From Cosmopolitan: A New Kind of Date Rape
Executive summary: rape is only rape if a total stranger jumps out of the bushes at you with a knife. If someone only forces you to have sex against your will, that's sort of a gray area and who can really judge?
After the dance, they went to Kevin’s room and, eventually, started making out. She told him flat out that she didn’t want it to proceed to sex, and he said okay. But in a few minutes, he had pushed her down on the couch and positioned himself on top of her.
“No. Stop,” she said softly — too softly, she later told herself. When he ignored her and entered her anyway, she tensed up and tried to go numb until it was over. He fell asleep afterward, and she left for her dorm, “having this dirty feeling of not knowing what to do or who to tell or whether it was my fault.” While it felt like rape to her — she had not wanted to have sex with Kevin — she was not sure if that’s what anyone else would call it.
[...]Alicia’s “gray area” experience is something that is becoming so common, it has earned its own moniker: gray rape. It refers to sex that falls somewhere between consent and denial and is even more confusing than date rape because often both parties are unsure of who wanted what.
But he wasn't unsure. "She told him flat out that she didn't want it to proceed to sex, and he said okay." And then she said "no." And then she was tensed and frozen the entire time it was going on. Does failure to hire a fucking marching band to create and perform an original composition entitled "NO I DO NOT WANT SEX" constitute consent?
This isn't even about the (extremely reasonable, thank you) belief that sex should be a matter of "yes" rather than "not no." She said no multiple times and he acknowledged understanding. Don't give me this "unsure." If he was unsure, he was ignoring so many signals that I don't even care. And that makes this not gray-rape, but your plain garden variety rape-rape.
And it’s a surprisingly common occurrence. The U.S. Department of Justice estimates that 1 in 5 college women will be raped at some point during a five-year college career; that about 9 out of 10 times, the victim will know her assailant; and that half of all victims will not call what happened rape. Sixty-two percent of female rape victims in general say they were assaulted by someone they knew, which includes dates, acquaintances, and random hookups.
Fun fact: most non-sexual physical assaults are between people who know each other. Does that make it a "gray beating"?
And as for not calling what happened "rape," well, you're really helping that situation, Cosmo. But even without articles like this, there are reasons someone wouldn't want to use that word. Labeling yourself "a rape victim" can feel sullying and disempowering, especially if you didn't report it, or if it didn't involve physical brutality, or if you're a man, or if you're gay, or if you think you somehow deserved or encouraged it. The fact that the label is uncomfortable does not necessarily mean it doesn't fit.
Many experts feel that gray rape is in fact often a consequence of today’s hookup culture: lots of partying and flirting, plenty of alcohol, and ironically, the idea that women can be just as bold and adventurous about sex as men are. How can something so potentially empowering become so damaging? Cosmo investigates.
Many experts feel that no, you're a poopyhead. These many experts are so accommodating.
Other than the obvious fact that sluts must be punished for their filthy ways, you'd think that women being more sexually aggressive would make "innocent misunderstanding" rape less common. If you expect women to be demure, then maybe you're expecting a consent that sounds like "no no no okay maybe." But if you're used to women being aggressive, then you're used to consent being more like "I want to fuck you now." In an atmosphere where women ask for what they want, it ought to be a lot easier to tell when they're not asking for it.
A generation ago, it was easier for men and women to understand what constituted rape because the social rules were clearer. Men were supposed to be the ones coming on to women, and women were said to be looking for relationships, not casual sex.
If the social rules are that women mustn't go looking for sex, then this blurs the line between "she's saying no because that's what women do, so they won't seem slutty" and "she's saying no because really, no."
Shari Rosen, a media recruiter in New York City, found that out on a business trip to Los Angeles. She and a coworker met a man in the bar of the hotel where they were staying. They ended up going with the man to a party, and then he and Shari returned to the hotel. On the way in, he kissed her deeply. They had a few more drinks at the hotel bar, and then he asked if she wanted to go to his hotel room to see some family photos.
She went to his room but after a few minutes said she needed to go. He pinned her on the bed and, according to Shari, sexually assaulted her. She struggled with him and managed to escape. Shari reported the incident to police but didn’t press charges.
How the hell is this gray? He pinned her down! Dear readers: if you have to physically restrain a struggling person to do something to them, and they have not very specifically arranged this in advance, they are probably not consenting to it.
I guess the "gray" comes from going up to his room. But I'm pretty sure this doesn't constitute consent to sex. More likely it comes from not having a polite way to say no to "come on, it's just some photos, how paranoid are you that you won't even look at some goddamn photos."
Anthony Moniello, 24, a radio personality for ESPN, says, “I’ve had girls tell me ‘I don’t have sex on the first night.’ And I say, ‘That’s fine, I respect that. Mind if I play with you a little bit?’ A girl will say no, she doesn’t mind, then she’ll get so hot, she’ll say, ‘Let’s do it.’ That’s the scariest part. Is it then my responsibility to say no?”
