"Theory of Rape"

[bloom]

I posted this in the enormous thread of nashville_brook's in GD - but I wondered what people around here thought. I thought it brought out some interesting points that related to the Duke case. I also think that when the writer argues that rape IS about sex - he ends up mostly just saying that sex is the weapon of choice.

-----

Partly - ? is arguing against Brownmiller's contention that rape is not about sex. "One influential school of Feminist analysis has desexualized rape, treating it merely as an extreme form of violence by men against women (Brownmiller 1975; Media and Thompson 1974)" And yet - while doing so - it seems that he makes the case that rape is about power over women and disdain for women.

"...On the one hand, authority and access to socially valued resources is greater for males than for females. In contrast, the normative structure of erotic interaction assigns to women control of sexual access. Therefore, normatively, a man is controlled by a person of lower rank for heterosexual sexual gratification. So long as a woman complies with (or does not seriously thwart) his wishes, there is no structural tension. When a woman appears to tease or to deny a man what he perceives as legitimate access, he is controlled by his structural subordinate. At one level, males commonly perceive this situation as one in which women control the degree of intimacy allowed. This is a correct perception of the normative structure. His perception may lead to mild resentment and some frustration, while evoking little anger, little hostility, or little disdain.

In contrast, some men articulate this experience as a situation where women are niggardly dispensers of a valued commodity; some men deeply resent female normative control over sexual access. This view is preserved and perpetuated by some male peer groups.

For such peer groups, rape myths, general sexually callous beliefs and callous orientations toward erotic interaction do important ideological work; they transform female normative control of erotic activity into (perceived) deviance against men. The causal nexus among gender stratification, erotic interaction, and sexual aggression lies here. Male resentment of women originates (in part) from a cynical portrayal of women's motives in erotic interaction and leads to the portrayal of her proper role in sexual activity as parallel to that in most other cross sex contexts. The requisite ideological work is performed by sexually callous views of women and by callous orientations toward erotic interaction. Since, normatively, males are seekers of sexual intimacy while females are the controllers, males are normatively dependent upon females for heterosexual sexual activity. In this very important social arena, social norms place women in control of the valued resource. ... These views amount to the belief that sex can be aggressively used to enforce the ``proper'' dominance pattern between the sexes....

Thus, sex symbolically becomes domination and rape myths legitimate sexual aggression (1) by transforming normative female control of sexual access into female deviance toward men, (2) by excusing male aggressive use of sex to reestablish the ``proper'' dominance relationship, and (3) by portraying the victim as both deserving and enjoying her treatment. Simply put, rape myths excuse, legitimate and celebrate male structural domination by portraying privilege in sexual interaction as consistent with privilege in general gender stratification...."

http://wwwcj.mnstate.edu/classes/CJ400/Monograph/Theory.html

Where you have the Duke case the perceived power by the team and the disdain of the woman because of her profession, class, race? (or all women) just would have added to the already toxic thought processes of the alleged rapists.

"Ryan McFadyen's email to the team was a reference to the book and movie, "American Psycho". Apparently, this was a bit of a cult favorite among Duke Lacrosse team members.... some of these guys admittedly seemed to spend a large amount of their time thinking about extremely graphic violence against women of a sexual nature, and they and others see absolutely nothing problematic about that."

http://redstatefeminist.blogspot.com / Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Still, convicted rapists differ from other offenders in two sociologically significant ways:

Rapists have higher levels of sexual arousal to depictions of rape and other violence against women than non rapists.
Rapists have more callous attitudes towards rape and other sexually aggressive conduct, including a greater acceptance of rape myths than non rapists.
In short, rapists have deviant sexual attitudes and they have a deviant pattern of sexual arousal.

...there is a relatively strong correlation in the ``normal'' male population between acceptance of rape supportive attitudes and sexual aggression, however measured. For example, Koss et al (1985) report that self reported sexually aggressive college males differed from the non sexually aggressive males in four ways:

they accepted sexual aggressiveness as normal;
they saw cross sex relations as largely adversarial;
they held conservative attitudes towards female sexuality and
they accepted rape myths as descriptively accurate.

