rape. You have a better chance of a conviction if someone just beat you up. Or killed you. Once rape enters the equation, battery and murder get side tracked.
Raising the maximum sentence for rape to a death sentence would not curb rape. It would kill conviction rates. Juries and judges already have difficulty acknowledging and sentencing rape when sentences are light. Put death the on table, they will not convict at all.
In other words, the unnatural reactions we have come up with–like rounding up & locking up criminals–aren’t working too well for this crime.
Maybe it’s time to see if something more instinctual works as well or better.
Good idea. Rather than solve a societal issue, let’s just tell potential rape victims, which is, oh, about fifty percent of the adult population, You are on your own baby, we are going back to the wild.
Of course there is that small problem, if a potential victim blows her attacker’s head off, we still have this troublesome court system that will hold her legally responsible.
We can fix that too, though. We can just empty the prisons. Of course then children become big targets too, but, you know, we can arm five year olds, and tell them they are on their own while dealing with predators too.
Problem solved. Cool.
[you do not know much about primates do you?]
You don’t think it is a societal issue that our society empowers jackasses by telling 100% of the population that assholes are completely powerful over, oh, about fifty percent of the adult population, and that that fifty percent is completely powerless at the hands of jackasses? You don’t think it is a societal issue that this jackass-empowering LIE is everywhere we turn in the messages our society communicates everywhere?
You don’t think that contradicting those messages is an act of trying to fix a societal issue?
My last post is waiting in the moderation line, because I accidentally posted it w/o being logged in, but I also wanted to comment:
Trying to spread messages to fix this societal issue is considered part & parcel of trying to spread messages to fix the one I mentioned in the post above by everyone I’ve read who does it.
You’re right that it’s important, too. However, I feel like part of the reason that efforts to fix this social prejudice alone have not done much good is because only working to change attitudes about the gun / revenge-when-safe-later situation reinforces the idea that jackasses have power over about fifty percent of the adult population unless the members of that fifty percent are given an advantage they weren’t born with. And when you use an argument that’s founded on misogyny, you’re going to get, well, a lot of misogynists drawn into the argument, and then you’re going to lose your case to get what you want, because they won’t agree with you that this should be a less punished crime.
I feel like this particular bit of extremely necessary advocacy isn’t going to get much done until it’s done as a, “And because not all of us are caught up yet, you need to go light on those who wait until they feel empowered by a gun simply because they didn’t know that they were powerful enough to do anything before that,” and not as, “You need to go light on any of those of us who wait until they feel empowered by a gun…period.” Letting it trail off there leaves room for someone else to complete the sentence with, “…because we women / you women aren’t powerful enough to do anything without a gun.”
Which, as I said, 1) encourages people who won’t let you change the status quo anyway to join the conversation and outnumber you and 2) encourages more assholes (that is, potential rapists and predatory-woman-beaters) to feel like they’ve got the power to be predatory & assholish over women in the future.
But, yeah, thanks for bringing that social problem up…and believe me, the “physical feminists” do talk about it and try to change it in every book.
Oh, and as for kids…we can also make our society a safer place for them to live by spreading the message throughout society that kids are dangerous to predatory adults (and not 100% the other way around, which is the status quo belief & manner of speaking), too.
In an interview, famous serial rapist and killer, Ted Bundy, said that he believed that American culture is responsible for the birth of his kind. It can be seen as a psychopaths attempt to not take resposnsibility for his own actions, but one cannot help but thinking that there must be some truth in it.
Bundy says among other things that modernization happened relatively quickly and traditional every (overly) strict forms of social control and sanction vanished, while nihilistic individualism increased.
He also says that American culture has the habit of portaying women as objects of desire, as status quo, as objects of possesion fetisism comparable with a shiny hot BMW. Just think about Marilyn Monroe films “Gentlemen prefer blonds” etc.
I think it’s pathetic, if not a sign of a state of psychological regression of an entire culture. It is so strong these days that in sociological tests nearly 0% of 13 year old girls are completely satisfied with their “looks”. They already know that “looks” will determine very many things in life…
Well, there was only one Ted Bundy, and he was american…
However, in most parts of the world, women are treated like objects of possession. The sex tourism “industry” is a good example of this. More and more, it is young girls that are being fetishized – just look at how we dress our daughters, for example, and western men ordering child brides from all over the world or travelling to exotic places just to pay to rape young girls without a condom. (And we wonder why it seems like child pornography is exploding in popularity.) And this fetishization of women as objects has been going on forever. I don’t think it’s accurate to describe it as regress either – it’s just deepening the stranglehold society has on women, and in that way, it’s simply the progression of the status quo.
There are so many valuable things being said here.
I would like to address republicanite:
In your religion, in the beginning (old testament) when god first created woman, he created Lilith [I have an image of her in the header of my blog]. Lilith was adventurous, scandalous, even. God figured he had made a mistake (I thought he was infallible–hmmm), so he then created Eve to join with Adam. Oh, and what became of Lilith? She became god’s lover, and Satan’s, too, as a matter of fact. I don’t recall any mention of Lilith being married to god, or Satan, either. I guess your god is more liberated regarding sex than you.
Rape is about men exerting power over women, and taking something from them. Some men resent the power women have, because, in woman is all power given (to quote my holy book.) That is the origin of Patriarchy–men sought to control that which is creation, and that which is death. There is nothing that humans fear or obsess about more than sex and death. Men seek to control women, because they cannot control themselves.
Oh my Gosh!
I had no idea there were so many replies after my posted comment here… I just now read through all of them…
Well, here’s my reply, Thinking Girl…. I just posted it on my blog… titled, “Sex, Lies, and Videotape: Men, Women, and Rape” (Rather than repost the whole thing here, see http://brucewagner.wordpress.com )
Let me know your thoughts!
: )
Bruce
http://brucewagner.com
Way to try to hijack a topic, Bruce. Very subtle.
@bruce: if you really stand by what you’re “arguing” on this subject, then the advice given above to future rapist is for you, too. basically.
I, myself left my thoughts about this as comment to your post, Bruce, and plan to write about it on my blog tonight as well.
Hijack attempt sabotoged, Max.
Well that is not a hijack attempt sabotaged. See. Here is how this works. Bruce checks looks at this topic and goes, wow, a lot of people are talking on that topic. I will just post a real inflammatory thing about the subject, being all misogynistic and all, and then I will say in that topic that I did it. Then all those poor little misguided chicks will flock to my blog, read my inflammatory comments, comment on my blog, and post little links back to me and I can feel all fluffy my blog got sooo many visits. So.
Basically if you go visit his lame commentary and then post about it and then link to it you are contributing to his topic hijack — i.e. funneling everyone actually talking intelligently about this subject here to his whacky corner of the universe.
Me, I just do not think bad behavior like Bruce’s deserves that sort of attention so I am not visiting that corner and am ignoring him.
Yeah, see, I’m just losing my patience with this line of crap.
I’m sick of this ‘Men are like this, women are like that‘ bullshit. It’s tired, it’s incorrect, it’s old – and it’s a very dangerous, slippery slope. Clearly, Bruce, you didn’t do your homework and read up on social construction theory. You’re still spouting the same old same old, and not really responding to my position with any depth of understanding about biological essentialism (which is, by the way, also a very dangerous theory for gay, lesbian, bisexual, intersexed, and transsexual people – so you might want to be careful about giving it too much support, hmm? Since you fall into one of those groups yourself?). Men and women aren’t LIKE anything, in any sort of way that denotes an incapacity for change. That’s the point. Men aren’t biologically evolved to be rapists due to some overwhelming sex drive. Rape is not a biological crime – it is a social one, committed by those in power over those who are not in power. The exercise of power is what is sexually arousing for the rapist. And there’s nothing biological about power. Rape most definitely is not about sex, no matter how loudly you want to insist that it is.
Rape survivors do not invite rape. Period. Not ever. Rapists are the sole cause of rape. That means rapists are responsible for rape. Survivors are not. Your arguments about women ‘playing with fire’ are demeaning, misogynistic, misandric, and completely illogical. You have no concept of the social pressures on women to be and act in particular ways: you see this is a complete choice, not in any way coerced by the necessity of living in a misogynistic and patriarchal society. You also give no credence to the fact that ALL MEN ARE NOT RAPISTS. If men are so controlled by and powerless to their sex drives, how is it that men are fully capable of stopping RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF SEX at the request of their partner? It happens all the time – during sex, something becomes uncomfortable, someone says please stop, and men (and women too) STOP! DURING SEX! How on earth do you explain that phenomenon?
Yeah, I’m afriad your view IS flawed. I mean, come on – ALL men are a certain way, and ALL women are a certain (other) way? Give me a break. It’s absolutely ridiculous to claim this. I mean, SERIOUSLY.
Rape is a violent, dispicable, disgusting, hateful act. There is nothing a person can do to invite or deserve to have this act perpetrated on them. Saying women should know better than to ‘play with fire’ or ‘feed and tease the ani-males’, and then twisting the way a woman dresses and acts into a reason to blame her for her own rape is also a despicable, disgusting, hateful thing.
For shame.
By the way, the direct link to Bruce’s post is here.
Thanks Lulu and Max
I posted my response, above, in the comments section of his post. However, I have no intention of going back and forth between my blog and his in order to find out what he says in return. (Hear that, Bruce? You want to engage with me on this topic, you can do it here.)
