Lindsay Mitchell and David Farrar have both posted on a Rape Crisis programme for students. One of the scenarios given to students is as follows (emphasis mine):
Is this rape?
Jo is a Year 13 Student at XX High School. She is at a party on a Saturday night. Jared is going to be there and she’s been trying to hook up with him for awhile. She’s wearing a short skirt, boots, and a low cut top –she’s sure to catch his attention –She looks great. Jo and her friends drink a few bottles of wine before they get to the party and she feels pretty drunk by the time they arrive. At the party she starts talking with Jared, he asks if she wants to go up to one of the bedrooms –they walk up the stairs followed by comments from Jared’s mates as they close the door.
In the room they start kissing, and Jared is putting his hands up her top and down her pants, she likes it and starts touching Jared. Jared then takes off his pants and hers. Jo starts to feel uncomfortable and pulls back a bit, and pulls her underwear back up. She doesn’t want to have sex with Jared but doesn’t know how to stop it. Everyone at the party thinks they’re having sex, and she doesn’t want Jared to think she’s tight. Jared pulls her knickers back down and they have sex.
I don’t particularly even want to imagine the sort of fucked up thinking that could even begin to suggest that this sex was in any way consensual. Not only is Jared clearly not seeking active consent, but Jo has shown clearly that she is not giving her consent.
And yet, it seems commenters at both blogs see things differently. Some try to argue this from a highly flawed legalistic viewpoint, as if the law is the sole legitimate arbiter of consent. Yet others, perhaps coming from their own experiences, attempt to defend Jared’s actions. Here’s some quotes from the two blogs, most from men although a few from women:
- What is your answer? I say no it isn’t. Neither is it sexual abuse.
- There is no suggestion of criminal coercian on the part of Jared or any further actions that would (or should) led Jared to believe she is not consenting in the resulting sex.
- While Jared needs to control himself as a human being is capable of ,Jo needs to realise and learn that she is the main cause of the situation she finds herself in and that its up to her to not put herself in these situations by giving cared the undoubted come on.Maybe if women were made aware earlier in life just how strong the male sexual urge really was they would be better prepared to deal with it and not find out the hard way…Mothers educate your daughters…
- Jared certainly should have ascertained why Jo put her underwear back on, rather than pull them back down. But to paint this as criminal offending is highly arguable.
- Jocularity……
Wouldn’t even be approved for prosecution in Aust. - Just to stir things up,High Court judge Justice Morris said “If every man stopped the first time a woman said “no”, the world would be a much less exciting place to live”.
- Whatever it is, it’s not rape.
If there’s fault, it’s 50:50.. case closed. - This quite clearly is not rape. Her consent was letting her underwear be removed for a second time and having sex without protest.
…
Men are not mind readers. I agree this though is a very good example, not only for the definition of rape but why some people are too immature to put themselves in the position where they are procuring sex, which Jo quite clearly is.
And people try to deny we live in a rape culture…
January 13, 2007 at 11:18 pm
Holy sheet! I wouldn’t have thought this was even slightly questionable without the assistance of DPF and others. I really have to get out more… or maybe not.
January 13, 2007 at 11:56 pm
If I rewrite the last few lines to leave out the bits that Jared doesn’t know (not being a mind-reader):
Jared then takes off his pants and hers. Jo pulls her underwear back up. Jared pulls her knickers back down and they have sex.
It would be good in this situation if Jared had asked her for consent. It would also be good in this situation if Jo had said no, or provided some other indication that this was other than momentary second thoughts. But we are talking about teenagers that have (I presume) both been drinking. I don’t really see this as a black and white scenario, you seem to think it is.
What if Jared pulls her knickers down, she pulls them up, then they kiss and fool around some more, then he pulls them down and she shows no resistance. Is that still rape in your book?
I can say with certainty that I have had sex on a number of occassions with my partner in which I did not have verbal consent. Equally, she has had sex with me on a number of occasions in which I did not give verbal consent. Does that make us both rapists?
January 14, 2007 at 12:28 am
“Jared then takes off his pants and hers. Jo pulls her underwear back up. Jared pulls her knickers back down and they have sex.
It would be good in this situation if Jared had asked her for consent.”
