Feminism - Frightbats Galore!

[sologdin]

dunno. I just reviewed NY, CA, and TX, and none of them limit rape to the penetrated person. first two define it as sexual intercourse, whereas the third specifies person penetrated in disjunct 1, but then by disjunct 3 pops it into genital contact.

[Enguerrand]

Enguerrand, you seem to be missing John's point - currently, in most legal jurisdictions, rape is defined as involuntary penetration, ergo a woman cannot rape a man with her vagina. He's not making an argument about whether that's right or wrong.

Even if that was true, which I very much doubt it is, people in this thread have stated that men exposed to sexual coercion by woman are "Lucky" and many people in general consider a hardon consent for some reason. Call it whatever you want, I still find it just as offensive whether it's perpetrated with a vagina or a penis.

[john]

dunno. I just reviewed NY, CA, and TX, and none of them limit rape to the penetrated person. first two define it as sexual intercourse, whereas the third specifies person penetrated in disjunct 1, but then by disjunct 3 pops it into genital contact.

First of all, Texas is one of the states where the charge is sexual assault, as far as I can see.

The UK statutes require penetration of the victim by a penis, Ireland is a man having unconsensual sex with a woman, France is an act of penetration committed against someone, India and China is a man having forceful and unconsensual sex with a women, Japan and Korea is a person having forceful and unconsensual sex with a woman.

Some places like Sweden, Germany, Greece define it only as sexual intercourse but also require force or insensibility. Norway does leave it at sexual intercourse.

I definitely applaud jurisdictions that have the broader definition of rape but I wouldn't say they were widespread at all.

[karaddin]

Even if that was true, which I very much doubt it is, people in this thread have stated that men exposed to sexual coercion by woman are "Lucky" and many people in general consider a hardon consent for some reason. Call it whatever you want, I still find it just as offensive whether it's perpetrated with a vagina or a penis.

No one said a raped man is lucky, there was a sarcastic eyeroll about that being some of the idiotic gendered expectations in society, not an actual endorsement of the sentiment.

And how in the world does this current derail have anything to do with what was being talked about? In a thread about a movement dedicated to changing the world, why the fuck are we quibbling over the legal definition of rape? We were talking about perceptions of rape and most lay people don't ponder the legal definition when they are forced to think about rape.

Please drop the derail, or start a new thread on whether rape requires penetration.

[Galactus]

Some places like Sweden, Germany, Greece define it only as sexual intercourse but also require force

Sweden does not, as I posted the text earlier.

[john]

And how in the world does this current derail have anything to do with what was being talked about? In a thread about a movement dedicated to changing the world, why the fuck are we quibbling over the legal definition of rape?

I mean, laws are part of how you change the world. Perceptions of rape are obviously related to laws on rape. But all right it's probably run it's course now.

Galactus- yeah, I only included Sweden after I saw your post. You're right I didn't read it properly.

[SerKDUB]

Hello,

I'd like to make a confession in that I have not been the most feminist person. I have not been a misogynist but the rights of women and the consideration of gender discrimination was not part of my consciousness. As part of my confession I think that it is relevant to say that I am a white male in his mid twenties who, as part of his growth as a human, has become self-aware of many of his past prejudices. Though for some reason, I have only recently become more aware of the disparity in which women are treated. I really think that this has become a disregarded issue in the USA as far as I can perceive. The disparity in how women are treated and viewed and how violence against women is portrayed has become more obvious to me the more I have payed attention to it.

So I just want to say that it is possible to have a convert and that by the fact that I have changed means that others can change.

[Arkhangel]

Even if that was true, which I very much doubt it is, people in this thread have stated that men exposed to sexual coercion by woman are "Lucky" and many people in general consider a hardon consent for some reason. Call it whatever you want, I still find it just as offensive whether it's perpetrated with a vagina or a penis.

I think the crack about female-on-male rape being considered 'lucky' rather than an awful crime was sarcasm, about the way that crime is treated in movies and on TV, and not at all a sincere reflection of that poster's views. Everyone recognises and agrees that rape is rape.