I know what you mean, Max, that this sort of behaviour shouldn’t be tolerated, and that attention only feeds the guy like a vicious cycle. However, his attitude is so friggin pervasive in this society that I really think it needs to be discussed, debunked. I mean, the fucking privileged arrogance of this guy, coming in here from his position of maleness to show all us sad misguided sneaky feminist/pro-woman commenters how we really are repsonsible for our own rapes, after all, so we should really stop all the whining about it and just quit raping ourselves, since men can’t really help it and all. Fucking male fucking privileged arrogance.
And this is the world we live in. This is the world we must navigate, as women, as survivors of sexual violence. We have no problem pointing out the depravity of a pedophile and the innocence of child victims of sexual violence, but when the victim is a woman, by jove, she’s at least partly to blame for what happened. Perhaps it’s the sheer voluminous extent of rape, tens of millions a year worldwide, largely committed by men, that leads to this attitude; for if ALL those rapists were considered depraved in the same way as pedophiles and rape victims were considered innocent in the same way as child victims of sexual violence, well crikey! that don’t look too good on the menz now, does it? pretty hard to legitimately maintain a position of power in society when you have all those depraved men raping all those innocent women. And so, better blame the women. Better blame them for their own rapes. take the heat off a little. and while we’re at it, let’s blame all the non-white people for racism, and all the gays and lesbians and bisexuals and intersexuals and transfolk for all the violence and exclusion they experience at the hands of heterosexist institutions, and we might as well continue blaming the poor for being poor since that works so well to keep the rich rolling in it, and the homeless for being homeless, and let’s blame the ill for being so damn sickly, and we better too blame the disabled for having bodies that just can’t do what normal folks can do. Damn them all, the fuckers! Can’t they just stop oppressing themselves so badly? jeez.
I know you are mad, but I read “Damn them all, the fuckers! Can’t they just stop oppressing themselves so badly! Jeez.”
And I crack up.
But, not cracking up —
Yeah. Bruce sucks. It does no good to talk to him though. He cannot hear you. The smug and banal cannot hear.
For me, Max, I would rather respond on his post as well as here and my own blog because this topic is larger than all of us. Fuck him. Let him have his little hits. What is important is who reads his blog, and that they see commentary that is relevant. We are preaching to the choir here, I want to address those that wouldn’t dream of coming here, but might be attracted to dicks like Bruce. (I in no way mean to belittle this forum–it is vital, it is important, and it has started something that we cannot let be pushed aside–thanks to Thinking Girl.)
By spreading this topic to all blogs, misogynistic as well as feminist, we can bring the commentary to the world at large. I say, lets use Bruce to get our words out in ways we never could if he hadn’t come here to comment. This isn’t about whose blog gets looked at more, its about making real change.
I will post the comments I wrote to Bruce here, in case you don’t want to go there:
Have you ever watched animal planet? There are shows on there about animal shelters that demonstrate some of the psychological testing they do with dogs to determine whether they are fit to be put up for adoption. One includes taking food/treats/bones away from them. If a dog is food aggressive (ie: bites or displays threatening behavior), it is most often killed.
I write a lot of pro-men posts on my blog, so I am not a man-hater. What I hate, and I really hate, are people who don’t take responsibility for their actions. Perhaps the men who cannot control themselves enough to not perpetrate violent sexual acts on women should be killed as unfit, just as the dogs are. I am all for culling the herd, and giving more evolved men a chance to spread their DNA, while eliminating those who are so defective.
I know plenty of men who can control themselves. The act of committing violent sex on a woman turns them off. They want to fuck women who want to be fucked. I think you are a dangerous person, who has a problem with resentment against women. You, and other men like you, are pathetically weak. I presume you have at least one hand and can masturbate. If you can’t find a women who wants to have sex with you, you can hire a prostitute (and yes, I think that should be legal.)
Alcoholics and addicts are weak as well. I no longer buy the fact that addiction is a disease, or the famous “medical model” of addiction. I worked with too many addicts in my former field. Beating addiction is a matter of will. Period. And so is “resisting” women.
It is men like you that force women to wear burkas. I do agree–“In woman is all power given.” Rape is a product of men resenting that power and control that they feel it has over them, and their desire to take it. That is the root of patriarchy.
As I said, though, I do agree that everyone should take responsibility for their actions, and woman have to be “street smart”, as far as risk taking, because the world is full of weak, pathetic men who will victimize them. It is also full of wonderful men, who have evolved themselves to have self-control.
Ultimately, a woman is not to blame for being raped. There is nothing a woman can do to make her deserve this act. If a man rapes a woman, he has violated her body and her spirit, and the law. Do you feel the same way about gay rape? If a large gay man raped you, because he liked your ass and felt you were tempting him and couldn’t “control himself”, would you blame yourself? Of would you blame him.
Human beings ARE animals, and not nearly as evolved away from our instincts and drives as most people think. We do, however, possess a well-developed frontal lobe that assists us with impulse control. Our brains have allowed us to do some amazing things in a relatively short period of time, including space travel. You mean to tell me that a man can invent a rocket, but not keep from forcing a dick into a woman? Come on, aren’t you more intelligent than that?
I think you are doing a disservice to other men by projecting your inadequacies onto them. Maybe you are really just unevolved, and not very bright, so you can’t control yourself. If that is the case, than there are places for people like you to be housed and cared for. I somehow suspect that’s really not the case.
Stop making excuses. And, as for women not understanding the power sexuality and sex drive? Perhaps you don’t know the right women. I myself have an extremely high sex drive, and love sex. I have not met a man yet who can keep up with me on his own, and find that most men, though they may boast at wanting to fuck all the time, when faced with a woman who really does, get very intimidated and back out.
Rape is about power, dominance, and aggression, and about taking hatred out on women. If young boys commit date rape, they were raised wrong by their fathers, who probably committed date rape as well. Perhaps you should do a little more self-analyzation here. Perhaps you should talk to some actual rapists, and victims of rape, so you can get a more accurate perspective.
And then:
Afterthought–
Perhaps if I put it this way it might be easier for you to understand. By writing what you did, you provoked me. Being that I have been a victim of sexual violence, you touched on the resentment I feel for men that think like you. You have tempted me by being so forward with your words and thoughts, and so, therefore, I cannot control myself, and I will have to shoot you in the head. I will have to find you, and I will have to kill you. I can’t help it. You tempted me. You knew what you were doing. It is your fault, and I will have no blame.
Of course, I won’t do that. I have self-control.
Oh, well, you are more patient and generous than I am Lulu. You have faith the Bruces of the world are redeamable — and the patience to be around them long enough to try to see that happen. Me, I do not have either, but I would rather be wrong than right on this one. Go get ’em.
The Bruces of this world are exactly why rape continues. The liberal ‘I’m not [racist/sexist/homophobic/whatever], I have so many friends who are [black/women/gay/whatever]’ attitude, the ‘I’m [black/woman/gay/whatever], so I can’t possibly be [racist/sexist/homophobic/whatever]’ attitude, the ‘I’m just trying to tell it like it is’ attitude. And an outright refusal to actually do the homework, listen and consider the opposing argument, and then come back to the table with at the very least a more informed opinion about opposing claims instead of reiterating the same old stuff the opposing claims critiqued and defeated in the first place. Biological essentialism is not a valid argument! And this Bruce guy thinks just if he says it loud and long enough it’s going to change the FACT that a binary sex system is a HISTORICAL CONSTRUCT, that before we had a two-sex system we actually had a ONE-SEX SYSTEM, that hundreds of thousands of people have been born NEITHER MALE NOR FEMALE and even more CHOOSE to live in that grey space. Please. Ignoring the fact that discourse MAKES our identities isn’t going to get you anywhere.
Bruce responded to my comment on his blog, but he seems too lazy to come back over here and respond to me. maybe he’s a little uncomfortable outside of his home turf. I say he’s arrogant to think he can move the discussion away and split the focus. If he wants to discuss, he can do it here.
Um. Think? Bruce does not know what a binary sex system is.
That is why he won’t discuss things here. It is embarassing for him. He does not have the education or vocabulary for the discussion. [Well, also, he is a misogynistic bore, but that is another subject entirely.]
Ha ha, thanks for the perspective Max – you are probably right. Which is why I recommended readings to him. The most basic truth about Bruce is not that he doesn’t know what a binary sex system is, but that he doesn’t want to know. It’s a privilege thing.
Naw. Bruce is screwed. He isn’t in a privileged rank any more. That only worked while the middle class held sway [wow did Karl Marx not see the middle class coming] and that sway is gone. So, being white middle class with a penis, while Bruce grew up thinking believing and being told that made him important, well it just does not any more. These days, to the powers that be, the middle class are fodder. That leaves him in a shrinking gray area, where people better educated can just ream him and he has no defense because he never knew or thought he might need more.
We are entering a time when three things count, real smarts, real knowledge, and real money, and Bruce has none of those.
It is not a good time. But, it is a better time for you and I than it is for Bruce. He is just clawing real hard at old status quos because they are all he has and if he loses those, then he has to acknowledge he does not matter in today’s system and is just fodder.
Sucks to be Bruce.
Wait. I forgot one. Real beauty. Tragically for the beautiful though, without real smarts, real knowledge, or real money, well, they do not last long they get eaten. That is one problem Bruce does not have though. He is pretty plain.
If I might add, re: Bruce– his mind is a circle with a sieve in the middle. I don’t think he has the faculties to process any new thoughts or ideas. I have literally had MRDD clients that had more imagination, more insight, and a higher capacity for learning and understanding new things. In fact, they were able to control their behavior and not rape, something that is obviously beyond his abilities and capacity.
His writing it the poorest attempt at rhetoric that I have ever seen. My kids made more convincing arguments when they were two.