That's actually a fair question, and I'd say no (unless she's very drunk or high). It might be nice to remind her "you said you don't do this; are you going to regret it?", or even to just say you don't want to, but it's not rape if you don't. People can change their minds, and as long as that's communicated by saying "let's do it" rather than by not refusing as loudly, that's okay.
The psychological effects of what a victim did or didn’t do can last for years.
Oh those wacky victims, always victimizing themselves with nobody else in the room.
Sarah Belanger, 28, a communications specialist who works in Boston, has been trying to find a middle ground in her own life. “If you make the choice to leave the bar with the guy, then you are also creating the opportunity for something to go wrong,” she says. “I think that is the point that needs to be driven home to everyone who participates in the hookup culture. Yes, you can practice safe sex. Yes, you can have casual sex without strings. But this behavior carries a risk.”
I think what she's saying is that you shouldn't leave the bar with someone unless you're sure you want to fuck them, because like it or not that's what's coming.
I just have one question about this attitude: does this include anal? Apparently it's established that agreeing to "can I walk you home?" or "want to come up and see my albums?" is exactly the same thing as agreeing to oral, manual, and vaginal sex. But I'm just not that into anal, even with people I'm into. How do I communicate this in "you have to expect him to be a rapist"-Land?
Or what about lying on my arm? Sometimes people lie on my arm funny and it gets all numb and I have to ask them to move. Does going home with a guy constitute consent for him to lie on my arm? I'm not just being offensively facetious here. I'm trying to demonstrate how even the most trivial interactions require continuous and explicit communication. If getting close to a guy meant giving blanket consent to anything he could possibly think of, I'd never get close to a guy at all, because my fingers might drop off.
The article closes with some decent advice--don't try to compromise on "okay, just a little sex" with a guy who's pressuring you, know your rights under the law, communicate clearly. And some not-decent advice--don't get drunk, ever, because it's just not safe for a little lady.
But ultimately I'm just amazed someone could write an article about "gray rape" and not realize that was a, er, fully-saturated bad idea. There may exist situations where a person doesn't want sex but their partner has no way to know that, where for some reason "yes" really meant "no," but I don't see any of that in this article. All I see is situations where "no" should have meant "no," and there's nothing "gray" about it.
I read an article a few years ago, in Cosmo, about "grey rape". The idea there though, was that if you both get drunk and have sex and you regret it the next day, then he raped you. I think Aebhal wrote about it a while ago...
ReplyDeleteI guess I have nothing else helpful to say, just, wow Cosmo, what a winner.
Dorkie - Drunk sex is kind of a tough one, in my opinion. Mostly because there's drunk and there's drunk and then there's drunk. That is, there's three scenarios:
ReplyDelete1) They were drinking, but that didn't change anything.
2) They were drinking to the point where one (or both) of them made decisions they wouldn't have made sober.
3) They were drinking to the point where one of them was totally incapacitated and couldn't say yes or no at all.
2 is problematic, 3 is rape, and they both seem to get lumped in willy-nilly with each other and with 1.
This is wrong on so many levels. I really can't see how having to hold someone down is consent (when a struggle scene wasn't negotiated). That's just bizarre.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing that might make sense is a mixed signal--saying no but the person saying no continuing to touch and otherwise act positive. I have had that happen, but in that instance, the question "Why are you saying no?" or "Hey, what do you really want?" comes to mind. Really, when you hit resistance, slow down and figure things out.
In college, I knew many women who wanted to have sex, but didn't want to. They dealt with their ambivalence by getting drunk--so it wasn't their fault, or protesting/refusing while continuing to act in a sexual manner. Again, when presented with this behavior--stop. It won't kill you not to have sex. But this presumes a maturity that is missing from the Cosmo demographic and those men they date.
Dear Holly - another great post! I do so appreciate young people like yourself - you are part of a better future!
ReplyDeleteThese sort of discussions need to occur so that the culture changes and people act in the right way (or not act is perhaps a better way of saying it) when someone does not expressly give consent.
I agree - no should mean no. In practical terms, it should. If someone asks if I want a glass of water and I say no, well there is no gray at all. I don't want water!
I'll try to explain why people, particularly, some men, may not respond to no in the logical way. Please note my explanation is based on my culture where I grew up - I have no experience of US culture.
One reason - It's part of the culture that men persuade women to take part in sexual acts and its considered OK for them to take liberties. I grew up in such a culture. It happens - I was there.
It starts by it not being considered wrong for a young man to grope a young girl and girls seeming to enjoy being groped - they scream and carry on like its a game of chase or whatever. They don't complain to their parents and they don't call the guys out on it. Girls who complain to their parents may not be believed or may be blamed for attracting such attention.
In this culture women are supposed to be coy and men are supposed to persuade them to take part in sexual acts which they then both enjoy. In this case "no" can mean "a little more foreplay and I'll be ready to go".
In this context, we can see why some guy with little empathy and few people skills might misinterpret "no".
