Y’know, this is an idea that goes way, way, way back. If you hadn’t read a lot of history, or you didn’t remember the days before feminism took off, you might get the idea that feminists just made it up for something to blame men for. But no, going back gazillions of years (ok, thousands anyway) it’s been a well-defined crime with (often) rather breathtakingly extreme punishments.
Resist for a moment the temptation to reflect on Freud’s sociological observation that cultures often assign the harshest punishments for those activities ordinary members most wish to do. Reflect instead on the interesting phenomenon that pretty much across the board (except maybe for a handful of MRAs and Laura Sessions Stepp) folks agree (and the evidence suggests) that men are the perpetrators in pretty much all violent sexual assaults and a pretty large majority of non-violent or indirect ones.
Resist also the temptation, if you’re a man or, more generally, if you’re triggered by stereotyping declarations of the form “all X are Y.” (That’s going to be a separate post.)
And finally resist the (no-doubt strong for some) temptation to point out the almost certain difference between the number of actual vs. reported, or even recognized cases where non-men employ so-called “gray area” exercises of power to sexually subjugate someone else.
Reflect instead on the question of why.
Resist, at least for the moment, to say anything about its being self-evident, obvious, or (don’t even go there) something to do with genetic imperatives men might have to “spread their seed.” Especially resist anything along those lines if you’re inclined to argue (as I tend to be) the underlying similarities between male and female human beings.
By the time I was in middle school I was violently sexually assaulted twice (without “penetration” either time, not that that matters by any modern definition of rape or sexual assault), once by a young woman when I was pre-school aged (maybe 4 or 5), once by a young man when I was in 7th or 8th grade (maybe 14.) As I reflect on those two instances I don’t really see that much difference. Certainly not in my own experience. And, at least based on confused but vivid memories, not in the overall behavior of my assailants. (Although at a more granular level in the first case the girl seemed more interested in experimenting with cruelty and in the second the boy seemed to be trying to reassert status or pass along a humilation of his own.)
So anyway, although I’m aware of the extreme folly of trying to turn anecdotes into data I’ve got this really strong feeling that at least to the extent that rape and sexual assaults are expressions of power rather than lust. And given that women no less than men are perfectly capable of abusing power (and, even if it really was about lust or some other sexual frustration and not power women are also perfectly capable of both those feelings as well.) And witness further that whereas the average man might be larger or stronger than the average woman it’s the case that there’s considerable overlap with the result that any number of women are individually larger and stronger than any number of individual men.
And yet we’re looking at these completely out of balance numbers of men vs. numbers of women who commit sexual assault.
I’m not saying there aren’t perfectly good answers. And maybe after a good night’s sleep I’ll wake up and feel really stupid for even wondering about it.
But at the moment it’s like where you say the same word or phrase over and over and over and suddenly they lose meaning and just become sound. I completely get that the numbers are out of balance. I can even see that they should be out of balance. But for the life of me, at the moment, I’m not getting why they’re so out of balance.
Any and all answers are welcome in comments, providing, of course, you first resist for a moment the aforementioned temptations.
Hmmm…I think that’s why so
Submitted by Geekgirl (not verified) on Mon, 2010-02-01 00:49.Hmmm…I think that’s why so many feminists refer to it as ‘rape culture.’ It’s not that individual men are more morally repugnant than individual women, but that men overall are taught that their desires deserve to be fulfilled. Women are taught to suppress this—your ‘No Sex Class’. And rape isn’t about sex, of course; it’s an expression of power, but it’s a sexual expression of power. For women, sexual expression of power is a violation of taboo, almost more so than just sexual desire. (For another example think about dominatrices and all the usual reactions to a woman who assumes that role and a man who wants to be dominated.)
All that may be such an obvious point that it doesn’t explain the extreme imbalances, but it might suggest that women only commit rape or other sexually violent acts when there’s almost no chance it will be reported or discovered. When she knows the victim, when he’s very young, when he’s physically much smaller, etc. All these types of crime are less likely to get attention than the dramatic stranger rapes (which are less common when perpetrated by men against women but get most of press). Add in that men are much, much less likely than women to report being a victim of a sexual crime and the numbers might not be as skewed as they seem.