No, it wouldn’t just be good, but rather necessary, before he felt like he had the right to pull them back down. Otherwise, yes, it is rape.
Perhaps (and I mean perhaps) if the situations were different – if neither were drunk, if they were in a stable consensual relationship, if they had known each other long enough to read non-verbal cues, then the consent process may not need to be based on such a high level of seeking verbal or otherwise clearcut, unequivocal consent. But it wasn’t – they didn’t know each others body language, Jared didn’t ask for consent and therefore he raped her.
End of story, in my opinion.
January 14, 2007 at 1:32 am
Well, first she’s 13. I’m not sure where this is set but everywhere I’ve ever lived sex with a 13 year old is not legal. Personally i think it’s good to tell young teens that sex with their piers is a crime and that they can be punished for it. This is a good scene to show kids that consent is an active thing. Lack of a struggle is not consent.
January 14, 2007 at 1:34 am
No, she’s year 13, thats the last year of our high school system in Aotearoa, so she’d be 17 or possibly 18.
January 14, 2007 at 2:05 am
Well that makes it harder. About a hair harder. She didn’t consent, so it’s rape. What should happen next is going to depend on things we weren’t told in the story. Was there physical force involved? Was Jared laying on top of her so that she couldn’t leave? Were there other non-verbal signs of resistance? Was Jared aware of how much she’d had to drink? Did Jared have a history of this type of behavior?
But the basic point of the story is clear; Sex without consent is rape, consent must be affirmative and that if there’s doubt you have consent than you don’t have it.
I think the reason that there’s any discussion about this is that there’s more than one meaning of the word rape. Rape is sex without consent. It’s also a horrible violent crime. predators that commit this crime should be locked up to protect the public and severely punished. Many people don’t think about degrees or types of rape. They hear the word and assume violent rape. The kind of action that isn’t about sex, but about hurting women. I didn’t see anything in the scene that makes me think Jared was violent, or that he wanted to hurt a woman.
January 14, 2007 at 2:21 am
Asher
Please take us through the steps you go through when trying to get laid with someone you don’t know very well. In particularly how you get a woman to consent to having sex with you. Does she:
a) have to sign a consent form.
b) have to have a witness
c) have to have a notary present.
Now think at age 17 how a young man such as Jared is meant to deal with this situation, one which hundreds of young men right now over summer are going through in an attempt to satisfy young women wishing to interact with them, all over beach towns in Ao…no it’s bloody New Zealand.
You sound about as romantic as a dead fish and as clinical as an open heart surgeon.
January 14, 2007 at 2:39 am
Joe: “Sex without consent is rape, consent must be affirmative and that if there’s doubt you have consent than you don’t have it.”
Yeah, thats exactly it
Happy we agree.
Kate: None of a, b, or c, although I’m sure you already knew that before you decided to throw a straw man into your writing.
Consent doesn’t have to be cold and clinical, on the contrary, if we are ever to escape from the rape culture we currently live in, we must see consent as something which is sexy, which isn’t something we simply do because we feel we have to, but rather something we actually desire to do and which enhances our interactions with each other.
How do I do it? Constantly checking in, both verbally and physically, at every “stage” of the sexual process, to make sure that the other person is consenting, and, at the same time, to make sure they’re enjoying themselves and getting pleasure from whatever is going on. Ends up resulting in a better experience for all involved, for sure
When I was a 17 year old in Aotearoa (you can call it what you want, but I ain’t gonna change what I call it), I definately didn’t have the same understanding of consent. And I’ve definately revisited in my mind my past experiences, and found myself lacking a number of times. I think the best thing that I can do is to ensure that I do my best during future sexual encounters, and that I work towards educating others in a similar place to where I was, and where I think most of us are taught to be.
January 14, 2007 at 2:53 am
Just been talking to someone, and I feel like I need to clarify what I meant by something in my last comment.
“if we are ever to escape from the rape culture we currently live in, we must see consent as something which is sexy, which isn’t something we simply do because we feel we have to, but rather something we actually desire to do and which enhances our interactions with each other.”
By that, I didn’t mean sexy as in to create it as a fad, as something we do because its cool, rather than of and for itself. Rather, I meant that we need to create the desire for egalitarian sexual relations, where one couldn’t imagine having sexual relations without active consent, thus turning consent from an obligation to a desire, where nobody would want to have sex without it.