Anyone here from the U.S.? Motherhood Uncensored posted a tongue in cheek piece about stay at home moms having it made and became the instant favorite of some strange contingent of humorless strident [illiterate] men that say U.S. women are evil, corrupt and soulless sycophants who go about marrying men and living off the proceeds of the divorces. It is pretty warped [way too much desperate housewives, fellas, no more tv for you] and I am getting beat up now for making fun of them. [oops]
Are american women evil?
I think I messed up that link, Think, I was going for blank target but something did not take, sorry about that.
Max – that’s interesting what you said about Bruce, losing his grasp on privilege. I think perhaps too, as a gay man, he’s gripping onto any amount of privilege he can get in a blatantly homophobic society. And it seems in a capitalist system, gay men are gaining strength as valuable consumers/cogs int he capitalist system.
as for real beauty, perhaps we can work our way towards a place where ‘real’ beauty isn’t dependent on bone structure and body fat percentages, but on depth of spirit, generosity, and kindness.
I didn’t hear about this american women being evil thing, but your link did work, so I’m going to read it right now….
… wow, I just read. very interesting. I love the blanket condemnation of all american women, and the complete innocence of all american men implied by that site of theirs. obvious misogyny going on there, wow. thanks for the heads up!
Lulu – you crack me up! that why I keep you around 🙂
Thanks for looking. These guys are such droids they do not even know they have descended on a satirical site and their attitudes are very scary.
Hey, I’m good for something!
Max–I’m going to check that out as well. The gender wars are heating up, and its not pretty.
[…] There has been much discussion regarding the subject of rape recently in response to a post made by Thinking Girl, whose blog is always well-written, thoughtful, passionate, and inspiring. […]
Well, that was sad. Forign man with bad english asks for advice on “how not to be a rapist” which I in part read as “how to be an american” and most of the response is ZOMG!!!!11!!! CUT YOUR BALLS OFF!
followed by a lot of gynocentric rape-prevention advice. I mean, the e-mail that started this was not a gynocentric question.
(snark) Of course, empathy isn’t a gendered trait (/snark)
Indy – “cut your balls off?” Please. Nowhere on this post did I ever make any such comment, nor did, I think, any of the other commenters, although I don’t claim to want or be able to control what they think or say about the topic. For a discussion that indeed devolved into talk of castration, go visit Twisty’s, linked above in the comments. Or try the blog, Dead Men Don’t Rape. There certainly do exist much more radical ideas about how to prevent rape than the suggestions I gave to this guy. But apparently, anything remotely related to focussing on the potential rapist himself, and not on chastising and frightening women into staying inside their homes with their doors barricaded is too radical for some people. Like you:
yeah, that’s kind of the point. The point is, stop thinking about your and your fucking hard-on and start thinking about the woman into whose vagina or anus you plan on inserting that hard-on, with or without her permission. I’m not sure how you could have possibly missed that point. Have I put it more clearly for you?
I’m not sure how to interpret your snarky comment about empathy. who do you think I should have empathy for? the guy who wrote to me and called himself Future Rapist? Surely not. I reserve my empathy for the millions of women, men, and children who are rape survivors all across this globe.
I find it interesting and enlightening that men like Indy respond the way they do, and I think it is due to the fact that they fundamentally believe that it is a woman’s responsibility to fuck any man who wants to fuck her, and that if we don’t want to we are somehow slighting them. They can’t understand what rape is, or that it is not about sex, or that women have a right to be outraged and resentful.
In addition, if a woman dares to be strong, or assertive, or opinionated, or outspoken, she somehow emasculated men–which is actually illustrative of the fact that men who feel this way are actually projecting their insecurity as males, and self-perceived inferiority. Real men get it. Real men don’t have to rape.
Your “empathy” remark, Indy dear, is an illogical and knee-jerk emotionally driven remark in the context of this discussion, which leads me to believe that you are inadvertently trying to justify some past behavior of yours, and you want us to feel sorry for you. Poor baby–didn’t get laid when he wanted. Those evil women. Maybe if you deserved it, it wouldn’t be so hard for you to find a woman who wants you, which will not be possible as long as you have the attitudes about women that you do. Sure, you may be able to pay for sex in one way or other, but it will not be what you really want. Stop punishing us for your bad behavior and attitudes. Grow up, take some personal responsibility for your actions, and become a man.
Thinking Girl gave him a lot more respect, time and consideration in her response to him than you, or men like have given us.
you tell him, Lulu!
thanks for your support.
After having read this, I wanted to state the following:
I am a heterosexual male who grew up witnessing a great deal of gendered violence in my home, was quite traumatized by it, and as a rejection of this paradigm I would personally rather die than cause sexual discomfort to any woman. Maybe this is an overcompensation, but there it is.
One of Max’s comments therefore really resonated with me about “every man being a potential threat” to women. Far be it from me to decry this position; I see a lot of truth in it. However, taken to its extension within my belief system, it doesn’t leave me with a lot of options when it comes to expressing my sexuality. If my sexual feelings and desires are inherently threatening, then women deserve nothing less than to never have to deal with them. As a result, I have basically “shut myself in” and disallowed myself any form of expression of my sexual desire because I can’t conscion being seen as a “potential threat”, and because I have the belief that any sane woman would see my sexual feelings as “wrong” and “harmful”, perhaps because I unconsciously see them that way myself, perhaps not.
No question, really, I just wanted to throw this out there because it’s what’s on my mind, and I’m interested in knowing whether anyone has anything to say about it. Apologies as it’s a bit of a sidetrack.
Sex is not a threat. Rape is a threat. Sex and rape are not the same thing. If you cannot distinguish between the two, that is a problem.
HI Dissonant – thanks for your comment.
I think I can get what you’re saying here – it’s like not knowing how deep the Matrix goes, how deeply your psyche has been affected by your experiences and exposures to gendered violence during your formative years. I will say, at the very least, it’s admirable that you care to be respectful of your potential sexual partners to the point of not even going there in order to avoid hurting someone.
I’m no shrink, so I can’t really give you much advice on this, but it sounds to me like perhaps a real psychiatrist/counsellor/psychologist/therapist might be able to help you work through some of the issues you’re having with sexual desire. If you haven’t been to see someone, it might be a good thing to do for yourself, to help you better determine what a healthy sexual relationship is about. Also, I don’t know what kind of stuff you might be interested in, and I don’t really want or need to know, but perhaps BDSM? Lots of folks get up to some stuff that others might find problematic, but they do it in a way that is safe and respectful. It’s all a matter of perception and consent, really. If someone else is happy enough to engage with your desires because it meets theirs, then that might be a workable solution. However, I don’t think BDSM is a substitute for good therapy on this issue.
Sexual desire is a difficult thing to talk about politically, because it seems to be outside of politics a lot of the time. My main concerns with sexual relationships are that they be respectful and consensual. That’s where I feel what Max just said – rape and sex are different things. the question is, where does the line get drawn between rape and sex? and the answer is: at careful, continued consent.
I hope that helps.
Max: Several women I know have difficulty distinguishing between sex and rape on some levels — in other words, they perceive sex as a threat. Is that their problem? Or do I (as a man) have a responsibility to ensure that no woman feels as if she has been raped or is going to be raped, regardless of what we think happened or want to happen? I firmly believe the latter to be true.
Also, I believe I know what the difference is between sex and rape. Rape doesn’t even enter into what I want to do or even want to think about. I just don’t want to alarm anyone and/or put myself in the path of a woman who is scared of my power or perceived “desire” to rape (I have no desire to rape), and as long as I have a heterosexual and/or male gender identity, as you point out, this process can and will happen, and thus sex, while not strictly speaking a threat, is in too many cases “close enough for government work”.
thinking girl: Thank you for your response, but I think that perhaps you partly misunderstood what I was trying to say. Let me reassure you that I am, as I intellectually understand, a perfectly normal, kind, considerate “vanilla” man. I have no interest in any sexual activity not fully mutual and free from an exploitative or subjugating dynamic.
I guess I am a little touchy about this because I am tired of the stigma of the whole “cycle of abuse” theory; it is equally true in some cases that exposure to abuse will cause one to reject the abusive mindset rather than capitulate to it, and I don’t want to be lumped into the category of “abuser” just because I am a male who witnessed violence.
Having said that, I encounter a problem. Due to my understanding that women “should” believe my sexuality (and male heterosexuality in general) is vile and disgusting (and given the time and resources I am sure I could come up with 5000 examples of women saying just that), there is ipso facto no such thing as a “respectful” sexual interaction between a man and a woman, because any woman who is capable of experiencing a man’s sexual feelings, no matter how respectful they are in his mind (or indeed how respectful they would be in “reality”, although I firmly believe this is one area where “perception is reality”), “should” condemn them. It is this fact that has largely held me back — I am 28 years old and have had one brief “relationship” with a woman who made all the moves and was too persistent to give up no matter how much I demurred. Even then, if I had been physically attracted to her (I wasn’t), I definitely would have run the other way as that kind of thing “should” be vile and disgusting in women’s eyes. (Incidentally, I am becoming aware that this means that on some leve they are vile and disgusting in mine — despite the intellectual understanding, albeit incomplete, that they are not.)
And I can’t establish consent without asking for it, or at least making it known how I feel, in which case I am betraying my vile, disgusting self to her, which I can’t allow myself to do. So, I can’t ask a woman out, or compliment her on her appearance, or any similar things, because these things are believed to be so terrible that they require consent, and so asking consent requires consent to ask, and a problem of infinite regress becomes apparent.