[Hi Geekgirl. “ For women, sexual expression of power is a violation of taboo, almost more so than just sexual desire.” Doink. Of course that’s probably it. The expression of power bit, I mean. We have a grammar for how men’s sexuality grubs anything it touches — it’s the whole men as the obligate, instinctive, animal, downward-dragging sex-class thing. Some places a man just has to show an unmarried woman his penis and her father or family is obliged to stone her to death. That’s power! Meanwhile if women exercise power through sex it’s… well, the way we have things fixed it’s her fault no matter who’s exercising power. But in the grammar of humiliation it might be personally humiliating, but not socially so to be assaulted by a woman. Hmm… So in terms of abuse of power being assaulted by a woman just wouldn’t be the “fate worse than death” being assaulted by a man is? And (not to get too long-winded here) since humans are power-wielders I guess the question might be what levers do women tend to use instead? Assuming there is one, since penis-nastiness really does have a certain nuclear quality to it. Hmm again. Anyway, thanks! I certainly wasn’t looking in that direction last night — I mean I thought there might be a no-sex class angle to it but I wasn’t looking at the male (sex-class) side of it. Thanks again. —fl]
It’s a deep question. I try
Submitted by Christopher (not verified) on Mon, 2010-02-01 04:12.It’s a deep question. I try to take a birds’ eye view of this kind of debate, being someone committed to both feminism & science. So. It’s not just rape: acts of physical violence are, the vast majority of the time, committed by men. That’s a bare fact. There are, of course, still lots & lots of violent acts committed by women. But it’s much less common. The reasons why are surely a complicated mix of biology & culture. For example, testosterone plays a role, but it isn’t the whole picture (see here: http://bit.ly/bkN7Qs); and obviously societies at different places and times have been more or less violent, so culture plays a role as well.
I think it’s very much an open question whether you could have vastly lower levels of violence (or even, say, less gender-based violence) in a society with a completely different culture—where, say, strong norms of nonviolence were taught and passed on to children. A lot of people on both sides of the debate will tell you that they know the answer; but there aren’t any controlled experiments, so it’s mostly just theorizing and guesswork, which can only take you so far.
Not that it really matters, because we don’t have the option of replacing our culture; the best we can do is try to shape it from the inside…
When women are considered
Submitted by fiveofnine (not verified) on Mon, 2010-02-01 05:57.When women are considered property and there are severe penalties for women acting out of cultural expectations, how would they get a reputation as natural rapist? I see that women get the reputation as the natural seductress, since in these cultures, men will not take moral responsibility for their actions.
It’s all about power, and
Submitted by the other anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2010-02-01 07:11.It’s all about power, and women are socialized away from power:
http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/i-fear-this/
I think you’re
Submitted by Holly Pervocracy (not verified) on Mon, 2010-02-01 09:40.I think you’re underestimating the strength difference. I’m a pretty tough girl, not Wonder Woman but I think I’m stronger than average, and I wouldn’t get into a fight with the average guy. Even scrawny-looking guys, when we get down to arm-wrestling or refrigerator-carrying, have some natural muscle I can’t compete with. Yeah, there are strong men and weak women, but in your model of overlapping bell curves, the majority of the time men are stronger.
A guy can hold me down and I can’t hold him down. He could break my bones and I don’t think I could break his. The physical does matter here.
(And on that cheery note: check your figleaf email!)
On Dec 6, 1989, Marc Lepine
Submitted by ChrisJ (not verified) on Mon, 2010-02-01 11:26.On Dec 6, 1989, Marc Lepine murdered women in Montreal because they were women and were behaving incorrectly by training to become engineers. At the time, there were two, opposing views about the event. One was that he was a total aberration, no reflection of anything cultural.
The other view is my answer to your question about rapists. Lepine’s attitudes and actions, albeit extreme, were a magnified reflection of cultural views of women – deeply misogynist. His actions were an uncontrolled and extreme outgrowth of what was enshrined in society. That’s what I believe rape is.
So to answer in another way – I don’t believe men are “natural” rapists; the ones who do rape have to be carefully taught, and from birth, in so many ways are taught. They just take it to extremes.
I think a very important
Submitted by ozymandias (not verified) on Mon, 2010-02-01 14:34.I think a very important point, especially in the case of date rape, is that our culture rarely acknowledges the existence of female-on-male rape* at all. A significant proportion of the difference in statistics might be that some men don’t really recognize their experience as rape as opposed to “wow, that bitch was crazy.”
