Figleaf's Real Adult Sex

I’ve always associated the sexual meaning of “seduction” with “enticement”, and the “leading astray” language is just that little thrill of being a little bit naughty that still adds an extra element of fun to fucking.

I think the distinction between the “indistinguishable from rape” line of argument, and the “sex-positive” approaches is that of willing versus unwilling going astray.

If seduction is perceived in terms of eroding barriers and disinclinations, then yes, I can see how it forms an abusive power relationship and could be perceived as sexual assault.

On the other hand, where seduction is simply the opening of a door to new experiences that are seductive in themselves (that is, that the person being seduced wants to experience, either before the door was opened, or else on having had the door opened and the existence of such things made clear) then seduction is in terms of leading “astray”, which I always perceive as being in the sense of, “away from society’s expectations/demands” – e.g. a woman is supposed to keep herself virginal, so opening her up to experiencing her own sexual desire is a “seduction” in that sense. That kind of seduction is something very sensuous and rewarding for both the seducer and the seduced – I speak from personal experience there!

Furthermore, sometimes removing barriers and disinclinations is something that is desired by the seduced: seduction can be a process of allowing someone to cast off inhibitions instilled and imposed by (patriarchal) society and being free to enjoy what s/he genuinely wants to do.

The way I perceive seduction is like laying a path in front of one’s intended target of seduction – but it is still for them to choose whether they step onto each new paving stone as you lay it.

Forcing someone along that path is abusive, and ultimately, assault and/or rape. I think Maggie Hays and her ilk mistake the laying of a path as being an imperative to follow it. They see that sometimes the path is forced upon a woman, so they assume that every time there is a path, there is some kind of force.

[“I think the distinction between the ‘indistinguishable from rape’ line of argument, and the “sex-positive” approaches is that of willing versus unwilling going astray.” Nicely put, SnowdropExplodes. I think it would be a shame to relegate seduction only to its traditional, negative connotation. But then I think it would also be a shame not to point out the rather barkingly big difference. By the way, I’m not inclined to call refer to Hays as “ilk,” in part because it’s pretty clear she was burned, badly, before she turned seriously took up feminism. And I’m… pretty sure her kind of anger is part of the process, even if I don’t agree the old “stay angry” motto is the most effective long-term strategy. (This isn’t intended as a specific slight either. In theories of social movements “staying angry” is great for generating solidarity, but not productive in terms of generating actual movement.) Thanks. —fl]

Well, words change. Like “rapture” is sometimes used to mean “great pleasure” but it used to mean both “rape” and “theft”. Probably it had something to do with the old rape of a woman = property abuse type of thing.

Keep in mind that the primary meaning of a word can change over time. For example, when Susie Bright referred to Eartha Kitt as “seductive” in a recent post, the word was not used in a derogatory sense, even though the dictionary definitions cited in your post give different shades of meaning. Perhaps it will be a sign of progress if in future dictionary editions, the definition of seduction as tempting another to commit wrongdoing will be notated as obscure.

As I explained in a comment to Sungold’s post on this issue, I think it is important, from a criminal justice standpoint, to be very clear how we define rape. This is an issue that has come up several timwes in your posts and readers’ comments.

According to the Rape, Abuse,and Incest National Network (RAINN), sexual assault is the the all-encompassing term which includes rape, sexual harassment, stalking and other crimes. While rape and sexual assault are prosecuted in the criminal courts, harassment is adjudicated in the civil courts. So there is a need to use these terms precisely.

While rape typically is a single event, what is called harassment occurs across a continuum. Harassment can escalate to rape or sexual assault, but physical contact is not required to prove a charge of harassment.

What Maggie Hays referred to as seduction may be a step within that continuum.

Seduction may be manipulative and an exercise of class privilege (as Sungold explained in her post), but it is not rape, and calling it such will only make the criminal prosecution more difficult. When the consequences of charging a person with the crime of rape or sexual assault can include conviction and imprisonment, we have a responsibility to use these terms precisely.