In such a culture, a woman should be very careful about putting herself in a position of weakness - not go to his room, not ride in his car, stay in public places, etc. Being alone with him may be misinterpreted as consent. If someone she supposes is trustworthy does not stop when she says no she has to act very decisively - a sharp slap, knee in the groin - and run as fast as she can. Easy to say, hard to do if you are not brought up to be assertive...and you still may be raped, but you will have the bruises and skin under your nails to prove it.
A second reason related to the first - Guys just get carried away and think its fine to go ahead because its unfair to deny them once they have been given the impression they will have sex and have got all worked up. In one case related to me the younger naive girl thought an older male student was genuinely interested in her and wanted a relationship when he asked her to go to his apartment. She expected other people to be there, but there were not. He expected sex and would not be denied when she said no - he said she had come so far, so he had a right to continue. He never spoke to her again and seemed totally lacking conscience about his actions. She was devastated and thought perhaps she did not understand the social rules.
...so if more people talk about respect for other people and what constitutes rape, the culture will gradually change and no will mean no.
Thank you Holly!
When presented with this behavior--stop. It won't kill you not to have sex.
ReplyDeleteDEAR GOD YES.
This was pretty much going to be my response to the fellow who had they "they said no, we made out, they said yes" fellow.
Take their first word for it. They're horny now? Ok, well, in my years of sleeping with girls, I can think of maybe a dozen scenarios wherein a woman said "I just want to make out, not have sex", and then later said "I changed my mind, let's fuck". And in two of those scenarios, when I said that we'd have to wait until the next date, I didn't get to have sex with those women. And the other ten, I did. And lots of it.
A rape trial will make your life way more fucked up than another evening of blue-balled masturbation. So say hi to lefty and try her again some other night.
Hee. Marching band. Amazing.
ReplyDeleteMy college has a very high rate of drinking, partying, flirting, hooking up and sexually adventurous women. It also has a ridiculously low rate of rape. Why? Because people keep an eye on other people when they get drunk, and because the universal reaction to "I pinned her down to have sex with her after she said no" is "YOU FUCKING RAPIST" and occasionally vigilante justice.
Also? There was less date rape in the fifties, because very few people were aware that date rape even happened. "I said no and he had sex with me" still happened, but "that's date rape" didn't.
Oh god, Cosmo, no, just no no no NO. Along with changing the social norm to no means NO, perhaps we can instill the idea that when things go wrong lying there and thinking of England is not the right course of action and that attempting to remove the rapists testicles is. I'm not trying to blame victims which I'm afraid this might seem like, but I think teaching women to fight for themselves is important as well.
ReplyDeleteMy only problem with your website is I'm not out enough as a perv to go linking it EVERYWHERE. Thank you for writing.
ReplyDelete"I'm not trying to blame victims which I'm afraid this might seem like, but I think teaching women to fight for themselves is important as well."
ReplyDeleteThe whole self-defense thing seems to come up fairly often as a strategy to 'help' women avoid rape, but I have to say I just don't get it. Not because it seems like victim-blaming (although the idea does a little), but more because it seems overly optimistic. Not every woman in the world can excell at physical fighting, and it's kind of easy to panic in a stressfull situation and freeze.
I actually write for an international edition of Cosmopolitan (don't hate me), and the bizarre thing is that I actually just submitted a story on this very topic... only it was framed completely differently.
ReplyDeleteThe point of the story was that people THINK rapists are only strangers who attack you in dark alleyways (or else obvious creeps), but in fact most rapes are committed by people known to the victim/survivor, and even liked by them and their community. And that, yes, these are real rapes, although these are the reasons they might not immediately be recognised as such (by the victim or the people around him/her), and here's what you can do if this has happened to you. No gray about it.
All pretty obvious stuff to the feminists among us, but useful information for young women who don't spend much time in the feminist blogosphere to have at their fingertips. Especially when it comes to valuing their friends' experiences.
As someone who both works in the industry and tries to make sense of it as an academic researcher, I've come to the conclusion that there just isn't a clear pattern of values and ideology within and between publications - or between my home country and yours, for that matter. It depends hugely on who the editor is at a given time (I've seen women's mags go from subtly subversive to regressive in a matter of months with a change of a management), but it also changes from story to story depending on who is writing it. Some writers parrot the existing majority view, others challenge it.
None of this is to say the article you're talking about here isn't terrible, but it's interesting to observe the differences in how the same publication might address the same topic under different editors, in different countries, with different journalists.
Ergh. Once again, Cosmo (like many other mags) has told women directly opposing, bloody stupid things. "Be empowered, girl power, yeah! Do and wear whatever you want! Just as long as you know that you a) have no real power, b)that you shouldn't expect any, c) your only value is in your appearance (which, by the way, is never good enough)and getting a man, d)and that your appearance (or shock horror! Being out in public!) may cause any man to rape you, but you shouldn't complain, 'cause it's a grey area.In fact, it's your fault." No. There's no friggin' grey area. None of that shit.These people are REVERSING EVOLUTION with this idiocy. This sort of crap just appalls me.