January 14, 2007 at 10:40 am
I think it becomes rape quite early on in the story “she feels pretty drunk by the time they arrive.” intoxicated people can’t give consent.
The comment from the High Court judge Justice is quite unsettling.
January 14, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Perhaps if young men/ boys weren’t taught about sex thru pornography and violent movies, they would have more understanding of what equality in sex is i.e women aren’t just passive fuck objects, but people too.
I almost see Jared as a victim here too, ( a product of his limited education and knowledge perhaps), though not saying what he did was deserves defending at all.
Women/girls are also taught not to speak up, to be ‘pleasing’ and compliant as it is ‘unfeminine’ to be otherwise….Yes this is the kind of thing that happens all the time in a Rape Culture and all the time in Aotearoa.
There really needs to be greater education in this area, though not just at school but at home, and more so for the boys than the girls. We have to stop blaming victims of such things.
January 14, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Byron – you are confusing a blanket ban on intoxicated people with vitiating consent. If drinking prevented consent being given or obtained there will be hundreds if not thousands of rapes every weekend.
The relevant section you are looking for is:
s128A(4) A person does not consent to sexual activity if the activity occurs while he or she is so affected by alcohol or some other drug that he or she cannot consent or refuse to consent to the activity.
Note the phrases “so” and “cannot” in that section.
Note also Jared has a ‘reasonable belief/reasonable grounds’ defence under s128 of the Crimes Act.
Asher – the piece of the facts that you have highlighted are completely irrelevant as to whether it was rape. The ONLY relevant information is that she pulled her knickers back up. As against that you have consensual sexual activitity and, at the least, tacit consent to knickers being removed for the second time and (although not totally clear on the facts) apparent consent to the ensuing sexual activity.
Calling this rape and claiming a ‘rape culture’ may make you feel all warm and fuzzy as you claim some sort of moral superiority but you are wrong. You are trying to make victims – of both sexes.
January 14, 2007 at 7:10 pm
There is a difference between
a) sex where there is clear refusal,
b) sex where there is clear acceptance and c) sex where there is neither clear acceptance nor refusal.
One is clearly rape, one is clearly not but the third category is neither here nor there.
This is, of course, where the scenario of Jo and Jared lies. There are in fact many other similar scenarios that would fit in the third category. The case of a husband pressuring his wife to have sex wherein the wife does not want to engage in sexual intercourse but for some reason feels obligated and duty-bound to honor the husband’s request or demand for sex. No legal system in the world would characterise this as rape but clearly there is a problem. Nobody should feel that they have to do something that they do not want to. Whether we call this rape or not is a matter of semantics. Much like how one can use the term murder to characterise everything from manslaughter and traffic accidents to capital punishment and military combat.
In a perfect world, we would all be having sex only when we really want to and there would not be any sexual activity when there are doubts. This is not a perfect world.
I understand where you are coming from in describing the scenario as rape. I feel that it would be the easy thing to do. The difficult thing would be to recognize that Jared and the many men like him are not so much the vile monsters we would like to demonize them as but all too common human beings too ignorant and self-centered to notice the doubts and hesitation. Should they be expected to? Should Jared have been expected to realize why Jo has put her pants back up? I’d imagine it would be nice if Jared could sense the hesitation and the doubts but at the same time, I do think it would be a tad unrealistic to expect us all to be mind readers.
Put yourself in Jared’s position. Ask yourself what indications have you received that would suggest the other person does not want to have sex? Did you in fact noticed that the pants have been pulled back up? Is that alone enough to suggest a lack of desire to have sex? Are there not other possible reasons why those pants might have been pulled back up? Or perhaps you have drank a tad bit much and only imagined that you have pulled her pants down earlier? Do you have doubts of your own? Do you fear she will laugh at you if you back off? Are you scared that your reputation might suffer if you hesitate?
Should you be punished because of this? I would really feel sorry for Jared if he were to be punished for being all too human. All we have in this scenario is the pants being pulled back up and we have no way of knowing whether Jared appreciates the significance of this act.