Two Rules of Desire again, I guess. How could you rape a man? He’s always up for it, duh.
*The number of comedies that are under the impression that women raping men is a hilarious joke…
I think dealing with violent
Submitted by Red (not verified) on Mon, 2010-02-01 20:21. I think dealing with violent women has always been a very difficult and often two edged sword for a feminist. In general, the culture by and large, allows more room for a very competitive and marketing style of debate rather than any sophisticated discourse. The difference between the violence committed by individual men and women and/or men and women with very violent personalities, versus the fact that patriarchy has employed, implicitly encouraged, condoned, and mystified certain types male violence as a means of control just doesn’t fit very well in a soundbite. (And believe I have seen women behave in extremely violent manner towards other women.) Not to mention that patriarchal societies have also, and perhaps more in some ways, sanctioned female on female violence (clitoridectomy, domestic violence between “sister wives” in polygamous groups, brutality towards younger females etc) as means of control. Trying to acknowledge all these issues and these distinctions, to hold individuals responsible for their actions, and at the same time dispel misogynistic myths that portray women as extremely vengeful, irrational, and rather cruel, has always been a tough juggling act. And trying to do it in a society where the media, the MRAs, and Anne Coulter are all standing over your shoulder like a pack of hyenas waiting to pounce upon anything you can say that they can twist, misquote, or take out of context…..... So how does a feminist deal with violent women and the MRAs who love them? Or at least love to use them as examples of how women are “just as bad as men”? (Of course, most feminists never argued that women were better) One tactic is to write at least some of them off as victims of abuse, mental illness, or false consciousness-which often has some truth in it. But that’s a problem tactic because MRA’s start making the same claims about violent me-pure victims of social conditioning and women. If you try condemning them the media plays that against other feminists. And basically there isn’t a good answer.I like this blog. Rape as you
Submitted by sunflwer75 (not verified) on Mon, 2010-02-01 23:35.I like this blog. Rape as you so noted has been used for a very long time as a power move, wars are started or maintained with rape, i.e. ethnic cleansing. I would say that the reasoning behind the numbers difference is a shame factor that might I hazard to say (I am a sexual assault victim and a woman) is somewhat worse than a woman’s shame. Men are expected to be strong and able to fend off such an offense, while women must give in (she is damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t). This is why the clergy abuse pisses me off so much. The years of whispers were enough to alarm this agnostic to want action, but the out cry of the public just made it worse with a certain ignorance. Boys who are molested by men can become very confused and when the public calls pedophile men “gay” they rub salt on the wound for boys exploring and awaked sexually. I think the compliancy I see in law enforcement is another issue http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2009-05-28/news/two-statutory-rape-allegations-tell-us-everything-we-need-to-know-about-the-mcso-s-priorities as the Sheriff Arpaio here in Maricopa County Arizona proved, in his quest to combat illegal immigration two boys got away with raping a 14 year old passed out girl, they video taped it. The video still exists and the MCSO failed this girl and us. But try telling this story to his supporters they will say its all lies, that there is no girl.
Because it’s dangerous not
Submitted by tlt (not verified) on Tue, 2010-02-02 00:06.Because it’s dangerous not to. You have to assume that a small child will go running toward something colorful and shiny that moves around and makes noise. Most people wouldn’t take a three-year-old into a large, busy store and get into a long, complicated conversation on the phone and forgot all about the kid for half an hour while expecting him or her to obediently follow you around without getting distracted by something every five steps or wandering off. It’s possible that nothing would happen, but almost no one would take that chance because 1.) Something bad can happen and 2.) Everyone will blame you if it does. After all, you should have known. They just can’t help it.
In the same way, women absorb the idea that the risk of any one man committing rape is so high that it’s best to just assume that he will and act accordingly until he has “proven” otherwise to your satisfaction. If you don’t 1.) Something bad can happen and 2.) Everyone will blame you if it does. After all, you should have known. They just can’t help it.
I guess what I’m saying is that the assumption that men are natural rapists is part of both victim-blaming AND low expectations. It’s not going anywhere until the other two do.