ReplyDeletep.s. Good on you, Holly. Keep it up. :)
ReplyDeleteI was in a situation where I'd just met a girl and she wanted to have sex straight away, but I wanted to wait a while, to get to know each other better and make sure this wasn't a mistake. I felt so proud of how mature I was being, especially since I was a virgin and most 19-year-old virgin boys aren't going to hesitate in a situation like that.
ReplyDeleteLater, she told me she was no longer interested in having sex with me, which made me feel frustrated at having lost the opportunity. Actually, her words were something along the lines of 'this isn't a good idea', which was close enough to 'yes' to my sexually frustrated brain. I resolved to have sex with her, regardless of how bad an idea it was, because the possibility of many more years of virginity was unthinkable.
In the end I couldn't do it, even though I was extremely sexually frustrated and it only ranked as 'not a good idea'.
I'm kind of proud that I was able to exert my will and do the right thing, but at the same time I became fucking terrified of my sexual nature, and how it can rewire my brain like that. I think this is why I lost my virginity at 25, even though I had several opportunities before then.
Having seen first hand the power of male sexuality, I can see why 'no' can be heard as 'maybe why not', and why a lot of women might be confused as to why they end up getting raped when they didn't mean to.
This talk of 'grey rape' is dangerous. It's like those articles in men's magazines with headlines like 'when no means yes'. "I read it in a magazine, so I didn't realise it was one of those situations where no means no". "I read it in a magazine, so I'm not sure if I was clear enough on my lack of consent".
"She read it in a magazine, so I can get away with it".
Oh yeah... another factor that added to my prolonged virginity was the girl I met a year after her. We met on the internet, she came to stay with me for a few days, we fell out, she left claiming that I had lured her there with the intent of taking advantage of her, I hadn't actually made any sexual advances at all during that time.
ReplyDeleteI had to abandon a much-loved online community because it was basically her word over mine. As far as I can figure out, she felt that he had somehow sallied her reputation by staying alone with a guy, so the only way to she could get it back was to claim that I had 'lured' her there with 'intent'. Well done... you saved your reputation at the expense of mine.
I wasn't alone with a girl for a very, very long time after these incidents.
@Anonymous.
ReplyDeleteWow. That is a great story. You should sell that story to Cosmo.
--Andy
Recently at my school there was a rape awareness assembly which was astoundingly badly pulled off, but had good intent.
ReplyDeleteThere was one section were they had a bunch of "Myth or Fact" statements where we had to clap when we thought it was either.
Things looked fairly good until we got to situational statements that had to do with alcohol (that were, in my mind pretty clearly She Still Means No cases). People were divided, and emboldened by being allowed to give the answers the teachers didn't want to hear, a bunch of assholes went to give deliberately opposite answers.
I don't even want to think about the reaction when they got to male rape and abuse.
Holly,
ReplyDeleteI was raped this summer. Your posts on rape (like this one) have helped me be able to say that. This line in particular resonated with me:
"Labeling yourself "a rape victim" can feel sullying and disempowering, especially if you didn't report it, or if it didn't involve physical brutality, or if you're a man, or if you're gay, or if you think you somehow deserved or encouraged it."
There's this perception of rape as a completely life-wrecking thing. Certainly it can be for many, but it wasn't for me, and calling myself a "rape survivor" makes me incredibly uncomfortable. You've helped me realize that avoiding the word rape necessarily does imply guilt on my part, discredits the experience of others and lets a rapist and completely worthless human being off the hook, even if I (hopefully) will never see him again. After it happened, I described being raped as my "sort of non-consensual terrible sex experience" to avoid the verbal punch and the overwhelming sympathy that comes with the word rape. But any variety of non-consensual sex is rape. And I was raped. It was awful, but it did not have a life-shattering effect on me. I'm happy and healthy, but that does not mean it wasn't rape.
So thank you, Holly. Your blog means a lot to me, and I so appreciate what you do here.
I wish there were a non-dismissive term for so-callled "grey rape," and that phrase used instead for activities that are wrong and violating but within the letter of the law.
ReplyDeleteAnthony Moniello, 24, a radio personality for ESPN, says, “I’ve had girls tell me ‘I don’t have sex on the first night.’ And I say, ‘That’s fine, I respect that. Mind if I play with you a little bit?’ A girl will say no, she doesn’t mind, then she’ll get so hot, she’ll say, ‘Let’s do it.’ That’s the scariest part. Is it then my responsibility to say no?”
That's actually a fair question, and I'd say no (unless she's very drunk or high). It might be nice to remind her "you said you don't do this; are you going to regret it?", or even to just say you don't want to, but it's not rape if you don't. People can change their minds, and as long as that's communicated by saying "let's do it" rather than by not refusing as loudly, that's okay.
I think in that situation I would err on the side of saying no. That's iff she'd explained it as a policy, and the policy is "first date=no sex" (as opposed to "I don't have sex with someone I haven't gotten to know" or a preference rather than a hard-and-fast rule).
there's drunk and there's drunk and then there's drunk. That is, there's three scenarios:
1) They were drinking, but that didn't change anything.
