Want to stop rape?
Aug. 25th, 2010 12:42 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumDon't rape
It's not a great campaign, but the idea is sound. Men rape. Women don't need to change what they do, the people who rape them do.
Yes, I l know the arguments... people need to take care of their surroundings, not do stupid things, etc.
It's all true, and none of it is relevant to the real issue. No one will really say, "it was my fault" if I do something which increases my risk, and I get attacked.
Example: A kid was murdered down the block from me. The word on the street is he was killed over money. What money? Stuff he won in the illegal dice game the folks next door used to run (they stopped, just after the killing... I wonder why).
No one is blaming him for playing in the local game, nor for being on a streetcorner. They blame the people who shot him.
Which is as it should be. They also don't have campaigns up saying, "If you hang on the corner, you are asking to get shot/robbed/thumped." When the Klan rolls into town and beats someone for being "uppity" we (no longer) blame the victim.
But rape... we still do that. She was in the wrong bar. She went out alone. She wore, "provocative" clothing (which is to say, she wore clothes). She "led him on", etc.
All of it is nonsense.
Rape isn't a con-game. It's not a Nigerian scam. It's not a case of the victim being beguiled into doing something. It's a guy who doesn't take no for an answer. It may be force, it may be subterfuge (the "get them drunk" trick). It may be social pressure. It may be any number of things.
But the root of it all, the rapist didn't take no for an answer. It may have been in advance (force, drugs) it may have been soft-pedal ("if you loved me", "you know you want to"), it may have been thoughtless (she says, "maybe this is a bad idea").
The simple fact of the matter... the consent you want, if you are going to avoid rape; the consent we need to teach our sons (before they get confused messages from the culture), the message we need to make the norm...
Consent = enthusiastic consent.
It's that simple. If one's partner is enthusiastic, then the question of rape goes away. If one doesn't pressure, then the question of rape goes away. If one sets rules (when I started having sex, my rule was, "if one of us is impaired, and we don't have an extant physical relationship, we aren't starting one now." As I got more experience with sex, and impairment, I modified it some. I have a pretty good idea when my ability to decide is starting to get fuzzy, and at that point the rule kicks in. For my partner, I do a slightly less nuanced version of this. I look at age, and what I've gleaned from conversation; while not impaired, to decide. I try to err on the side of, "we can wait." First times are, IMO, better sober, in any case).
Enthusiastic consent = no rape.
Non-consent (no matter when, nor how mildly expressed) = rape.
It's that simple. The same way the thief steals, the murderer murders and the liar lies: the rapist rapes.
It's not a great campaign, but the idea is sound. Men rape. Women don't need to change what they do, the people who rape them do.
Yes, I l know the arguments... people need to take care of their surroundings, not do stupid things, etc.
It's all true, and none of it is relevant to the real issue. No one will really say, "it was my fault" if I do something which increases my risk, and I get attacked.
Example: A kid was murdered down the block from me. The word on the street is he was killed over money. What money? Stuff he won in the illegal dice game the folks next door used to run (they stopped, just after the killing... I wonder why).
No one is blaming him for playing in the local game, nor for being on a streetcorner. They blame the people who shot him.
Which is as it should be. They also don't have campaigns up saying, "If you hang on the corner, you are asking to get shot/robbed/thumped." When the Klan rolls into town and beats someone for being "uppity" we (no longer) blame the victim.
But rape... we still do that. She was in the wrong bar. She went out alone. She wore, "provocative" clothing (which is to say, she wore clothes). She "led him on", etc.
All of it is nonsense.
Rape isn't a con-game. It's not a Nigerian scam. It's not a case of the victim being beguiled into doing something. It's a guy who doesn't take no for an answer. It may be force, it may be subterfuge (the "get them drunk" trick). It may be social pressure. It may be any number of things.
But the root of it all, the rapist didn't take no for an answer. It may have been in advance (force, drugs) it may have been soft-pedal ("if you loved me", "you know you want to"), it may have been thoughtless (she says, "maybe this is a bad idea").
The simple fact of the matter... the consent you want, if you are going to avoid rape; the consent we need to teach our sons (before they get confused messages from the culture), the message we need to make the norm...
Consent = enthusiastic consent.
It's that simple. If one's partner is enthusiastic, then the question of rape goes away. If one doesn't pressure, then the question of rape goes away. If one sets rules (when I started having sex, my rule was, "if one of us is impaired, and we don't have an extant physical relationship, we aren't starting one now." As I got more experience with sex, and impairment, I modified it some. I have a pretty good idea when my ability to decide is starting to get fuzzy, and at that point the rule kicks in. For my partner, I do a slightly less nuanced version of this. I look at age, and what I've gleaned from conversation; while not impaired, to decide. I try to err on the side of, "we can wait." First times are, IMO, better sober, in any case).
Enthusiastic consent = no rape.
Non-consent (no matter when, nor how mildly expressed) = rape.
It's that simple. The same way the thief steals, the murderer murders and the liar lies: the rapist rapes.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-08-25 09:22 pm (UTC)No, actually, it doesn't. You're comparing the basically mythical stranger rape that starts violent and remains so to the equally mythical "woman to slightly too drunk to drive" who later claims she didn't REALLY consent.
And just because it doesn't justify rape, doesn't mean deliberate cock-teasing doesn't exist, or is morally acceptable behavior.
Um, okay, yeah, you don't actually know anything about sexual violence, do you? Like, at all?
no subject
Date: 2010-08-25 09:34 pm (UTC)But, in my hasty first reaction, I missed the bit about cock-teasing.
Yeah, it exists. And it's cruel. What does it have to do with rape? What point bringing it up? I mean really?
Because the only parallel, is my saying it doesn't justify rape. You agree with this, so why the attack on it's morality?
What is the rhetorical purpose; what support to your argument is it supposed to make.
As
That changes the equation, a lot. It removes a lot of the aspects of physical violence, it puts
no subject
Date: 2010-08-25 09:45 pm (UTC)There, we disagree.
The kindest interpretation of this behaviour is, she has no idea exactly how unconnected with actual reality the things she is saying are, that she does not, actually, know what she is talking about.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-25 09:50 pm (UTC)You know who else gets tired of this? Sexual assault survivors. We truly do. When there stops being sexual assault, everyone gets to stop hearing simple, plain truths about it. Not before. No matter how tired they get.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-25 10:20 pm (UTC)"Mythical," my fluffy white butt. I personally know women who fall into each category. The one who was violently raped wrote a book about the experience. It's well worth reading. It's called Lucky by Alice Sebold and it is still in print. And it is quite clear that Alice's experience hat a much much larger impact on her life than did Alicia's, or mine. How rape happens matters. The degree to which one's consent is violated matters. Collapsing all that into a single thing trivializes the trauma of violent rape, and that is not okay with me.
Um, okay, yeah, you don't actually know anything about sexual violence, do you? Like, at all?
No, what I don't do is accept or agree with some of the premises about it that you appear to be operating from.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-26 02:05 am (UTC)