Second, these beliefs ideologically legitimate sexual aggression.

Third, these views are based upon early sexual socialization and are available as a touchstone for sexual activity and relationships. These are the cognitive foundation of a callous orientation toward erotic interaction.

The Schwendingers (1983) show that rape myths and negative views of women are learned in adolescent single sex peer groups. Ageton (1983) identified 63 sexually aggressive adolescent males in a national longitudinal sample who held attitudes supportive of sexual assault prior to their aggressive acts. These beliefs were not held by sexually non aggressive males. Further, these attitudes and behaviors were strongly influenced by delinquent peers.

http://wwwcj.mnstate.edu/classes/CJ400/Monograph/Theory.html

[bloom]

1. We will never be able to convince all of the rape apologists....

.... but it would be great is we could get the rape apologies to be seen as more unacceptable.


I think what we are seeing is this manifested on a message board (from the "theory of rape paper - linked above):


"...it is plausible that some adolescent male groups control and enforce gender expectations which make sexual aggression acceptable conduct.

...The content of these peer communications includes a callous orientation toward sexual activity that grants little respect to a woman's expressed wishes."

-----------------

I think it would be a big step forward for women if such views were not accepted. It's easy for the "rape is sex" crowd to yell "censorship" because they don't care if WE agree with them as long as their ideas are accepted enough to be part of the discussion.

It does seem like it practically an obligation to insist that sex is one thing and rape is another. I think men who insist that rape is a form of sex are trying to assert and maintain their dominant world view.

Taken to extreme - people who have no concept of mutuality and equality could view all "sex" as rape. It seems that some men get rather bent out of shape when some women have said something to that effect. But when you see these men go on and on and on that rape is a form of sex and to blur the lines - well - I for one can see how the feminists got there in their thinking.

Here is "twisty fasters" take on the subject:

"...But our culture’s fascination for dominance and submission turns women into commodified fetish objects. This means sex isn’t just sex, it’s the eroticization of a culturally enforced power differential. Women aren’t fully human, but are instead just a collection of moist holes into which men not only can, but must ejaculate their hatred, their frustration, their fear, their crushing sense of inferiority, and whatever other vulgar impulses drive them to dominate anything that moves."

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/04/18/he-touched-my-special-gray-area/


I, for one, would like for sex to be sex and rape to be violence and for there to be less confusion for more people.

[Nikia]

2. For some sex=rape and that is the problem

We all know young men and not so young men who have callous attitudes towards rape, women, and sex. They believe that they are entitled to sex, that courtship is a game in which the goal is sex, sex by any means. They see nothing wrong with taking advantage of a drunk woman. They see nothing wrong with lying, like professing love or promising a relationship. They see nothing wrong with threatening not to take her home in order to get sex. They see nothing wrong with repeatedly asking for sex to wear her down into saying yes. Some see nothing wrong with sex by force if she did anything to suggest that she might want sex. The woman is just an object.
Adults need to have discussions with young people about this, especially boys. These attitudes are pervasive in our society and is the cause of a lot of aquaintance rape. Whether or not the man intend to committ violence against their date by raping her after foreplay, he still hurts her.
I know this might sound puritain, but to be ethical, all sexual encounters should involve honesty and respect for each partner. Anything less might not necessarily be rape, but it isn't right or beneficial to both partners either.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

5. As a former college professor I'm completely familiar with those attitudes

both on campus and in the larger community.

I once took a community theater acting class, and part of it was doing scenes excerpted from plays. That was kind of fun, trying on different characters and so forth, but there was one scene I refused to do. It was a "comedy" in which a man was trying to talk a reluctant woman into sex.

Having been in situations where guys I assumed were platonic friends tried to grab me when I "foolishly" let them into my dorm room to borrow a book or study for a test, I found the whole premise of the scene distasteful.

I explained that the scene was too much like a date-rape scenario, and the teacher was surprised but withdrew the scene.

[raccoon]

6. You said it, sister! Great post.

I've run into some of these slimeballs who think they are ENTITLED to sex just because THEY want it.