2) They were drinking to the point where one (or both) of them made decisions they wouldn't have made sober.
3) They were drinking to the point where one of them was totally incapacitated and couldn't say yes or no at all.
2 is problematic, 3 is rape, and they both seem to get lumped in willy-nilly with each other and with 1.
Isn't 2 sometimes the point of drinking? The first time I had intercourse with my current girlfriend I was drunk, and if I hadn't been we probably wouldn't have done anything. Because I'm shy. But I at least literally would not have made that decision sober.
The only thing that might make sense is a mixed signal--saying no but the person saying no continuing to touch and otherwise act positive.
"I want X but not Y" or "I'm willing to go this far and no further" is not a mixed signal. I've gotten a handjob from somone who wouldn't let me do anything to her, and I had little trouble figuring out what to do; I didn't feel I could touch her (or fuck her) and get away with it by saying "but she was touching my penis, how was I to know what she meant by 'don't do anything to me'?"
@hrithfrith: no such thing. what defines rape is "lack of consent," so someone putting hir penis in you (etc/adapt for different bodies) is rape, and is illegal, end of story. morally wrong, violating, AND illegal, all in one. or to answer your question in a different way, there is: it's called rape.
ReplyDeleteI loled at the marching band. Reminds me of a Middle School conversation with friends after watching a sex ed video where we were told NOT to let anything happen to us unless we explicitly consented. "Can I touch your leg?" "Can I move my hand an inch higher?" While now a sort of fun BDSM game, at the time it was hilarious.
ReplyDeleteAnd kudos for getting through the whole article. I got to "Cosmo investigates" and had to go throw up. Crimeny.
"The whole self-defense thing seems to come up fairly often as a strategy to 'help' women avoid rape, but I have to say I just don't get it. Not because it seems like victim-blaming (although the idea does a little), but more because it seems overly optimistic. Not every woman in the world can excell at physical fighting, and it's kind of easy to panic in a stressfull situation and freeze."
ReplyDeletePromoting self defense for women might be victim-blaming if people went around saying "that little lady got herself raped because she never learned how to throw a punch!", but I've never heard anyone say this (in contrast to the constant warnings about "don't get yourself raped by drinking & flirting too much!"). Second-guessing after the fact is pointless, but recommending something useful (i.e. not "stay indoors unless you have a man to protect you!") isn't.
It's not "optimistic" at all to imagine that most women can learn basic self defense techniques. In the class I took, we learned that even disabled women can use some of the tactics. Even a woman who's already been pushed to the ground can fight back by kicking. Etc. (The book "Her Wits About Her," a collection of real-life self defense stories, has some great examples of this.)
Women's self defense isn't about learning to "excel at physical fighting," but about learning some moves that can distract or disable an attacker for long enough to get away. Attackers are opportunistic and pick targets they think will be easy to control. A painful kick on the shins or squeeze to the nuts might be enough to convince the guy to give up and leave you alone. People hear "self defense" & imagine some sort of elitist karate dojo, where you're training yourself to be the ultimate fighting machine, but defending yourself in real life is nothing like that.
And as for the fact that people tend to freeze up in stressful situations, the only way to avoid this tendency is to practice! Somebody who's rehearsed her responses to a dangerous situation is less likely to freeze up.
@ Miss L: In general, yeah. But what about 'he just freakin' nagged me and nagged me and nagged me and called me a frigid bitch and I finally put out just to shut him up'-type situations. It's violating asshole behavior, but it isn't rape by any legal definition I've heard of. I'm guessing that's the sort of thing hrithfrith was talking about (I could be wrong).
ReplyDelete@ Anon:
Having seen first hand the power of male sexuality, I can see why 'no' can be heard as 'maybe why not', and why a lot of women might be confused as to why they end up getting raped when they didn't mean to.
Women end up getting raped when they didn't mean to (...as opposed to when they did mean to?) because some people are rapists. And a man who has so little control over his sexual response that he doesn't trust himself not to commit rape if he's in a position to do so should have himself committed. I'm not even kidding. That's the fucking definition of 'danger to society'.
Emily H - I don't think self-defense is a bad idea. But I'm wary of it being framed as an obligation. The line between "it would have been better if she'd fought back" and "she failed in her duty to fight back" can get so thin. One of the women quoted in this article describes her rape as "gray" because she didn't physically fight the guy off.
ReplyDelete(I'm also very wary of statements like "even disabled women can use some of the tactics." Depends on the disability.)
And there's one other factor: I can hit a malevolent jumped-out-of-the-bushes stranger, no problem. I can't hit my boyfriend. Certainly not as a first resort the instant I start to feel uncomfortable, anyway. The "freeze" is likely to be as much emotional confusion as it is physical intimidation, in that case.
Again, all this isn't to say that learning self-defense is bad. Just that encouraging self-defense should never shade into judgement of those who don't self-defend.
...and ironically enough, in the Victorian period, it was thought that a woman defending herself with anything more than tears and pleading was egging her attacker on.