Turn the table around. A woman seduces a man. We all like to indulge in the stereotype that all men would like to have sex with any woman at any time but the truth is there are many instances where a man might not want to have sex. A woman unzips the pants but the man zips the pants back up. The woman persists again and this time the man gives up. Should we characterise this as rape too?
Doubts, hesitation, reluctance and uncertainty are not pleasant things. It is easy to confuse them with acceptance but it is also easy to confuse them with refusal. They are neither one nor the other but somewhere in the middle.
I would suggest that we before we make any conclusion in the scenario above, we should ask Jo what she feels. Would she actually perceive the incident as rape? Would she want to? Should she? Should we try to convince her that she was raped if she does not think she was? What purpose would there be in trying to make her feel like a victim if she does not think she is?
January 14, 2007 at 8:48 pm
I agree with what you are saying din, (mostly anyways) though I guess we are left with, how the sex made them both FEEL, did they both orgasm? Was there a power imbalance? Who got what they wanted and who didn’t? Does Jared go away thinking that next time he wants to have sex with someone and they put their pants on , he has the right to convince him/her into sex, or just go ahead anyway?
Does Jo think she even has a right to say no? Who was in control? Is this the first time Jared has coerced someone to have sex with him? What made him believe he was entitled to get sex on this occasion?
This is a case of Rape. Though like u said, its not black and white, there are many shades of sexual violation. And this is the problem I guess, that Rape has become such an institutionalised part of modern culture its hard to see the forest for the trees.
January 14, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Jo said:
“And this is the problem I guess, that Rape has become such an institutionalised part of modern culture its hard to see the forest for the trees.”
Wtf are you on about? Is this babbled conclusion actually meant to make sense or even be backed up by evidence or are you simple a raving loony who thinks any man having sex is a rapist?
For goodness sake the fictional Jo CONSENTED. She may not have wanted to, according to her inner thought processes and she may not have known how to say no but the upshot is she consented to her knickers being removed again and (seemingly – on somewhat sketchy facts) consented to the ensuing sexual liason.
She may regret the experience, she may wish it had never happened but that does not make Jared a rapist.
January 14, 2007 at 10:31 pm
Is there a double standard, where girls who’ve been drinking aren’t responsible any more, but boys who have been drinking still are?
Jo, once we accept that there is peer pressure on *both* those kids the situation becomes even less clear cut. The obvious solution to me as a sober adult is for them both to lie and claim to their peers that they had sex, and from what I recall of my teenagerhood that’s a fairly common thing too.
I’m going with the definition of rape that Asher uses: any sex without complete, informed consent by all parties involved. That includes both the legal definition of rape and the Dworkin-Mckinnon definition, but not the “rape culture” definition (which limits it to stranger rape with overt threat of violence). It also means that mutual rape is not merely possible but common, and many people have both raped and been raped without realising it.
Discussions like this make me value the legal shades-of-grey approach more (rape through to sexual harassment), but I do think there needs to be mroe done to make rape complaints easier to make and prosecute. I’m living in Sydney where we have an explicit rape culture in the police force (the police training college is particularly nasty for female candidates), and some truly awesome judges ( http://www.leadershipforwomen.com.au/infocus/moral_superiority_or_simp ly_forg.htm) but at the same time I’ve dumped women who literally could not consent to sex verbally. As in regularly coming round late at night to my place, getting naked in bed, then if I say “shall we have sex then” I’m met with “why do you have to spoil it”… she leaves. On occasions when I didn’t ask she initiated sex… that pattern stopped abruptly when I said I wasn’t willing to put up with it, so we broke up. Some women are really torn between being “nice girls don’t” and liking sex a lot.
Now, in the theoretical world where girls weren’t ever told “nice girls don’t” and boys weren’t given the “sometimes you have to push” and “traditions romance” was regarded as mental illness in fantasy as well as real life and teenagers were sensible adults, there wouldn’t be these problems. But we don’t live there. So we have the problem of defining consent…
Asher, I wonder how much you’ve noticed women hitting on you? Have you ever been propositioned by a woman rather than just hit on? I’ve only had a verbal request for consent once, but I’ve known some quite pushy women. Which is one reason why I’m concerned that these discussions include the possibility that women might initiate sex too.