Now, I know on an intellectual level that there are some women that, to some degree, do not view male heterosexuality in that way, and when faced with male sexual desire free from the influences I mentioned above, would actually have little problem with it or (hope against hope!) actually feel positively about it. I just can’t bring myself to understand why or how that would be the case. Furthermore, in order to allow myself to openly feel sexual desire for a woman, in whatever form (looking at her the wrong way, or smiling the wrong kind of smile, or other behaviours typically classified under the rubric of “flirting”), I have to make the assumption that these things will not be vile and disgusting to her, and although I know that they may not be, I can’t allow myself to assume they are not.
Good call on the counselling, though. I am working through it; I just get frustrated that it’s not going fast enough.
Thank you very much for your time. I really appreciate it.
Men are not vile and disgusting, Dis. Neither is sex.
Look, some dogs bite. Not all dogs, lots of dogs are perfectly fine, but because some do, you have to be aware of this when dealing with dogs you do not know. Some men rape. Not all men, but because some do, you have to be aware of this when dealing with men you do not know. None of this makes dogs or men vile or disgusting. Both pose an unknown quotient for violence and doing you harm. That does not mean all will, it just means some can and will and you do not know so have to approach all with caution.
HI Dissonant – thanks for your reply. Sorry for the misunderstanding in my earlier comment. Now that I know more, let me try again.
so, we’re talking about regular, run of the mill kind of sexuality stuff here. And I think I can mostly understand your concern, because it’s also been mine, but in reverse: how to have a sexual relationship, as a woman, with a man, and have it be free from gender power imbalance issues? Am I along the right lines here? So from your end, how to have a sexual relationship with a woman without being dominating, exploitative, etc.?
My concern here is your idea that women “should” find male sexuality, and yours inclusive in that, “vile and disgusting.” “Vile” and “disgusting” are two very strongly negative words. And yes, I’m sure you’re right that many women do feel this way, for various reasons – but that’s not to say that all women would, or should. Forgive me for pulling out the Pop Psychology 101, but that does sound like a classic case of transference to me: it sounds like you’re projecting your own feelings about your sexuality and male sexuality more generally onto women as a group.
However, I can see the point that male sexuality is inherently harmful to women because it’s based on objectifying women and using them, as objects, for male sexual pleasure, thus dehumanizing and demoralizing women. But, I don’t think it has to be this way! This may sort of be the general way men and women are taught to be/act/think about each other sexually, but it doesn’t have to be this way at all. I think there is definitely room for men and women to have sexual relationships that are mutually engaging, respectful, and satisfying – even with patriarchy breathing down our necks. But, I also think that mostly this has to begin with oneself – because, doesn’t everything?
I don’t know…. I mean, I understand what you’re saying, about not wanting to put a woman off or harm her by doing or saying something she might find offensive. But at the same time, I can’t help but feel like some of your hesitation might be informed by your own feelings that you’re projecting onto others. I can’t speak for all women, of course, but for myself, I am generally not offended when a man compliments me on how I look (like, “You look nice tonight” or “I like your dress” or “I think you’re pretty” or “Nice shoes”), or asks me out or to buy me a drink, even when I’m not in the least bit interested. I do become offended when there is arrogance, sleaziness, asshattery, inappropriate comments that objectify me, and general disrespect of my personhood and humanity involved in what a man says or how he approaches me. I mean, there is not objectivity about this kind of thing, because everyone reads things differently, but I guess what I’m trying to say is that you’ve got to get to a place where you feel like you are being as responsible and respectful as you possibly can be, and then let it go, because at some point, it’s going to be out of your control how someone else responds to you. They’re going to respond how they’re going to respond, from their own point of view, and there’s not much you can do about that, because we all have our shit to work out, right? So long as you’re being as careful and respectful as you can be, I think your moral requirements are met. It’s then up to the person on the receiving end to take it how they want to take it.
Does that make sense? Anyone else wanna jump in here if they think I’ve been neglectful of something?
Keep up the counselling. I wish you all the best with sorting things out.
Max, thinking girl: Thank you both for your kind words and helpful consideration. You have gone above and beyond the call of duty, and I am quite moved. I will keep up with the counselling and try to work out some of my shame issues, although it’s tough slogging.
Good point on the transference issue in particular; I have often wondered this about myself, although I believe it might be a little more complicated (due to my background, which I won’t go into).
I also agree that male sexuality doesn’t have to be objectifiying (although the concept and definition of “objectification” for me opens a whole other kettle of fish… but that is perhaps a subject for another time and place). I also don’t see myself as dominating or exploitative, and even if I did try to pursue a relationship I think I could keep myself reasonably free from these things. It’s more of a core shame issue, a more basic and fundamental feeling of “wrongness”, that holds me back.
Anyhow, thank you both very much and best of luck in all your future endeavours. (unless you wish to pursue this line of discussion further — in which case I am always interested 🙂 )
I forgot to mention a minor quibble: to me, “being as responsible and respectful as I could be” means hiding my sexuality completely (shame issues, you know). Perhaps you mean “being as responsible and respectful as I could be while still expressing my sexuality”? Yes, it probably looks just like semantics, but it really does help me to categorize these things.
Also, Max, I want to come right out and tell you how much I agree with the second part of your last comment.
Thanks again.
dissonant, you may find it reassuring to know that there are men who are trying to address these very issues, taking responsibility for solving the problem of male violence, recognizing the many ways in which it is deeply damaging to both women and men, and must be eradicated. that this is (or can be) “natural” as well, and that basically masculinity and male sexuality don’t have to be what we’ve been taught it is. but it must be worked at, just like feminist women must work at their own issues around how female sexuality is seen and how it impacts them and their relationships, negotiate a level of comfort with it, “fit in” or not as the case may be, etc..
here are some thing you can read and groups to check out, addressing i think much of what you brought up: “What men can do to stop sexism and male violence” – especially the list here and about “Challenging Rape Culture,” “Why is Rape a Men’s Issue?” and “10 Things Men Can Do to Stop Rape” here
– and the whole XYoline.net site, as well as mrcforchange.org, menagainstsexualviolence.org, mencanstoprape.org, menstoppingviolence.org…
other than that, about your question regarding feminists “not caring” about men from elsewhere, too, i can’t think of anything better to say than this bell hooks quote:
Dissonant – you’re welcome.
I see, it’s not necessarily a worry about being a dominating “man” in a sexal relationship, but as you say, a “core shame issue.” I’m sorry you experience these feelings. I hope you are able to work things out within yourself. I don’t necessarily think that one’s sexuality is the core of who they are and that it must be expressed to live fully, but sexuality does play a role in life and relationships, and I think it is important to be able to express one’s sexuality when and if you want to.
Yes, I did mean “being as responsible and respectful as I could be while still expressing my sexuality.” that’s right on the money, in terms of what I meant, at least.
I also agree with Max’s second comment – although I’d take it a bit further than that, because so many rapes are committed by men that are known to their victims. So it’s not even that we need to be careful around men we don’t know, but also that we need to be careful around men, period, and bear in mind that sometimes, men we know can turn on us (just like sometimes, dogs we know can turn on us). The moral of the story is, keep your guard up, girls.
Ruxandra – thanks for adding in those references for Dissonant, and also for jumping in with the “not caring” bit here and elsewhere. bell hooks is always a good place to start from, and this quote pretty much sums it up.
ruxandra:
I have to say that I disagree a great deal with many (not all, but many) of the references you have given me. Personally, I think they are based on a very shallow and short-sighted analysis of our culture and psychology, especially male sexual and gender psychology. I want to help to stop real violence and abuse, not get bogged down in this self-indulgent, vapid bullshit about how I am controlled by my privilege and how advertising and magazines that depict attractive women’s bodies are a force for violence in our society and how rape is symptomatic of the ubiquitous power of the patriarchy. I like to think I’ve outgrown that shit by now. I don’t buy the reasoning behind these statements at all, I think they’re fundamentally myopic and (dare I say it?) egotistical and I believe they actually work counterproductively to their supposed aims by drawing attention away from the real problem (actual domination and exploitation of women), not to mention exacerbating my feelings of being “vile and disgusting” by accusing me of being something I’m not.
In short, I know my thoughts and feelings better than anyone else knows them, and I know I am not, could not be, violent or an abuser or one who dominates or exploits women, despite the logical extension of these statements showing that I must be because of several phenomena that are supposed to lead to these things. Rather than reject the evidence, then, I reject the theory.
Anyhow, I’m sure you’ve heard and disagreed with this stuff a thousand times before, so I’ll go find something more productive to do. The painful part for me is that I do agree that male violence needs to be eradicated, and that it can be natural for men to live in a world without it. It hurts me that I don’t think we’re going to be able to reconcile anything beyond that.
And I was really pleased with and gratified by the responses up til now 😦 IMO that quote from bell hooks is right on, too.
thinking girl: Thank you. As much as I dislike being compared to a dog 🙂 I do understand and agree with your point.
Incidentally, I don’t know what this “not caring” bit is about; is it a reference to something I said that I’m missing?
After my diatribe above you may not want to respond anymore, but I’m leaving this comment in the hopes that that is not the case. As always, do what you will (not that you need me to tell you that!)
