Is rape always rape? Are men always to blame?

silentrust wrote: »

Thank you for your thoughts Obliq, it makes for very interesting reading.

Of course in your case there's a strong argument to say that the man in question should have known that this kind of contact would be unwelcome - even if you knew him well and/or found him attractive I imagine you wouldn't want him grinding his crotch at the back of your head either way!

You also mention that women do often live in fear of violence, even if someone's behaviour isn't overtly threatening. We can accept this as an axiom and sympathise with this insofar as you have the right to feel safe when going about your business, socialising etc.

Thanks silentrust - I think the fear is drummed into us from childhood, and not without reason, but it does unfortunately lead to women regularly reading men's behaviour in ways that weren't intended by it. It's a catch 22 really.

Nevertheless it's been commented earlier that women have an exaggerated fear of being raped by a stranger in that it's actually quite a rare crime. It's also unlikely that a man who touches a woman inappropriately in a public place will then proceed immediately to rape her - this of course doesn't lessen a woman's fear necessarily or indeed make inappropriate behaviour acceptable but it does beg the question of whether this fear is based on a true premise and most importantly whether lewd behaviour exists on the same spectrum as rape itself.

I think there is a spectrum of non-consensual sexual behaviour altogether, that I illustrated there in it's mild form, and that has rape at it's extreme form. I think that the mild end of the spectrum is very prevalent unfortunately, and I'm willing to say that every woman up here could give you multiple examples of it. This behaviour IS threatening, in that it threatens to control us in some way and it leads to perhaps unwarranted, but understandable fear of a man's potential for further acts of control.

What's been difficult for me before in the past when discussing this with women (particularly feminists!) is that even saying this much has apparently been too offensive a concept to warrant further discussion - I think defining the problem clearly is better though as it helps to solve it.

Don't dwell on the past! I'm not offended anyhow

tiny_penguin wrote: »

I dont understand how asking the guy to take half a step back would have made you seem 'fussy' - if it was intentional, he was acting like a jerk and then it should have been pointed out to him - I dont understand howthat would make you seem fussy - its a lot better than resorting to violence.

Well, I was surrounded by friends of both mine and his - I remember actually looking back up at him questioningly and he gave me a big grin. I turned away, and yup, there was his crotch touching my head again. I could have said "here muppet, does your fiance know how much you're enjoying that?", I could have said "could you please move away a bit?" or any variation of those, but I figured I'd have got a slagging along the lines of "that's not what ya said last night, ha ha" or "ho ho, she's never said that before, eh?" Why bother with that when all that was needed to get him to cop on was an "accidental" sudden move. Could have happened anyway eh? He shouldn't have had his tackle so close, end of story. I certainly don't regret the "violence" in return for his violation of my personal space.

I don't buy this notion that we as women are constantly second guessing what might be in a fellas mind. If you arent comfortable with something someone does - tell them. Why is it such an awful thing to say that women have to set their own boundaries. Everyone is going to have different boundaries and clear communication is how that line is drawn. If you are made to feel like a 'prude' or 'fussy' then you are in the wrong circle of friends.

You don't have to buy it, but it happens. It might surprise you to know that I would first off go through the possibilities in my head in case I embarrassed a man who didn't deserve it, or I thought it would be better handled by telling them when they weren't drunk, for example. I'm extremely outspoken, and very comfortable around men and have often been the only woman holding my own in a bar full of fellas. That, however, does not stop certain men from pushing boundaries and you'd also be surprised about the number of men who, having had your boundaries explained to them, will push them still further just to get the upper hand again.

I have a completely different opionion of 'surprise hugs' from behind or otherwise coming from my friends to most of the women here - and have no problem with setting the boundaries for acquantances I am not comfortable hugging or even having any sort of physical contact. Why shuld leggo talk to his friend without first being sure his female friends would want him too - i know i wouldn't want anyone speaking on my behalf without clearing it with me first.

I agree with you here and I don't know. You're asking the wrong woman.

silentrust wrote: »

You're accusing me of "mansplaining"?! Let me tell you exactly why you're wrong... :-D

No seriously, I can't dispute that women live in fear of rape. What I do dispute is that rape by a stranger is a particularly likely outcome of someone approaching you in a public place and acting in an inappropriate way.

We can say it's ungentlemanly, potentially illegal and even intimidating but it's not rape and the suggestion that they two exist on the same kind of spectrum does more to trivialise rape than so-called "rape culture" in my humble opinion. :-)

And what do you think of the sad fact of what usually happens if a woman does end up being raped after being approached inappropriately because she isn't wary and suspicious enough?

IF she reports the crime, the popular response is likely to be "what did she think was going to happen?" or "she should have known better" or <some kind of unlocked car analogy> or any one of the multitude of crappy bits of advice you'll find if you just scroll through a few pages of this thread.

It baffles me that some men use the "Some women want me to be like this" excuse.