January 14, 2007 at 10:33 pm
sorry, that link broke. try this: http://www.leadershipforwomen.com.au/infocus/moral_superiority_or_simply_forg.htm
January 15, 2007 at 3:50 am
Moz said, “Now, in the theoretical world where girls weren’t ever told “nice girls don’t” and boys weren’t given the “sometimes you have to push” and “traditional romance” was regarded as mental illness in fantasy as well as real life and teenagers were sensible adults, there wouldn’t be these problems. But we don’t live there.”
I say: We could live there, though. We could make this theory reality. Indeed, we are apparently discussing an actual, factual programme, one that is being instituted, that might help us move from theory, from a hazy, somewhat fear-laden present to a much clearer new reality. I am right in reading Asher’s opening sentence about the way the scenario is being used to educate, aren’t I?
So why are some here rushing to defend/excuse the status quo, rather than talking about, exploring, where we are going?
Kate, this:
“… hundreds of young men right now over summer are going through in an attempt to satisfy young women wishing to interact with them”, sounds awfully like “she asked for it”, or at least positioning woman as seductress. Is that what you meant?
And why would young men believe they need to ‘make themselves’ have sex with, perhaps sometimes uncertain (or pushy!) young women in order to ’satisfy a wish for interaction’? I’m hoping not to get answers along the lines of questionable biological imperatives… we are more complex than our bodily urges alone, I’m quite sure
It is true that women do seduce in our society (where conquering by whatever means we each might have at our disposal is valued so highly – power being such a heady thing and all), but in the interests of furthering the discussion, I’d appreciate some real consideration given to my questions.
I, for one, think that education around what is and is not clear consent is a very good thing for future generations. Do you, and others here, honestly disagree with that?
January 15, 2007 at 4:09 am
Further, I contend that many young people will be able to be far more throughtful about and far less reactionary to new ways of thinking than it seems many of us who are technically or legally adult are.
We older folk may have to concede to being a bit stuck in our ways sometimes, I think, not to mention disrespectful of what younger people are truly capable of understanding.
January 15, 2007 at 7:20 am
It is a reasonably wide spread belief that if you ask a girl “do you want to have sex” (or requesting consent for any of the other steps) you will make her feel ’slutty’ and that there is no chemistry and greatly reduce the chances not only of you having sex but also of her being your Girl Friend.
Dating experts (not the Oprah type) seem to say that assumption of consent is strongly associated with proceeding to the next step each time.
Presumably boys should ask and girls should reward them for doing so.
January 15, 2007 at 10:43 am
GPT might have to explain to me how you can consent to sex when you don’t want to? Isn’t this coertion? And how is this not rape?
January 15, 2007 at 12:42 pm
I’ve got to back up ‘another Jo’ here. Do u guys not actually want change ? Why are u so afraid of acknowledging where we are at the moment and of looking to where we could be as a society.
I would also suggest GPT, that if what I said makes no sense to u, perhaps u might want to either do a gender studies class, or read ‘Transforming A Rape Culture’ published by Milkweed Editions. Its an wicked resource.
It might make things clearer to you.
January 15, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Din – “In a perfect world, we would all be having sex only when we really want to and there would not be any sexual activity when there are doubts. This is not a perfect world.”
I agree totally, however, not challening sexual activity where there are doubts will only perpetuate the current way of looking at it. It is only by challenging these assumptions that we can hope to create an atmosphere where seeking active consent becomes an automatic prerequisite to sexual activity, which will surely put us well on the path to creating a rape-free society.
I’m not attempting to demonise Jared. On the contrary, I think it’s far too easy and common to view rapists (and I include Jared in this) as the “other”, and thus seperate them from our own (in)action/s.
I definately agree with “Doubts, hesitation, reluctance and uncertainty are not pleasant things. It is easy to confuse them with acceptance but it is also easy to confuse them with refusal. They are neither one nor the other but somewhere in the middle.” and thats why I think that we need to be encouraging and teaching each other to make sure we have that active consent. If Jared had been brought up in a better society, then when Jo pulled her knickers back up, he would’ve checked with her where she was at, and made sure she was enjoying what was going on before he pulled them back down.