I think some of them think if they let this woman (especially if she's small and/or quiet) say No to them that would make them less of a man.

[cally]

3. I'm trying to understand why it's so important for some to equate

rape with sex. It's obvious that just telling them and citing studies isn't getting through to many. I'm thinking it's the culture of rape that is so pervasive that has influenced too many. I believe that many men are trained to make women submissive and that violence is sexually arousing. For them, rape, subjugation, abuse, and hitting is sexually arousing.

Thanks for the information. I'm learning all the time.

[ismnotwasm]

4. Rape culture

The arguments over the Duke case here have put it under a very bright light on a overturned rock and all kinds of creatures are scuttling around. --

All those who believe that rape is sex believe basically this; Any implementation of penetration--- plus an human orifice of some sort equals sex. So a Q tip violently --or tenderly shoved in a ear is sex, as well as some of the more violent sick acts of mutilation and penetration if the rapist is committing the act -- Rape culture will always empower rapists

They go on to condemn rape, but can't get past the indoctrination of rape culture. When you say "rape" I'm willing to bet the visualization is a male overpowering a female, with penile penetration into the vagina, mouth or anus. All considered "sex acts"
The psychological makeup of rapists is rarely brought up. Why do men rape?
WHY DO MEN RAPE?
But the women's "role" in the rape always is. This is also part of rape culture.

The fact that sex is largely mental, (quadriplegics can have a satisfying sex life)That it's a joining, a mutual partnership gets lost in the penetration/orifice thinking. I'm baffled quite frankly. Thank God for this forum and the wisdom I find here.

[geniph]

7. I think it all goes back to some people's idea of gender roles

There are genuinely people who believe, although they may never have actually articulated it or even really thought about it, that a woman's role is to provide sex, and a man's role is to demand it. Thus a woman, being the "keeper" of the supply, controls the supply and demand equation that people with this mindset think of as sex.

Now, to me, sex is not a supply and demand equation. It's a hell of a lot of things, but unless money changes hands, I don't see it as a simple transaction of that sort, with one person demanding and the other supplying. However, if you see it that way - as a "necessary" thing that someone else controls your access to - in a way that seems to you arbitrary - suddenly you can understand why people that think that way believe that FORCING the supplier to yield to you is conceivable.

It's a weird mindset. But I see a parallel between this and a nation of spoiled, self-absorbed rich old white fucks who see nothing wrong with invading a sovereign nation and killing its citizens because said nation controls access to something those old fucks want (oil). Those who feel a) sex is a commodity controlled by someone else, and b) something to which they are automatically entitled, are not going to have the same restraint about taking it by force as those of us who have progressed beyond emotional toddlerhood.

Whew. Rant mode off. I don't even know where that came from, but it seems to have been percolating for awhile.

[bloom]

8. "parallels"

Yes. I think it is no coincidence that it seems that the objectification/commodification mentality is ramping up under Bush* and with the endless wars and all.

And I totally don't get the people who want to just dismiss rape and gender relations as unimportant and unrelated to everything else that is going in the world.


I suppose there is some element to the Duke case where the spoiled, self-absorbed rich young white fucks seem to represent the spoiled, self-absorbed rich old white fucks. And I'm afraid that even though they may (or may not) be guilty - that with theirs and Dukes power-lawyers - they won't be any more likely to be held accountable than their older counterparts.

[bliss_eternal]

9. I just wanted to say, that was an amazing thread...!

It really was. There were some wonderful things written by thoughtful, intelligent men and women. There also some truly thought provoking issues presented as well. My head is still spinning with all of this, to be honest. When I'm clearer in thought, I'd love to discuss it more.

bloom--you were fantastic (as usual), There were others as well, so many--too many to recall right now. :)

For a while, I just kept an eye on it (to alert and such if it got out of hand). Out of all the threads related to that topic, that one maintained civility the longest. I was really blown away by that thread. I was sad to see some of the "usual suspects" crawl out from their dark places and make their "usual arguments." :eyes:

Overall, I think some positive conversation grew from that thread and that photo. Great ad campaign, btw. I really love it.