Max: A little quibble that I noticed above: you refer to fifty percent of the population as potential rape victims. I happen to believe that one hundred percent of the population are potential rape victims. It’s a small thing, but I thought it needed to be said. 🙂
oops, the link to the compilation of various advice as to “What men can do to stop sexism and male violence” is this:
http://www.xyonline.net/downloads/Whatmencando.doc
dissonant, i must say i don’t actually understand your point, then. because i think what you’re (still) saying is that you want it to be clear that people can transcend (“outgrow”) the bullshit. and that is precisely what i was saying and the stuff under those links says, too.
however, the fact that you know/hope you have outgrown it, doesn’t mean the bullshit doesn’t exist, right? it means it exists, and it’s all the more positive if you are able to see through it and address it. to me, the message of those “vapid” points is very hopeful. and i don’t know why they’d be “egotistical” and “self-indulgent” – they obviously make you angry in some way.
but i really don’t understand. for the outgrowing to happen in any real way (which you say is what you want, also), the bullshit must be named and analyzed. recognizing that people are “controlled by […] privilege and how advertising and magazines that depict attractive women’s bodies are a force for violence in our society and how rape is symptomatic of the ubiquitous power of the patriarchy” etc. doesn’t mean anyone is telling you what you feel and think, or that you are something or other. i guess this is where a problem comes in. and there’s a perfect parallel there with how women feel about stereotypes of “femininity” as well – for instance, just because it’s expected and socially sanctioned that women should be superficial and empty-headed, it doesn’t mean that any woman is automatically like that (that i, as a woman, am like that). but it does mean that part of the patriarchal order depends on and profits from this stereotype. so then i can choose to fit or break it.
aren’t/weren’t you saying precisely that knowing/feeling that you’ve “outgrown this shit by now” doesn’t translate into this shit being outgrown, so then more needs to be done? ’cause i thought it was. and that’s what groups of men against violence are interested in addressing – besides actively working to educate other males about privilege and men’s responsibility to stop violence.
i’ve known men who belonged to such groups and i’ve worked together with such groups before in rape crisis and prevention services, and all i can say is – maybe you need to take another look at them. give those sites another try. maybe your initial interpretation and reaction was based on some misunderstanding of what they’re saying and what they’re about. or maybe you’ve had some particular experience that was negative, but that doesn’t mean you can judge all of them.
so i’m sorry not to have “gratified” and i’m quite surprised by your reaction… however, if you have some other, better approach for ensuring that “male violence needs to be eradicated, and that it can be natural for men to live in a world without it,” i salute it.
but i truly don’t understand what “theory” you say you reject? the theory that privilege exists? you’re right, that‘s something i’ve heard thousands of times, unfortunately.
ps: the “not caring” point comes from the “has feminism failed” thread (the question of why not choose “equalism” – or “humanism” – rather than “feminism”) and the “on rape” thread bit that you commented on yourself, but no, it’s not just a reference to you, personally.
ruxandra:
Thanks for clearing that up. Personally, I don’t think feminism has “failed” or that equalism or humanism needs to “replace” it: I think they are two great tastes that taste great together, if you will. 🙂 I just don’t want to see humanism dropped or ignored either.
Not that you said anything, but I want to apologize if I offended you or anyone with the above (not that I’m going to take it back just yet). This is quite a sore point of mine, and often when discussing it I don’t tone down my anger to the point where it is palatable to others. Still, I must remember that it is not my intention to be divisive where I can avoid it.
wait, i did say something, it’s in the moderation queue. 🙂
Ok. Ooh, nervous :S
Actually, I have been up for 24 hours so I will go to bed. Will check tomorrow or the next day. Hope that’s alright. 🙂
Silly me for thinking I could sleep. I will clarify my position.
I believe that male privilege exists. I believe that the patriarchy exists. I believe that there are men that dominate and exploit women. I believe that it is a problem prevalent in society and needs to be eradicated. I think we agree on those points, at least. I just think we disagree on where the patriarchy is and isn’t found and what it does and doesn’t mean.
In particular, I believe that concluding that “I am controlled by my own privilege and advertising and magazines that depict attractive women’s bodies are a force for violence in our society and rape is symptomatic of the ubiquitous power of the patriarchy” is wrong, is very shallow and short-sighted, and that by chasing these shadows modern feminists are basically taking their focus away from things that could actually be done to help women. (Note I clarified the first item: I was referring to the idea I run across that my privilege has turned me into a blithering idiot who as such has no idea about what sexism or patriarchy really mean and thus conveiently cannot engage in meaningful debate about the subject. See below about memetic content).
I simply don’t buy the analysis that leads to these conclusions. I think they are based on a pronounced lack of understanding about human behaviour and psychology, especially male sexual and gender psychology. And because I don’t believe them, and in some cases actively work to oppose them, I am told I am an enemy of women, when I really don’t believe that’s the case. I also think the memetic content of these conclusions is tremendous and there is so much “if you don’t completely agree, you are an oppressor and therefore automatically wrong” bunker mentality that any opportunity for meaningful interchange of ideas is often lost.
This “OMG! patriarchy is responsible for everything” attitude is exactly what I feel I have outgrown. Yes, partiarchal domination is out there, and I do my best to condemn it when I think I’ve found it. But, as they say, “Look hard enough for something and you will find it”, and I think this is applicable to many aspects of life, patriarchy being no different. Look hard enough for links to patriarchal structures and you will find them, whether they are really there or not. I have encountered people that so go far as to say that because I enjoy looking at the women in Playboy, despite the fact that I do find the Playboy culture to be objectifying to women, I am basically little more than a rapist waiting to happen, which I know is not the case, and both male and female feminists that know me very well agree wholeheartedly that I am not among that group. At the very least, when compared to my internal core belief that my normal, vanilla sexuality is “vile and disgusting” to women, pursuing any kind of sexual relationship certainly seems to me to be worse in comparison.
I believe “if all you have is a hammer, everything around starts to look like a nail.” I think modern feminism needs to realize that the lens that facilitates identification of things with the patriarchy is its hammer, and although it is a fine one for nail work, there are significant non-nail issues, and feminism needs to examine what other tools could be used on these problems rather than trying to make nails out of them and simply causing damage in the process.
I am aware that there is much to laud about rape crisis centers, believe me. From giving the victims support and combating efforts to blame them (which are both of course sorely needed — I wholeheartedly agree that rape and abuse are never the victim’s fault), legal work, advocacy, fundraising, the list goes on. It’s just the stuff you pointed out to me seems to be trying to go about combating rape and abuse in a shallow and short-sighted way by buying into the analysis I described rather than successfully (in my view) understanding the causes of the problems they fight. And I believe that’s counter-productive, and so this type of analysis, that I believe has failed women in crisis and unfairly (in my not-so-humble opinion) blamed some men for being unwitting tools of the patriarchy, makes me angry.
In conclusion, I believe that there is patriarchy and male privilege, and that they do need to be dismantled, but I also believe that the beliefs these resources communicate as to their nature are overblown and inaccurate, obscure the truth rather than unearth it, and do more to hinder the cause than to help it.
Hope this makes more sense.
Typo: …but I also believe that some of the beliefs these resources communicate…
Sorry about that.
p.s. woohoo! 5 in a row!
dissonant – no, actually, to me it doesn’t make more sense. because in order to argue your “i’ve overcome this bullshit but the problem lies somewhere else than feminists say” position, you must lump together all feminists into the category of those who tell you that “privilege has turned [you] into a blithering idiot who as such has no idea about what sexism or patriarchy really mean and thus conveiently cannot engage in meaningful debate about the subject.” but the thing is, my point and the point of those lists i linked to was pretty much the opposite (that men can indeed engage in a meaningful analysis). so i still don’t understand.
what i hear is that you want to still be allowed to enjoy looking at women in playboy and otherwise “sometimes actively work to oppose conclusions” about privilege, exploitation etc. (?) and NOT be told you’re supporting the patriarchy. and i’m also hearing that the work done by feminists isn’t “actually helping women,” in your not-so-humble-opinion, that in fact everyone else is shallow, and short-sighted, and misguided, and shadow-chasing and on the wrong track.
really?
well, ok. fine. like i said, if you are able to find some other way of going about dismantling the patriarchy, preventing rape, eradicating sexism and violence etc. than by naming the problems and working through them – great. but how? from what you were saying before, i was under the impression that this is exactly what your question was… and yet you don’t seem to be looking for an answer at all.
to me, it seems like a huge freaking (mis)step from not wanting to find the patriarchy in playboy to concluding that “by chasing these shadows modern feminists are basically taking their focus away from things that could actually be done to help women.” ok, please enumerate some of these other “things” – and then maybe i’ll understand and agree with your not-so-humble angry opinion.
and don’t worry, there’s “modern feminists” who also look at women in playboy. just like there are feminists who are “women in playboy” (alongside the million other ways we submit to, compromise with and/or profit from the patriarchal order every day). this doesn’t mean the privilege/exploitation part isn’t there and playboy, the sex industry etc. aren’t an integral part and an expression of the problem.
the “shaming,” by the way, doesn’t come from feminists who try to look at these things honestly and pragmatically and peel away the layers of patriarchy, but from traditional culture which would prefer those layers to stay on, and not mention them or think about it.
Oh let’s back up a little here before this becomes so intellectualized the problem is forgotten entirely.
Dis thinks a woman having sex with a man [him] is vile and disgusting and thinks any “intelligent woman” should also think sex with a man [him] is vile and disgusting. That is pretty twisted up. And robs any woman Dis might have sex with of any impetus or desires of her own.
Dis also repeatedly refers to sex as expressing himself. Sex, in a traditional sense, though, involves two people, not one. So this “it is me expressing me” perspective too is twisted up. It eradicates any partnership inherent in a two person act and makes sex a one sided narcissistic act of self expression rather than a mutual act of partnership or joining.
These are big problems, Dis. You might want to work on them. And your views on feminism, in light of these problems? No matter how intellectual in presentation, they are invalid until you do work on them because you do not see women as people, you see them as objects and extensions of your personal sexual dysfunction and, possibly worse, you use damaged women as justification for maintaining personal dysfunction.