ReplyDeleteSome cultures still see it that way. And some cases, the best self-defense is being willing to put the correct label on it. If a woman didn't want to have sex, and wound up intimidated or physically forced into it, she was raped. End of sentence. Yes, she was a victim of a crime. End of sentence.
I was a victim of rape--the most awful kind, where the perpetrator was a parent. I didn't move from victim to survivor in my own mind until I put the right term to it, allowed myself to feel rage and hate for a while, then moved on.
In my opinion, any unwanted sex act--even foreplay--is a degree of rape. Any degree of "no" must be treated as "HELL no," or the guy pushing the girl is a creep and not fit to be in human company.
And any girl that has consensual sex, decides later that it was a bad idea, and cries rape (and I've known several in high school, college, and grad school) makes it harder for the rest of us to get that point across.
aebhel, that is exactly the scenario I had in mind. I'm not trying to let rapists off the hook; I want to do the opposite of that.
ReplyDelete"And some cases, the best self-defense is being willing to put the correct label on it."
ReplyDeleteHeroditus, I've used the label strategy and it worked. The male involved did not want to abuse women - once he realised that his behaviour was recognised as abusive by society and frightening to women he stopped. However, I am not sure if every perpetrator is ready to realise their wrong doing and reform!
Re Emily H's support of the value self defense - the psychologist that ran the class I attended said that every rape victim he had counseled reported a chance to escape, but had been too scared to move. Therefore, even if self defense lessons only teach us how to remain calm, they will be very helpful!
The whole suggestion of self-defense lessons seems well meaning, but from my perspective it seems like a fluffy little fantasy in regards to rape prevention. Not to say that learning self-defense is a bad thing to do, generally speaking, just that it maybe is more useful for other things most of the time.
ReplyDeleteNow, I have not been raped. I was, however, sexually abused for several years by my father when I was a preteen. The only difference between that and rape is that he wanted to save the "deflowering" bit until I was 16ish. I had taken self-defense classes. It happened anyway, repeatedly. The usefulness of this eludes me.
You know, maybe we can start telling everyone to take "How to Avoid Raping People" classes and "How YOU Can Hold Rapists Accountable for Rape" classes. Address the problem at the root!
Sorry if I'm overly snarky. I've just been told to learn self-defense enough times by people as they learn that I'm a survivor that I'm a bit...less than patient with the idea. (It's actually often not people telling me I SHOULD have fought back, it's more often people telling me it would make me feel better or would prevent it from happening again, on which I also call BS.)
The self defense argument annoys me too. Not that I think its a bad thing to know but because its generally treated as women should be on guard at all times against the evil men lurking everywhere just waiting to pounce on them. We should all wear running shoes and long pants and short hair and carry our keys as brass knuckles at every opportunity. We should all not carry purses or go our alone after dark. We should not travel alone with our children as getting them buckled in the car maximizes our time distracted and vulnerable in the parking lot - we must get into the car and lock all the doors as soon as possible. Anyone who lives their life in that much perpetual fear is already a victim even if no one ever touches them.
ReplyDeleteRape is most often perpetrated by people known to the victim and this creates a whole other conundrum. My rapist was my father and when I opened my mouth about it everyone in my family reacted poorly. I was rocking their apple cart and goddamnit I best just hush and keep taking the abuse like a good little girl. All the self defense classes in the world don't help a toddler. They don't help a preteen who thinks everyone's daddies do these things and she's just bad for complaining. They don't help a teenager who is caught in a broken family with a mother who is actually jealous of the fact that her husband is abusing her daughter.
Lastly - boo to cosmo for making it even harder to exist as a woman in society. Lets devalue our decisions even further by pretending no isn't really no and rape isn't really rape.
"All the self defense classes in the world don't help a toddler. They don't help a preteen who thinks everyone's daddies do these things and she's just bad for complaining."
ReplyDeleteThis. That preteen was me. And when I think about it, even if I had tried to fight my way out, even with the knowledge of self-defense I had/have, I don't think that would have helped me at all. While my sexually abusive father didn't use this as a threat to make me comply, he made it generally well known that he had years of training in a few different martial arts (which was not just talk, I saw him practice) and would not hesitate to break limbs or bodies if someone was trying to hurt him, even if it was a woman or a child. He was also about 250 pounds, and I was probably around 85 pounds at the time (even full-grown I'm only 115). Self-defense did not, and probably could not in this situation, make me safer or help me get away. Also, sometimes fighting back is NOT the right thing to do. Sometimes not fighting back is how you stay alive or less injured. And sometimes you lose the ability to control your own body when you're being assaulted (possibly especially in cases of being assaulted by someone you trust) and can't fight back even if you think it will help.