Just because some women, for what ever reason, want to pretend that she is being assaulted to get sexual arousal, that isn't a reason to actually do that, particular when you don't know that is actually the case.

Some men seem to think that the "But if I don't do it I might not get to have sex" excuse is some how valid.

It is your responsibility to be sure you are not raping her, not her responsibility to be sure you know you aren't raping her. Men should not put themselves into a situation where there may even be a shred of doubt that the woman was raped, even if that means you never have sex again.

The "But but but but I want to have sex" excuse is just pathetic.

silentrust wrote: »

... I rest my case. :-)

You see, this is why it's so hard to have a sensible discussion about this. Of course I ridicule someone who says that telling a joke about rape is supporting "rape culture".

It's not the same thing as supporting rape. If there is humour in these kind of jokes it's because they are unrealistic. The nature of humour is diverting your expectations one way and then another.

As for hating women have you read any of my other posts? Do I mention hatred anywhere? I have a deep suspicion of people who try to blur the issue by saying things which aren't rape in fact are, that's true but I'd say the same to a man.

I have read your other posts and I find them patronising and misogynistic. Some examples:

If you read Nancy Friday's Beyond my Control you'll see that fantasies of coercion if not rape, both where the woman is the perpetrator and "victim" are very common.

Of course, because some American hack has collected a bunch of solicited anecdotes this of course means that rape fantasies are common. She also talks about a gang rape victim who actually enjoyed it. Damaging damaging stuff imo. Later in that post you also said

if a woman imagines being forced into sex, her imaginary rapist will only go as far as she wishes and if she finds the thought of it disturbing, she can always stop thinking about it - obviously not something that could happen by definition if a real rape is taking place.

Wrong, dissociation during rape is an extremely common way of dealing with trauma- the mind and body shut down because they can't handle what is happening to them. This is one reason why women often don't fight back or often even remember the details of a rape. Not necessarily misogynistic in itself but your lack of understanding of the topic coupled with the 'obvious' fact that this could never happen shows you once again shoving your patriarchal viewpoint down victims throats.

my favourite Twitter Channels is the "Everyday Sexism Project" which I troll fairly regularly

You admit to trolling a site which exists to empower women.

Yes of course you get the odd Feminazi there who claims that something is sexist when it actually isn't, or something is "rapey" when it's not actually rape. (Actually this happens a lot), but it does make for entertaining reading.

Silly women, not listening to silentrust about when they're allowed to feel objectified. :rolleyes:

I am not suggesting they should have been harmed or gang raped but in a situation where a country was sufficiently depopulated you can understand why their consent was overruled, even if you don't agree.

Suggesting that there is ever a situation where rape is legitimate = rape apologist.

I've cited three women below, just from the first page of a quick Google search who cry rape. This happens regularly and I suspect it is often unpunished.

Insinuating that women cry rape often without consequence for financial gain based on your suspicion rather than fact. The fact that a Google search renders incidents in the media of women who cry rape serves to reinforce the idea that this relatively rare phenomenon is misrepresented as fact in the public consciousness directly contributing to women who experiencing rape being fearful of coming forward and demanding justice.

sweetheart

just plain patronising

and Feminists wonder why no one takes them seriously!

patronising with a side order of misogyny. And to answer another poster, if you're not taking feminism seriously then logically you would think it was funny.

It's not the same thing as supporting rape. If there is humour in these kind of jokes it's because they are unrealistic. The nature of humour is diverting your expectations one way and then another.

But can you know that everyone who hears your ironic rape joke is as wonderfully intelligent as you obviously are and doesn't take it as sanctioning rape? Do you even pause to think of the effect it might have on a rape victim?

Feminism is a disease masquerading as its own cure

utterly patronising- you've shown very little insight into the nuances of feminism or women.

So yes, from your previous posts you do seem to have a patronising and misogynistic attitude to women, I stand by my previous post.

You also seem to have little understanding of what rape culture actually is. In a society that trivialises rape, condones unwanted sexual contact or excuses it because of drunkeness, perpetuates a myth of violent stranger rape, encourages women to modify their dress or behaviour as a sole measure to protect themselves from rape, or considers these factors when assessing a rape claim, objectifies women and places them in submissive poses in the media, engages in victim blaming and slut shaming, fails to educate its children on the real meaning of consent..I could go on.., these contribute to a culture that make it difficult for rape victims to come forward, which makes it more likely that rapists will get away with it, which in turn leads to a higher incidence of rape. No one (well not me anyway) is saying that a grope or an unwanted hug is equated with rape. They are saying that a culture that blurs the line of acceptable sexual contact without consent is one in which rape is allowed to flourish. I do not agree with all the posts on the 'feminist' side of this issue in this thread, I believe that the debate is not entirely polarised. I have taken the time to read over your posts in order to get a better sense of where you are coming from, I suggest you do the same.

Yes. The definition of rape is a male engaging in non consensual sexual intercourse with a female. A woman cannot be guilty of rape.