Fix the dysfunction and start noticing there is another person in the bed with you and I might take some of the other stuff you have to say seriously. Not till then though.
ruxandra — Of course I don’t lump all feminists into this category. If I did, I would be confused by the fact that you’re responding to me. 🙂 Thanks for that, by the way.
I want to prevent rape and abuse. I want to dismantle the patriarchy. I think that many feminists do great work on both of these, and I admire it. I just don’t think the idea that these two things are more than superficially connected is faintly ridiculous, and comes from a failure to understand the social implications behind these phenomena.
If you can swallow looking at it, the first part of Susan Faludi’s Stiffed gets into some ideas closer to how I feel (although I haven’t read it in a while) — basically I think that men rape in significant numbers because they feel (rightly or wrongly) that they are powerless, and abuse and rape are things that they feel they can do to regain some sense of power. So, although this attitude may as a side effect reinforce the patriarchy, I don’t believe that were the patriarchy to disappear tomorrow that the problems of rape and abuse would go away — far from it.
This leads me back to the quote from bell hooks… we need to teach men to love. We need to teach them that there are ways to feel powerful that don’t involve harming or exploiting women. Shaming them as “tools of the patriarchy” and telling them that their privilege is responsible when they feel underprivileged is IMO the wrong approach.
As for Playboy, I can see a connection with the patriarchal order regarding the Playboy culture and its exploitation of women (although I fail to see the connection between the patriarchy and rape, as above). I don’t think that we are necessarily (key word here) contributing to rape or abuse in our society when we decide to enjoy looking at a woman who decided to pose in a manner that is reinforcing to male sexual pleasure, regardless of what relationship to the patriarchy that woman has or doesn’t have. Yes, elements of the sex industry are connected to rape and abuse, no question. I just think that some of these conclusions are going too far.
I am not trying to “indict” all feminists, far from it, just the ones that I percieve as cleaving to these attitudes. I don’t believe these people, for all their positive qualities (and they are many) are naming the problems properly and working through them “honestly and pragmatically”. I think they are in fact being intellectually dishonest and a little bit delusional to see a connection that I don’t believe is there, and thus reaching faulty conclusions about how to stop rape and abuse.
MaxL
Dis also repeatedly refers to sex as expressing himself. Sex, in a traditional sense, though, involves two people, not one. So this “it is me expressing me” perspective too is twisted up. It eradicates any partnership inherent in a two person act and makes sex a one sided narcissistic act of self expression rather than a mutual act of partnership or joining.
I don’t follow this. Partnership comes from mutual expression, and mutual expression involves individual expression on all sides, and communication based on that expression. It is not some kind of Vulcan mind meld where individual expression disappears.
And besides, were it not for individual expression of desire to join into a partnership, how would partnership begin in the first place?
And I’m not going to rise to the bait of you telling me I don’t see women as people simply because I have expectations of how they might percieve aspects of the world. All of us have ideas (right or wrong) about how others might respond to things in our environment and the actions of others. Does that mean we do not see them as people? That’s ridiculous.
And so, I don’t believe it’s right to conclude that my views on feminism are invalid (this does back to something I said a little earlier).
I think you’re right about the dysfunction, though. In my childhood, I got to see women being fundamentally damaged, and I think that in parts of my consciousness my cry of pain that resulted from seeing this process is still echoing.
Oh, and before I forget — if I were truly narcissistic I would see no reason to not simply pursue my own pleasure, no matter the cost to others.
And I don’t discount the possibility that women might want me to join into this partnership with them, I just don’t understand why they wouldn’t see me and vile and disgusting and I think that by asking if it is the case I am risking being seen as vile and disgusting if they don’t (which seems to me to be far more likely).
yeah, well, you see, dissonant – the problem is that you understand that bell hooks quote about teaching men love as somehow being v. different from the point that men must take responsibility for their actions, educate themselves/each other, and thus change the status quo. i don’t know why you’re convinced that men can’t possibly learn “to love” this way? i – and many other people actively involved in addressing rape and violence – disagree with you there. and we disagree because this is the most straightforward, natural, pragmatic AND respectful way… and we know it works. i can’t think of a better approach. you still haven’t proposed any.
but do you honestly believe that anyone who’s ever worked in rape crisis and prevention doesn’t know that sexual violence is precisely about the assertion of power? that they’re “naive” and delusional and superficial and don’t know what they’re talking about? come ON! that’s what’s ridiculous.
that, and the whole “but don’t tell me not to enjoy playboy” thing… like i said already, you can do whatever you want – but refusing to look at it critically is just that. it *shouldn’t* make you angry to even entertain the idea that something you do *is* actually “patriarchal.”
and i’m not gonna comment anything further, because i don’t see a dialog happening at all. you are arguing against stuff that’s the opposite of what i’m saying – for instance, the fact that it’s at all about shaming or abstractly dismantling the patriarchy in order to reach the goal of eradicating violence.
No one baited you Dis. I made an observation.
If you and a partner brought in groceries together, would that be you expressing your grocery bringing in self? No. It would be a mutual endeavor. If you washed the dishes together, would that be expressing your dish washing self? No. It would be a mutual endeavor. Sex is also a mutual endeavor. It is more fun than washing dishes or bringing in groceries, but still, a mutual endeavor. You are just twisted up about sex so it has become to you all about expressing you — and that is why when you talk about it you call it expressing you. If you were twisted up about dish washing, the same thing would be going down with dish washing.
You can yell “pain” a couple more times and say I am a mean bad person for saying things not comforting or coddling. You came here saying you wanted answers though. There is an answer.
Alright. I think I will stop at this point also — I obviously need to do some more reading and thinking about it before I come back to the table, and I find it quite emotionally draining to debate this topic, truth be told.
Of course I believe that men need to take responsibility for their actions and educate themselves and each other. I just think we partly disagree on what these responsibilies are and what the education entails.
Sexual violence is about the assertion of power, I agree, but I think that is where our agreement ends.
Just because I don’t agree with your conclusion about Playboy doesn’t mean I am not looking at the issue critically. This is what I mean by “shallow and short-sighted”. I have considered and rejected the idea that what I am doing is “patriarchal”, although I do believe that Playboy itself is “patriarchal”.
If you think we agree on other things, then that’s great and I’m glad to hear it. It’s too bad we disagree on other things.
Again, thank you all for taking the time to debate with me on this issue. Thousands wouldn’t. 🙂
One last thing to Max:
You’re right about the bait thing. I’m sorry.
However, I do believe that walking up to someone and saying “I want to wash the dishes with you” (whether verbally or non-verbally) is in large part individual expression as there is no prior dish-washing connection to speak of. After that point, it has not become “all” about me just expressing me, and there is another person to consider… but there is some reserve of self, some personal desire, involved in these things, and your apparent refusal to see this is rather frightening to me. Individual personalities do not disappear during the act of sex — not “vanilla” sex, anyway — or dish-washing, if you prefer.
I never thought you were a mean bad person at all. I’m sorry if you got that impression. I think well of you for taking the time and effort, and if I feel pain, it’s not you that is causing it.
I do not know why you keep talking about “Vulcan mind meld” and personalities disappearing.
max
I don’t see how it wouldn’t be both (“mutual endeavor” AND self expression). Perhaps your posing these as mutually exclusive is why Dissonant is reacting with a ‘disappearing personalities’ interpretation of what you’re saying?
Dis, I take issue wth your analysis of why men rape. You seem to be claiming (in a post above) that men rape in such huge numbers because they feel powerless and thus are trying to regain this power via overpowering women. You seperate this from an act that is fed through patriachal structure in society.
My question is: If rape is only about getting back (or getting) power, not about patriarchy as well, then why is it that women are being violated so much? Why aren’t men stealing in huge numbers (gaining power through possessing goods, this would actually make a lot of sense especially when power is lost through monetary methods)? Why aren’t bosses tires slashed on mass? (Another way of violating someone else to feel powerful)
While these actions do happen, they don’t happen nearly in the numbers that women are raped (in fact I feel a little gross even trying to draw a comparison). So perhaps patriarchy, the objectfication of women and hatred of women, and pallocentrism DO have something to do with it after all. There are a lot of route to power through violence, it’s not a coincidence that so many men take the road of rape.
United States crime rates 1960-2005
Please examine.
Yes, perhaps patriarchy makes it easier for men to get away with rape, and to be sure rape enforces the patriarchy, but I don’t believe the patriarchy causes rape (not in most cases, at least).
I apologize Dis, my last post was statistically oblivious.
Not a problem. 🙂 Don’t feel bad for kicking these issues around… that’s the only way to know how to progress.
dissonant: now, seriously, what the hell are you trying to say/prove (and getting all smug and authoritative about, even though you seem quite uninformed)? ’cause now besides asserting that rape is nothing more than poor men trying to get back at the system for taking power away from them (and anyone saying it’s something else or more complex than that is wrong and naive, plus it makes you angry), rape isn’t even that big of a problem – statistics tell us so, just look at how much fewer rape cases than theft cases there are!
well, you shouldn’t be getting smug and authoritative. see, if people feeling powerless really was the only reason people raped and it really existed in a vacuum, outside or in spite of the patriarchal system somehow, as you suggest (actually, i can’t for the life of me figure out how you’ve decided to look at all this), then those who really were the most powerless in this world would rape more. logically. so maybe this hasn’t occurred to you, but according to your theory women, for example, should be raping all the time. and yet that’s not the case. why not? because it’s men whom the patriarchal order tells that it’s ok to first objectify women (and other “others”) and then assert power over them, as with rape, to prove their masculinity or just “have fun” since it’s not that big of a deal (i.e. not really a crime, or one they will most likely be able to get away with). and this is the case whether you personally reach this conclusion after looking at the problem critically or not.
as for statistics, you might be interested in looking at real ones regarding rape and sexual violence and violence against women in general, to be able to actually argue your point. but look at statistics that take into account actual facts about vaw – that these crimes are the least reported ones, for instance. here is a place to start.
and you may want to read those lyrics from the song “refusing to be a man” that i quoted above a while ago. it’s a pretty perfect parallel to your points, including the sexual disfunction issue – but from a patriarchal order-aware point of view. most importantly, like what other feminist men against violence advocate, it offers answers, approaches and hope for ever addressing these problems.