Again, not to say that self-defense is a bad thing to know. I'm sure it's handy general knowledge for whatever specific situations it CAN get you out of. I'm just kind of tired of how frequently it's the response to discussions of rape. And I don't really like the "How to Not Get Raped" discussion because the whole problem with rape in the first place is the Not-Having-Any-CONTROL over something that is being done to you. Being able to do something about it if it's happening to you is a matter of luck, not Doing The Right Thing. I think it would be far more productive to focus on giving everyone better education about consent (how to not rape people/how to recognize rape) and working to hold rapists accountable for rape legally and socially (people rape less if they don't think they can get away with it).
@aebhel and hrifrith: 1st, hrifthfrith, my apologies if i sounded cranky. i am not a lawyer or anything, but i'm pretty sure that penetration-via-coercion is still legally rape too. My google-fu tells me that according to Burton's Legal Thesaurus (2007, if you're so inclined) coercion is defined as: "The intimidation of a victim to compel the individual to do some act against his or her will by the use of psychological pressure, physical force, or threats." i'd say that continually nagging, ie refusing to acknowledge a "no" that's been given (particularly, though not exclusively in the case of straight man and woman, where there's a lot of cultural force backing up the notion that the latter should listen to the former, etc etc etc) qualifies as psychological pressure. i think you'd have a reasonable foothold to say it was a threat as well, because nagging implies an unwillingness to take no for an answer that could escalate (and does, on occasion). But then, i am not a lawyer.
ReplyDeleteMiss L:
ReplyDeleteI can see where you're coming from, but I think in this case the important thing is the concept of 'intimidation'; being annoyed into sex isn't pleasant and makes for lousy sex and a worse relationship (and trust me, I speak from sadly extensive experience there), but it's not (or not necessarily) intimidation.
If it's my boss, or my teacher, or some other individual where there might be actual consequences if I keep saying no, that's intimidation. If he gets up in my space and looms, that's intimidation. If he sits there watching me play around on my computer and keeps bugging me to come to bed, that's dickish and annoying, but it's not really intimidation, imo.
Miss L, you didn't come off as unreasonably cranky. It's a difficult thing to express clearly*. But I think among adults of nominally roughly equal status (male privilege aside**) compliance -- consent without desire -- is, legally speaking, consent, but makes for lousy sex and a worse relationship and should not be used as the standard socially.
ReplyDeleteThat is, you shouldn't have sex with someone*** who doesn't want it. You are legally prohibited from having sex with someone who doesn't allow it. And going back to my semantic point, I would prefer that "grey rape" be applied only to the gap between those standards even as I'm not sure it is practical to enforce the first, social, standard as the legal one.
* Or I'm a lousy writer, but I know which explanation I like better.
** Otherwise it's all coercion.
*** Particularly in a casual context.
Thank you for this post, Holly. It's an uncomfortable subject for me, but I genuinely appreciate your no-BS approach and honest insight.
ReplyDeleteAnd I completely agree with the stigma behind calling oneself a 'rape victim'. It makes people treat you differently - they often react with either Anger, Shock or Determination to somehow "fix" the problem, or comfort you, even after the wound has healed over. And when you don't want to discuss the unpleasant situation at all, it's often lost on well-intentioned people that want to hear every last detail of it, to somehow justify that they've done all they could to help and counsel you.
I'm actually quite offended at Cosmo's idea of "gray area". I do think a gray area exists, but this IS NOT IT. As someone that's been involved in a quasi-rape that's deemed "gray area" under Cosmo's reasoning of "Well I let him touch me, I said no but he assumed it was okay anyway since we were on a date, and I didn't physically push him off and scream my lungs out", I'm quite irritated by this "investigative" drivel.
Man! Where is my marching band to troop out whenever someone tries to rape me against my will?! (As opposed to those rapes that I had intended, of course.) I want to know!
ReplyDeleteI have three comments, all of which are probably going to make me very unpopular. First let me stress this only applies to this "grey rape" stuff. It doesn't apply to rape of children or rape by out-of-bushes-jumping strangers.
ReplyDelete1) I don't think it's a good idea to ridicule the common-sense steps women can take to avoid putting themselves at risk. Yes, yes, in principle we shouldn't have to watch how much we drink and we shouldn't have to be afraid to accompany a horny guy back to his room alone... but then, we shouldn't ever have to lock up our bikes or cars either. We *do* lock up our bikes and cars, not because thieves are ever justified in taking them, but because we know there are scumbags in the world and we don't want our stuff stolen. (I read the cars analogy thing somewhere, can't remember where. Credit to that person.) In the same vein, girls and women should be educated about how to minimize the risk of date rape. Not because they *should* have to modify their behavior, but because they're just less likely to be date-raped if they make good decisions.
2) I find myself really frustrated by these cases where consent is in doubt. It is within the power of women to permanently eliminate this "grey rape" thing by communicating NO clearly and unequivocally. Whispering "no sex, aright?" while continuing to make out with a guy often fails to achieve the desired result; why isn't it standard policy for us to halt the action and say NO, or even drop the r-word, when we're getting pushy vibes?? Guys want to use confusion or mixed signals as a defense and maybe they even believe it, but this would not be possible with a girl saying NO and "Hello - are you going to rape me?" I wish women would do this, and I feel insulted when people answer: “oh no, we can’t expect women to express their wishes clearly; that’s beyond them.”