When thinking this through,
Submitted by chingona (not verified) on Tue, 2010-02-02 12:00.When thinking this through, it’s important to remember that rape, for most of human history, has been conceived of as a property crime against the men who own or have rights to a particular woman – the father in the case of a virgin, perhaps her brothers if the father is dead, the husband in the case of a married woman. It wasn’t actually a personal crime against the woman.
In that context, because male sexuality doesn’t belong to someone else, the ability to defile or violate a man in the sense that rape connotated, didn’t exist. The concept was not contained within the definition of the word.
[Nicely put, Chingona. Though actually while digging around it sounds as though a number of slave-taking and/or war-obsessed cultures formally or informally used penile penetration as a way to degrade or “unman” male prisoners. This evidently fell enough out of favor, at least in the West, to have also fallen out of public awareness. Still that’s not even quibbling with your main point. Thanks! —fl]
ozymandias: it’s not just
Submitted by makomk (not verified) on Wed, 2010-02-03 12:09.ozymandias: it’s not just that our culture doesn’t recognize female-on-male rape as rape, but some of the more commonly-quoted statistics on rape don’t either, no matter what the victims think it is. For example, the US National Crime Victimization Survey only counts something as rape if the victim was sexually penetrated, as do the unofficial variants on it. Penetration with an object or body part is counted and so in theory a woman can rape a man under their definition. However, all the obvious hetrosexual sexual acts – penis-in-vagina, penis-in-anus, and oral sex both ways – count as rape if the man’s the rapist, but not if the woman is. The definition’s a bit iffy when it comes to same-sex rape too…
In fact, the statistics sunflwer75 gives in another thread, taken from the RAINN website, have the same problem. They’re from the National Violence Against Women Survey which is based on the NVCS and uses the exact same definitions. Have fun finding a decent survey when it comes to this issue.
[Thanks for the update on the NCVS criteria. Since only a very small fraction of even violent sexual assaults, by men, upon men, include actual penetration that already seems seriously inadequate. Add that a “good” rapist knows pretty well that physical arousal (for instance penile erection or vaginal lubrication) can be induced in a perfectly terrorized, thoroughly unwilling victim and the lines about penetration and “proof” of willingness get even blurrier. I’ve been stewing over this for a bit lately so I’ll probably do a post about it. Thanks, Makomk. —fl]
...Ouch. I didn’t know
Submitted by ozymandias (not verified) on Wed, 2010-02-03 12:49....Ouch.
I didn’t know that. I’d kind of thought that people who were, you know, experts on rape would realize that the primary issue is consent, not penetration. I mean, even if you discount the whole gender issue, there’s the fact that (if I understand you correctly?) a man forcing a woman to give him oral sex is rape, but a man forcing a woman to receive oral sex wouldn’t, which is just… wow.
Actually, these surveys –
Submitted by makomk (not verified) on Wed, 2010-02-03 13:28.Actually, these surveys – particularly the NVAWS, but in theory the NVCS too – do count a man forcing a woman to receive oral sex as rape. (It’s still counted as penetrative – specifically, as penetration with the tongue and mouth. The NVAWS especially is very explicit about this.) What they don’t count is a woman forcing a man to do either of these acts. At least some penetration-based legal definitions of rape work in the same way too.
Also, that’s the odd thing – despite all the people (especially in feminist circles) who do realize that the primary issue is consent, the issue with these statistics is really quite obscure. A lot of people who’d strongly disagree with the underlying definitions quite happily quote these figures for the purposes of showing that men don’t get raped very often, often in ignorance of the problem with them. In fact, they seem to be the figures usually quoted for this purpose, in my experience…
its not that we believe men
Submitted by sunflwer75 (not verified) on Fri, 2010-02-05 00:05.its not that we believe men don’t get raped, its that they are less likely to report it for various reasons.
[And Lil Wayne points to one more reason why they don’t. There really are a lot of ways for predators to spin it so their victims think it was their idea. As a college-town bartender back in the 1970s, before the idea of date rape really emerged, I saw an awful lot of the ways that’s done. By men and women. To men and women. For boys just using the stupid football aphorism that “an ugly win is still a win,” hearing things like at least you’re not a virgin anymore and/or you’ll never be able to say you’re straight again creates enough confusion to keep them out of the records. Thanks, Chingona. —fl]