[Summah]

Enguerrand,

I think others have explained the sarcastic comment well enough. What's been going on for the past couple pages is derailment (and I know it wasn't all you), it's not ok. No one is saying that women being raped is a more serious crime (I'm talking reality, not law) than men being raped, no one should be raped it's horrible and wrong and awful no matter the genders of the victim and the perpetrator, that said while the crimes are equivalent in gravity, women being raped is a much bigger problem, because even considering that male victim rapes are likely even more underreported than female victim rapes many times more women are raped, does that make the men unimportant? No. But does that mean that every time the issue of rape is brought up in a feminist conversation that it's ok to say, but what about the menz? No. When that issue is constantly brought up it minimizes the issue of women being raped, because the conversation becomes, once again, all about the men.* Finally quibbling over the legal definitions of rape and if that requires the victim to be penetrated etc etc could be a perfectly interesting topic, but it is another derailment, or rather a continuation of the one about male victims of rape.

*And honestly because I haven't been here that long I don't know what the history is with that on this forum, my response is primarily based on my experiences elsewhere.

[Deedles]

Can I please make a request that we move away from the rape topic'in general. It's really making me not want to read one of my favourite topics. I'm not sure what, if anything, it brings to a debate on feminism. While there is crossover with enthusiastic consent culture, that's not really what is being batted around here.

[KiDisaster]

Can I please make a request that we move away from the rape topic'in general. It's really making me not want to read one of my favourite topics. I'm not sure what, if anything, it brings to a debate on feminism. While there is crossover with enthusiastic consent culture, that's not really what is being batted around here.

I agree, but it's become pretty obvious that it's impossible to keep these threads on topic. Shit, Lyanna already gave up and I don't blame her.

[john]

Anyone who thinks differing attitudes towards women's role in sex crimes is not an issue of import to feminism is simply wrong. Fair enough to not want to talk about it but claims of "derailment" are just nonsense.

[Galactus]

that said while the crimes are equivalent in gravity, women being raped is a much bigger problem, because even considering that male victim rapes are likely even more underreported than female victim rapes many times more women are raped,

I admittedly am not sure of the exact statistics, but one of the articles earlier quoted a link saying 12% of men have experienced sexual assault. The usual figure for women is "one-in-six", so roughly 17%? That's a significant increase, but hardly "several times more".

[Gneisenau]

I admittedly am not sure of the exact statistics, but one of the articles earlier quoted a link saying 12% of men have experienced sexual assault. The usual figure for women is "one-in-six", so roughly 17%? That's a significant increase, but hardly "several times more".

Does this include prison statistics ?

[Galactus]

Does this include prison statistics ?

It was quote in an earlier article, so you might want to check that, but it's not really relevant in any case.

[Summah]

If you want to continue discussing rape and/or sexual assault please start a new thread. Several of us have made requests for this to stop, so please stop or make a new thread.

[Enguerrand]

In a thread about a movement dedicated to changing the world, why the fuck are we quibbling over the legal definition of rape?

Perception of rape has nothing to do with feminism? The feminists I'm acquainted with must be horribly misinformed then, and I wasn't quibbling about the legal definition of rape. At all.

I think the crack about female-on-male rape being considered 'lucky' rather than an awful crime was sarcasm, about the way that crime is treated in movies and on TV, and not at all a sincere reflection of that poster's views. Everyone recognises and agrees that rape is rape.

Did you see that video with David Chapelle, linked earlier? His audience is laughing themselves to tears over an actual serial man on man rapist. I very much doubt everyone recognises and agree that rape is rape, regardless of gender.

I think others have explained the sarcastic comment well enough.

If you all say so. I apologize for my poor sarcasm detection then. Yet I don't see why it's such a strange notion to take seriously. A man claiming to have been sexually exploited by a decent looking women wouldn't be considered a victim by many. It's even a trope http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoubleStandardRapefemaleOnMale not that it is one that Sarkeesian will ever adress.

No. When that issue is constantly brought up it minimizes the issue of women being raped, because the conversation becomes, once again, all about the men.