3) Along the same lines, self-defense is absolutely wonderful for preventing "grey rape." Maybe you can't actually fight off your date if he's got a hundred pounds on you and you stink at fighting, but fighting conclusively proves to the guy that his advances are unwanted. Plenty of macho drunkies apparently feel it's their male prerogative to press on with a hesitant girl, but it's a whole separate level of scumbag who will hold down a fighting girl and rape her. Lots of guys won't do that - and the ones who do have less chance of beating charges by pleading grey area. (And that’s aside from the possibility that fighting actually *will* be effective.)
I actually agree with all your points.
Delete1) When "rape prevention" measures conflict with daily life in a way more intrusive than locking your door, and when they don't even work to prevent most rapes (which are committed by people the victim already knows), then yes, they are up for criticism and even ridicule.
ReplyDelete2) Women aren't a unified organization that can coordinate our movements. Also, sometimes I do want to make out and not fuck, and if I communicate that fact, I'm actually not sending mixed messages at all.
I feel insulted when people answer "oh no, we can't expect guys to wait for clear enthusiastic consent; that's beyond them."
3) I don't think you understand how fear works.
I also think you don't understand how getting the shit beat out of you works.
Taking precautionary measures won’t prevent *all* rapes, but *not* taking precautionary measures won’t prevent *any* rapes. So, I say precautionary measures should be encouraged, even if they’re not perfect. If some measure is too much of a pain to justify the risk reduction it provides, then don’t do it. But I think a lot of the more basic measures would pass this test.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes we’d be justified in morally expecting guys to make sure of consent. But our expectations are sometimes disappointed, and then we get raped. So, I don’t think it’s a good idea to rely on that expectation. I guess my real difference of opinion with you here is I’m less concerned with what should be fair or right or whatever, and more concerned with what could be done to decrease rape in the actual world we live in with the actual people who live here.
My personal experiences with fear and with shit-beating aren’t at issue here, though I do have them. In general though: most of these “grey rape” stories didn’t sound to me like they involved beating the shit out of people or the fear of it. I don’t believe that most dates, even pushy or drunk ones, would beat the shit out of their date if she said: “Stop, because you’re about to rape me.” Again, there *are* some guys who might do that, but those guys don’t seem to be what the “grey area” thing is mostly about.
No one's actually suggesting women take naked naps in unfamiliar frathouses.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, frankly, they should be able to. Since we're both already in the realm of telling enormous populations that aren't listening to us what we think they should do, we might as well dream big.
"I have a dream... that one day my daughters will be able to take naked naps in unfamiliar frathouses..."
ReplyDeleteAmen to that. Sadly I'm a pessimist, so for the time being, any daughters I end up having are going to take wrestling classes. :-/
You know, looking back on my life, after reading the comments, I can't believe how many situations I have been in where I was coerced into engaging in in sexual activity I did not want to. A couple of stupid situations where guys I trusted at the time wouldn't give me a ride home if I didn't comply. It wasn't forced but on one occasional I had snuck out of my parent's house and the other I was out in the middle of nowhere with no phone. I also dated a guy for a awhile that had a higher sex drive than me and insisted on sex. I'd say "no" over and over but after him throwing tantrums I'd just give in. This was almost every single time I saw him. I got to the point where I didn't want to be alone with him because I knew as soon as I was it would start. I loved him (it feels so weird to say that now)and many times I would end up feeling like an awful girlfriend for not complying like I should (hello, low self-esteem!)
ReplyDeleteHow fucked up is that? And how fucked up is it that there are so many people who think they are owed the right to get off, regardless of how awful it makes others feel.
I know this article was posted a long time ago, but I just can't get over how fucked up adding the word 'grey' to those scenarios is. Those were flat out rapes.
ReplyDeleteWhen I heard the term grey rape the scenario that sprung to my mind was more like a situation where a woman does consent to sex but is in a situation where she doesn't feel able to not consent like in sexual harrassment in the workplace. The guy gets to say "she said yes, there's no ambiguity!" meanwhile the woman believes that if she says anything other than yes she will be fired/evicted/deported.
It is just so gross that they used the word grey because it is pretty black and white. They could have written pretty much the same article and left out that label and gone more for the idea of 'if a guy you know, and even one you like, forces you to have sex with him without your consent, that is rape and it is just as horrible as if a stranger raped you. Nothing you did caused it to happen and you should get help"
"A generation ago, it was easier for men and women to understand what constituted rape because the social rules were clearer."
ReplyDeleteDa fuck? A generation ago it wasn't rape if you were married to your rapist. It didn't matter if he pinned you to the bed, held a gun to your head and beat you black and blue. If he put a ring on your finger and promised to love you forever before God it was considered a consensual sexual experience.
Cosmo needs to get new management. Preferably someone with a brain.
LOL!
ReplyDelete"Women get raped because they're sluts! If women didn't want to get raped then they shouldn't be sluts!"
Ew, slut shaming.