Moz – “Asher, I wonder how much you’ve noticed women hitting on you? Have you ever been propositioned by a woman rather than just hit on?”
Yeah, I’ve been propositioned by women before. A number of women I’ve been with have initiated, rather than leaving it to me. Of course, hanging out in the political circles I hang out in, I acknowledge this isn’t necessarily the norm in other circles.
I’d like to finish with two things. Firstly, people seem to be forgetting that there’s plenty of things that two people can do in bed, both clothed and naked, that aren’t sex. Jo (in the scenario, not the commenters) could very well have consented to some of these things, but not consent to sex. So even if she had consented to her knickers being pulled down a second time, that does not automatically mean she was consenting to sex. And if the only thing you do naked with another person is have sex, you’re certainly missing out on a hell of a lot.
Lastly, I think the commenter another Jo hit it on the mark when they said
“We could live there, though. We could make this theory reality. Indeed, we are apparently discussing an actual, factual programme, one that is being instituted, that might help us move from theory, from a hazy, somewhat fear-laden present to a much clearer new reality. I am right in reading Asher’s opening sentence about the way the scenario is being used to educate, aren’t I?
So why are some here rushing to defend/excuse the status quo, rather than talking about, exploring, where we are going? “
This scenario was used with students in an education programme by Rape Crisis – the responses on Lindsay, David and my blog only go further to show that this is EXACTLY the sort of scenario that SHOULD be brought up with students (and everyone else, for that matter) – something which is totally fucked, but currently accepted. It is only by challenging those boundaries of what is currently accepted that we can ever hope to move forward.
January 15, 2007 at 9:00 pm
In addition to the book Transforming A Rape Culture recommended by jo , XY: Men, Masculinities, and Gender Politics http://www.xyonline.net , an Australian site by and for men, might be a good, accesible resource for further reading, for those who are interested. And, honestly, what man, even one who imagines himself opposed to, who is affronted by talk about consent, wouldn’t want to at least be clear about where the other side is coming from. Word of advice, if the word patriarchy makes you queasy, just find some way to blunt yourself to that and please do go and read how other men have learned not to take it quite so personally as they’ve begun to examine the less than life affirming socialisation they were/are subject to as boys and men.
from a speech delivered by a man at a Take Back the Night rally:
http://www.xyonline.net/MontagnaTBTN.shtml
“We’re still missing the mark when it comes to teaching consent. We have heard “No means No”, and I think we’re finally clueing in on “Yes means Yes” – in other words that the absence of a “No” is not in itself consent. But the problem is that we are still stuck in the old paradigm. It’s still based on the idea of permission: there is this line that once crossed can’t be un-crossed, and the woman is just going to have to live with the consequences of her actions (emphasis HER actions). As a culture, we still blame male arousal on women.
“This is made worse because “no means no” is really not the issue; it’s that we continue to tell men that a real man can get a woman to say “yes”. It’s practically our job when you consider that we know how shamed women are taught to be about their bodies and about sex in general. It’s 2003, and we still have no positive words for a sexually active woman. We’ve got several hundred negative terms.
“We need a new paradigm of consent, that says, clearly, without any question: consent means one thing — no one, no one has sovereignty over this [my body] but me; twenty four hours a day, seven days a week. Period. End of story. There is nothing I can do or say that revokes or forfeits that.”
GeniusNZ, I wonder if asking for consent serves to demystify a lot of what passes for chemistry with regard sexual interaction? There are many degrees, layers of romanticising involved in the ways sexualities, especially hetero-sexualities as the primary sexuality, have been constructed. Googling the phrase “men against pornography” will produce some enlightening articles around that too.
January 15, 2007 at 9:29 pm
I think you’re being unfair on most of DPF’s commenters. It seemed to be a common theme in that thread that this scenario was actually a good one for the purposes of education.
I also think you’re failing to see half of the educational opportunity that’s being usefully provided by it. The concentration here in this thread seems to be totally on the guy, and his obligation. But there’s also a woman needing to be educated in this scenario: “She doesn’t want to have sex with Jared but doesn’t know how to stop it.” Well, telling him might be a bloody good start – educational opportunities all over the show here. Rape Crisis have done a pretty good job with it.