Well yeah, approximately 94,000 rapes in one year totally requires an apology. Documented rapes.
This is why I cannot hit this site too often. It is so damn upsetting. Sigh.
94,000 documented rapes. 17,000 documented murders.
How many people reading that figure think, Oh good thing the murders are lower?
max: i know. i need to take a break, too. and, just in case dissonant or others cannot be bothered to actually check that link, here’s some other stats:
* Around the world at least I women in 3 has been beaten, coerced into sex or otherwise abused in her lifetime. Most often the abuser is a member of her own family. (John Hopkins School of Public Health 2000)
* An estimated 91% of victims of rape are female, 9% are male and 99% of offenders are male. (Bureau of Justice Statistics 1999)
* 77% of rapes are committed by someone known to the person raped. (Bureau of Justice Statistics 1997)
* According to the National Crime Victimization Survey there were an estimated 248,000 rapes and sexual assaults against victims over the age of 12 in the US in 2001. (US Department of Justice)
* According to the National Victim Center, 683,000 women are raped each year. (1992)
* Only 2% of rapists are convicted and imprisoned. (US Senate Judiciary Committee 1993)
* Women of all ethnicities are raped: American Indian/Alaska Native women are most likely to report a rape and Asian/Pacific Islander the least likely. (National Institute of Justice 1998)
* Reported rape victimization by race is: 34% of American Indian/Alaska Native; 24% women of mixed race; 19% of African American women; 18% of white women; 8% of Asian/Pacific Islander women. (Tjaden and Thoennes, National Institute of Justice 1998)
* 80-90% of rapes against women (except for American Indian women) are committed by someone of the same racial background as the victim. (US Dept. of Justice 1994)
* American Indian victims of rape reported the offender as either white or black in 90% of reports. (Department of Justice 1997)
* In a 1999 longitudinal study of 3,000 women, researchers found women who had been victimized before were seven times more likely to be raped again. (Acierno, Resnick, Kilpatrick, Saunders and Best, Jnl. of Anxiety Disorders 13, 6.)
* 93% of women and 86% of men who were raped and/or physically assaulted since the age of 18 were assaulted by a male. (National Violence Against Women Survey, 1998)
* Among female rape victims, 61% are under age 18. (American Academy of Pediatrics, 1995)
* 22% of females raped are under the age of 12 years; 32% are 12-17 years old; 29% 18-24 years old; 17% over 25 years old. 83% of those raped are under the age of 25 years old. (National Institute of Justice 1998)
* In a study of 6,000 students at 32 colleges in the US, 1 in 4 women had been the victims of rape or attempted rape. (Warshaw 1994)
* 13% of college women indicated they had been forced to have sex in a dating situation. (Johnson and Sigler, Jnl. of Interpersonal Violence, 2000)
* In a study of 6,000 students at 32 colleges in the US, 42% of rape victims told no-one and only 5% reported it to the police. (Warshaw 1994)
* 1 in 12 male students surveyed had committed acts that met the legal definition of rape or attempted rape. (Warshaw, Robin 1994 “I Never Called It Rape”)
* In a survey of college males who committed rape, 84% said what they did was definitely not rape. (Warshaw, Robin 1994 “I Never Called It Rape”)
* A study of 477 male students, mostly 1st and 2nd year students, found 56% reported instances of non-assaultive coercion to obtain sex. Examples included: threatening to end a relationship; falsely professing love; telling lies to render her more sexually receptive. (Boeringer 1996, Violence Against Women:5)
* Women with disabilities are raped and abused at twice the rate of the general population. (Sobsey 1994)
* Of the 22 substances used in drug facilitated rape, alcohol is the most common finding in investigations. (Jnl. of Forensic Sciences 1999)
* According to the First National Survey of Transgender Violence, 13.7% of 402 persons reported being a victim of rape or attempted rape. (Gender PAC 1997)
* A 1991 study of college gay, lesbian and bisexual students found that 18% had been victims of rape and 12% victims of attempted rape. (Jnl. Of College Student Development)
* 15% of men who lived with a man as a couple reported being raped/assaulted or stalked by a male cohabitant. (1999 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
* 6 out of 10 rapes are reported by victims to have occurred in their own home or home of a friend, relative or neighbor. (US Dept. of Justice 1997)
* Sexual assault is reported by 33-46% of women who are being physically assaulted by their husbands. (AMA 1995)
ruxandra:
Not exactly. In my view, women don’t rape as much as men not because they are powerless, but because our society accepts powerless women more than it does powerless men (it has to, or the patriarchy couldn’t function the way it does).
And I never said anything about rape not being a big problem (it is), nor am I saying that the system actually takes power away from men (it doesn’t). I was simply refuting M’s point. You are reading things into my comments that are simply not there.
Oh, and your comment about “real statistics vs. fake statistics” is laughably biased. I have no doubt that most if not all of your statistics are basically correct (even if some of them are a little outdated). But, I guess you only want to look at the statistics (and theories, for that matter) that support your view in the first place — everything else is “fake”.
You know what? You can’t seem to grasp what I’m saying, so I give up. I should have just “agreed” with you in the first place and kept my mouth shut, but I didn’t, I got pissed off, and I made a comment that was perhaps ill-advised. So, I give up. You win. I’ll go away now.
ballgame: Yes, that’s it exactly.
Max: If M had asked me to compare rape and murder stats, I would have. See my comments to ruxandra above.
I’m done with this. Goodbye.
good god. I get sick for a few days and look what happens.
Max, Ruxandra, and M – thanks for holding down the fort. You’ve done an excellent job, and I agree whole-heartedly with what you’ve written. Sorry I was a bit too sickness-addled to contribute to this discussion.
Dissonant – actually, I think you’re guilty of doing just what you accuse feminism of doing – shallow analysis. It isn’t just powerless men who rape – men from all walks of life rape, and rape women from all walks of life. To say that patriarchy plays little part in the widespread problem of rape is far too shallow. And, it’s been my experience that when we are unwilling to analyse too deeply, generally we have something to gain from a shallow analysis.
Look, you came here with an honest question, and I tried to give you an honest answer. You admittedly have a lot of work to do with how you view women, and from what you have said here, it seems clear to me that you are making women into objects to be used as vehicles for your own sexual pleasure and that of men more generally (it just so happens that this gives you great pain, and so you avoid actually, physically doing it, and that’s where your shame might lie). It seems to me that perhaps your personal standpoint isn’t allowing you to analyze deeply enough. That happens sometimes, to the best of us.
To be quite honest, this whole thing from you has reminded me of white folks who deny that they’re racist. Particularly your insistence that your viewing Playboy isn’t participating in patriarchy – even though you see Playboy culture itself as patriarchal! That is just plain confused.
The thing is, patriarchy IS everywhere – it is utterly unavoidable because it is infused in every single institution our society is built on in the west. To say that patriarchy doesn’t play a part in rape is like saying white supremacy didn’t play a part in slavery. Seriously.
Just because some men, or perhaps, you, don’t FEEL like patriarchy has infused you with power in society, doesn’t mean that men as a group don’t have more RELATIVE power than women in society. We are dealing with relations of power here, and that is what your short-sighted and shallow analysis is missing.
Now, I am going to reiterate my suggestion that you continue to seek counselling for your personal issues with women and sexuality, and I wish you the best of success in finding some solace for these problems. However, as part of this process, I will encourage you to set down your defensiveness and reactionism and anger at being called out as a guy who sometimes supports patriarchy. Here’s the thing: we all sometimes support patriarchy. It’s almost impossible not to. I do it almost everyday. But let’s not deny that we are participating in a patriarchal culture when we are doing things that clearly indicate that we are. Because it’s not necessarily the act itself that is problematic (although sometimes it most certainly is the act itself that is problematic, like rape, or violence against women), but rather it is the value assigned to the act by society that is problematic. None of this means we shouldn’t strive to avoid doing things that uphold widespread systems of oppression. Instead, it means we have to fight to redefine jsut about everything in our society so that every person is truly equal. It’s these common contexts of struggle and resistance that bind us together.
dissonant, you don’t have to agree with my “view.” although my view is simply that i know that male violence is a serious problem, that this is patriarchally accepted, facilitated and enforced, and that something must be done. the majority of people don’t “agree” or care. but then, the majority is perfectly fine with the patriarchal order.
ah, yes. and how is this different from what i was saying, or groups like men against sexual violence are saying? because loosely put this is precisely the “rape is rooted in patriarchy” point that you emphatically say you don’t agree with. in fact, so far what you’ve done is to say that you really don’t agree with whatever “theory” about the impact of patriarchal practices from those links i gave, and then, when explaining, to “argue” that you do agree. so of course i don’t grasp what you’re saying. you’re contradicting yourself. the only actual explanation you’ve given for why you got angry and “don’t agree” was that you don’t want to stop enjoying playboy. which is your business, i couldn’t care less, but it doesn’t have anything to do with the “theories.” again, just because you think you’ve totally overcome patriarchal bullshit, it doesn’t mean something you do will necessarily not be patriarchal. for one thing, no one has totally overcome all that bullshit yet. kind of reminds me of that onion joke about how “women are now empowered by everything a woman does.”
and then there’s the stuff that max has commented on. the whole objectification issue… and your basic point that asking men to change is delusional and won’t solve the problem – meaning what? that it’s women who are responsible?!? god only knows…
yup, i sure don’t get it.
ps: i never said anything about “fake” statistics. i only brought up “statistics that take into account actual facts about vaw” as opposed to ones that ignore them (so that the official number of rapes is, say, 94.000 when in reality, taking into account that this crime is so under-reported/prosecuted, the number should be ~ ten times higher)! which is essential – to this discussion and in general. the issue of glossing over vaw is part of the problem, and it’s what you’re doing though when called on it you say you’re not. you say you’re not, and yet you call drawing attention to the matter is “biased” and “laughable.” i know, another thing i find in your comments that’s simply not there…
oops, i posted at the same time, thinking girl – and said pretty much the same thing, though less nicely and clearly. now i’m really going to take a break.