I didn't bring it up, I objected to what I perceived was a dismissal of male rape. I will assume that the insinuation that I would do so in order to "minimize the issue of women being raped" is just me not understanding sarcasm again.

Anyway I gather my contributions to the thread aren't appreciated so I will leave you to it. Good day.

[Lyanna Stark]

Perception of rape has nothing to do with feminism? The feminists I'm acquainted with must be horribly misinformed then, and I wasn't quibbling about the legal definition of rape. At all.

Did you see that video with David Chapelle, linked earlier? His audience is laughing themselves to tears over an actual serial man on man rapist. I very much doubt everyone recognises and agree that rape is rape, regardless of gender.

If you all say so. I apologize for my poor sarcasm detection then. Yet I don't see why it's such a strange notion to take seriously. A man claiming to have been sexually exploited by a decent looking women wouldn't be considered a victim by many. It's even a trope http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoubleStandardRapefemaleOnMale not that it is one that Sarkeesian will ever adress.

I didn't bring it up, I objected to what I perceived was a dismissal of male rape. I will assume that the insinuation that I would do so in order to "minimize the issue of women being raped" is just me not understanding sarcasm again.

Anyway I gather my contributions to the thread aren't appreciated so I will leave you to it. Good day.

Right so, let me explain where you got it wrong and where you got it right:

Firstly, there is no inherent contradiction or relations of opposites between the reactions to women "asking for it" and men "not being able to be raped". It is pointless to pit one against the other, and in fact in doing so, it obscures the underlying causes for why this happens.

Secondly, and most importantly, the underlying causes are actually an underlying CAUSE. Both men and women are being gender stereotyped when they are victims of rape. What "verdicts" comes out depends on whether your gender is man or woman. If you're a woman, you're going to get the whole schtick of "too short skirt, asking for it, why were you alone with a man in the first place, but you had sex with him before so you must have wanted it" blah blah. On the other hand, if a man has been raped then "LOL men can't be raped, are you in fact gay, just be a man and fight off your attacker already you weak saddo".

See? Stereotypes and prejudice rule in how people judge. The same underlying mechanic in both cases. Whether it's a woman who "really wanted it" or a man who " can't get raped" the same mechanics are at work.

Because gender stereotypes are so pervasive and a lot of people either refuse or try to avoid removing them, we're going to continue getting these types of reasoning around rapes. I might add as well that regardless of what the actual law says, we've had cases in Sweden where the woman said no, repeatedly, and the man still got off free because the judge didn't think that the man really really realised she meant no when she said no. She could actually have meant yes. Hence the actual text in the legislation may be important, but more important still are the people actually working with these cases. As long as our judges and the juries consist of people with reactionary views on gender then this is the sort of stuff we're going to get.

From a feminist perspective the legislation is important, but how it is applied is even more important.

Can I please make a request that we move away from the rape topic'in general. It's really making me not want to read one of my favourite topics. I'm not sure what, if anything, it brings to a debate on feminism. While there is crossover with enthusiastic consent culture, that's not really what is being batted around here.

As long as it is not discussed from a feminist perspective, then no, it is off topic. I also agree that it is a tired topic and one that is often brought up, over and over again. But hey, I am not people's mother and I can't be fucked to try and discipline a bunch of people set on Rechthaberei.

EDIT: per Galactus' suggestion :P

[Galactus]

Firstly, there is inherent contradiction or relations of opposites between the reactions to women "asking for it" and men "not being able to be raped". It is pointless to pit one against the other, and in fact in doing so, it obscures the underlying causes for why this happens.

I assume you mean "No inherent contradiction" (since I'd argue the causes are similar, IE: Notion of gender roles)

Incidentally, the swedish term könsmaktsordning (something like "ordered structure of gendered power") is really great.

[Lyanna Stark]

I assume you mean "No inherent contradiction" (since I'd argue the causes are similar, IE: Notion of gender roles)

Incidentally, the swedish term könsmaktsordning (something like "ordered structure of gendered power") is really great.

I did mean that yes. :p

Agreed on the word. It's perhaps a bit of a mouthful though. Swedish is such an inventive language when people put their mind to it. English totally hasn't got a good translation for haverist either.