I would like to weigh in on this thread. Hope you don’t mind.
I am dissonant’s mother.
First of all, I understand how difficult it is to see the whole person in a dialogue like this but i wanted to add some balance to the threads before I give my personal opinion on this issue.
I have worked my whole life in a man’s world and I am about to retire. When I attended University, there were no female profs. I worked in a field(s) dominated by men. I had to work twice as hard to prove myself
I have had beautiful relationships and one really bad one. So before I get blamed like a rape victim for my thoughts, I want to clarify that I do know what a beautiful relationship can be. And unlike my son’s experience, my parents were loving and kind.
So here is what i think, for what it’s worth.
I am a feminist and have been since the mid 60’s. But I see nothing wrong with a man looking at pictures in Playboy. No more than women looking at nude mags with photos of men. I see nothing wrong with women painting a naked male, nor men painting a naked woman. I see nothing wrong with the admiration of the naked body…man or woman.
I do believe that in the sex-trade there is a risk that woman can be exploited, drugged and abused and can lose their lives either physically or psychologically. Playboy does not fall in this category, in my opinion. One could attempt to argue that it falls on the continuum of sex-trade vehicles, but I really don’t think so. Nor do I see Playboy as supporting the Patriarchy.
With respect to Patriarchy..and it sure does exist, I call it the Old Boys club. I know first-hand what the glass ceiling is.
The power imbalance between men and women that needs the most work lies in wages, working conditions, sexual harrassment, day care and elder care issues.
I admire the principled approach that you have taken in the threads, but I think you disparage a lot of good men that I have known by suggesting that they are upholding the Patriarchy by looking at women in Playboy.
I have thought about this issue long and hard. My son is a good person who is struggling with how to love. I think that his struggle lies in basic trust issues and he needs to learn, on his own, that he can trust others with his sexuality. He is not arrogant, in fact far from it, and I worry that he will be dominated by a woman because he will find it hard to stand up for himself.
Perhaps, with age, I have become a less militant person about this issue. And perhaps, because i have fought for so many years to ensure that the power balance between men and women is addressed, that I am more focused on those issues as a symptom of the Patriarchy.
The topic of Prostitution is perhaps more relevant to your comments.
One last comment…to me sexual objectification requires a disconnect between the person and the act. With Playboy…the disconnect is already there. it is a photo. So this act implies deliberate consent.
In other words, if a man looks at a woman’s anatomy without her consent and deliberately disengages from any acknowledgement of the woman, and does so with the express intent of sexual self-gratification, then i consider that to be objectification. But if a man looks at woman’s anatomy, admires it and looks for permission before or after, then he is not objectifying, just admiring. If he looks at her after, he runs the risk of being rejected. But to me, this has nothing to do with patriarchy…rather it is healthy and spontaneous curiosity, sexual interest and a form of communication. This is not to be confused with leering. That is a most objectionable behaviour.
It is always wiser to seek permission first..to not run the risk of misinterpretation.
There are women who disagree with me, and there are women who think that i am a prude. So perhaps, because I seem to be a moderate, I am simply a woman who falls in the middle of the heap.
It has occurred to me that you might see me as a supporter of the Patriarchy by these comments. All I can do is hope that you see me as a woman who has fought against racism, sexism and every other ism my whole adult life. And i hope you see me as a woman who has given a great deal of thought to this issue.
My son is struggling with his problem but I want to thank you for engaging in dialogue with him. This debate has been good for him…although he struggles.
I am one proud mom who is so glad that he was willing to share this with me.
Well that got awkward quick…
Did Dis just tell on us to his mom?
Seriously?
I so am having flash backs to the third grade here.
It is either that or he is pretending to be his mom which might be worse. Gadzooks.
So the options are 1)third grade behavior and 2) pretending to be his mom.
There is another option: Dis talks to his mother about issues that concern him. Dis has a relationship with me that is open and he knows that I will tell him when and if I think it is inappropriate to discuss a matter with me. In fact, both my son and daughter have an open and mature relationship with me.
There is no deception here. I debated putting my two cents worth into this discussion but my passion for Feminisim got the better of me and I thought, perhaps incorrectly, that I might be able to contribute something of value for others to consider.
It appears that I may have made the wrong decision because the last thing in the world that I wanted to do was to appear as Max has suggested.
Dis is perfectly capable of debating this subject on his own and there was absolutely no conversation that resembled “telling on us” but rather an intellectual discussion of the topic.
My apologies for contributing to such negativism.
wow… OK.
Seasoned Feminist – thanks for commenting. Just a couple things.
Re: your phrase “blamed like a rape victim” – we are certainly not into that around here. In fact, most of us who are part of this little online community would never dream of blaming a rape victim, and anyone who makes even the slightest move toward blaming survivors gets shot down pretty quickly – we most definitely and clearly place the blame for rape at the feet of rapists. Same goes for violence against women.
Now, onto Playboy, if we must. I agree, there’s nothing wrong with admiring the nude human form. But that’s not exactly what’s going on with Playboy. I think we all know that.
Whether or not a man is “good” is beside the point. “Good” men do all kinds of things everyday to support patriarchy – and so do women, even feminists. Patriarchy is so deeply woven into the fabric of society it might as well be the air we breathe to survive. Patriarchy is the Matrix. So when your son says he thinks he has risen above “patriarchal bullshit”, that is highly suspect to me. I’m not sure anyone has ever risen above patriarchy – if they had, it wouldn’t be the dominant social system any longer. the best we can hope to do is engage it with resistance and try to redefine ourselves through that process.
on your point about consent, well, I don’t know. Consent implies non-coercion, and coercion comes in lots of flavours, including the coercion that dominant societal pressures place on us everyday. and I think that assuming all of the women who have posed in Playboy are completely free from patriarchal coercion is likely a stretch, considering that these are women who fit a particular patriarchally-defined gender model – not by accident, but by deliberate effort. We’re talking about women who are deliberately complying with patriarchy, and I’m not sure we can call doing that a completely autonomous action.
It seems to me that resistance to patriarchy in any action is indicative of non-coercion by patriarchy. That is not to say that in many other ways, a person cannot be opposed to patriarchy even if he or she engages in something else that supports patriarchy. This is where you and your son are making the same mistake – it’s not an all-or-nothing deal. we all need to survive under patriarchy, so there is always a degree of compliance with the system to live under it. it’s a complex issue, and certainly can’t be boiled down to black and white answers.
There’s a thing in progressive politics whereby folks who consider themselves to be progressive think that in order to be “against” something, like patriarchy or white supremacy, they have to reject it entirely. I’m here to say that doing so is next to impossible, because of the nature of our society. These are dominant social systems we’re talking about – not just majority, as in numbers, but dominant, as in dominating, controlling, masterminding everything about how our society is structured and how we interact within it. We internalize these systems, these discourses, and they internalize us, from before we’re even born. So rather than getting noses out of joint and knickers in a twist when someone points out that when a woman wears high heels and makeup or when a man looks at Playboy they are participating in patriarchy, they need to quit it with the reactionary hurt feelings, accept that “yes, this thing that I do is supporting the dominant social system,” and either give it up or not. It doesn’t necessarily mean that doing that thing makes someone a bad person, or that they’re not otherwise committed to resistance. It’s not about that. People are complex and sometimes contradictory, and it’s really hard to live one’s entire life by non-contradictory political principles. But don’t try to justify continuing to do that thing by saying that it doesn’t support the dominant social system.
Again, I wish your son the best of luck.
Classic TG. Yay!
I find rape to be a very terrible crime, and I feel that an repeat offender should be faced with lifetime imprisonment. It is proven that rapists, especially violent offenders, will repeat the crime upon re-entering society after releasal from a correctional facility. There is no cure for a rapist, and the therapy and medications rarely work forever.
M – thanks!
HI Jamie – thanks for your comment. You’ll get no argument from me on that suggestion. Rape is barely given any punishment these days – and considering that rape survivors are affected for the rest of their lives by their rape, I don’t have a problem sending rapists to jail for the better part of their natural lives – 25 years sounds about right to me, more if the assault caused a great deal of physical damage to the survivor (what they call ‘aggravated sexual assault’). And I don’t believe in parole – do the crime, do the time.
Double-bold that and underscore it about fifteen times. Someone I knew needs to hear it.
[…] where this came from : how to avoid becoming a rapist Posted by max Filed in all, favorites, politics, women […]
[…] There’s also ‘How to avoid becoming a rapist’. […]