Finally, terms like “rape culture” are the kind of activist hyperbole that drives potential allies off in droves. If we have a “rape culture” because some members of it can imagine themselves feeling reluctant to bang someone up for 8 years under the scenario described above, then we also have a “theft culture”, a “murder culture”, an “assault culture”, a “trespass culture”, a “breach of the peace culture”, it’s a fucking long list really. Why doesn’t somebody just nuke us now and put the world out of our misery? “Rape culture” is a term of no semantic use.
January 15, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Cheers for that link, another Jo. Looks interesting, can’t wait to have a good read
January 15, 2007 at 10:02 pm
Nice blog you have, Asher.
Thought these may be of interest to people, in reference to the Justice Morris quote. slightly off topic, but still within general theme…
These quotes are a sneak preview from upcoming misfit zine we are putting together in Otautahi,
Peace be,
Anna-Claire
Judicial violence against women
“The only reason I will not sent you to jail is the woman assaulted was your de facto wife and by that very fact she is no good and won’t be too upset that you assaulted her”
District Court Judge J. W. P. Watts, Palmerston North, July 1980.
(Judge Watts later said the survivor “got what she deserved”. In this case, the convicted man subsequently murdered the ‘defacto wife’.)
“Having regard to the unusual circumstances that the victim was not traumatised by the event, indeed was probably comatose at the time, a sentence significantly less than the maximum is deemed appropriate”.
Justice O’Bryan of the Victorian Supreme Court, early 1990s. The schoolgirl victim was unconscious because she had been bashed senseless, then her throat had been slit with a knife, narrowly missing a carotid artery. The convicted man received 9 years, out of a possible 20.
“It does happen, in the common experience of those who have been in the law as long as I have anyway, that `no’ often subsequently means `yes’.”
Justice Bland of the Victorian County Court, speaking to a young man who admitted rape.
“There is nothing wrong with a husband, faced with a wife’s initial refusal to engage in intercourse, in attempting in an acceptable way to persuade her to change her mind — and that may involve a measure of rougher than usual handling.”
Justice Bollen of the South Australian Supreme Court, 1993
January 15, 2007 at 10:33 pm
hey Psycho Milt
–we also have a “theft culture”, a “murder culture”, an “assault culture”, a “trespass culture”, a “breach of the peace culture”–
good call brother. damn good call!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonialism#History_of_colonialism
January 16, 2007 at 1:40 am
Jo, I’d really like to live in that world, and to some extent I do. But I still know a lot of women who even when they’re happy to talk about sex generally, claim to dislike having to explicitly consent. Guys are supposed to “just know”. So there needs to be more education for both sexes.
I’ve also got quite shitty with women to whom no really obviously means yes, and in one case she got really shitty with me for believing that no means no… apparently sometimes “I’m not that sort of girl” means “but wait til I’ve had a few drinks”. That’s one instance where I’m happy not to have played the game…
Even in long-term relationships I’ve found that differences in sex drive (usually male higher) mean that the common pattern is “he asks, she says no” which usually annoys both sides. One amusing/irritating thing I’ve noticed is that some women also object to their male partners masturbating. Apparently it feels like their failure. Talking this through is quite fraught, because it’s a no win situation – either she has more sex than she wants, or he lies about masturbating (there are other options but they’re more fantastical than real).
January 16, 2007 at 2:49 am
[...] was also common on other on-line discussions of these scenarios. Here’s an example from Anarchia Well that makes it harder. About a hair harder. She didn’t consent, so it’s rape. What should [...]
January 16, 2007 at 3:39 am
Moz, I wonder if you realise the extent of the context in which the frustrations you describe yourself to have experienced manifest themselves? The ways in which women – as a group or class of people – are vulnerable in relationship to men – as a group or class of people – and how that all figures heavily into personal/sexual relationships between individual women and men?
You might be able to find a group of men, either on-line or irl, interested in helping each other gain a clearer understanding of the dynamics in heterosexual relationships in the broader social context? If I recall correctly you’re in Aus. and the link to xyonline above may be useful to you in this way.
Asher, I’ll likely withdraw now, fearing myself to be out of both generosity and bluntedness, but I do thank you for hosting this conversation.
sparx [if that is in fact your real name] ; ) , nice one!
January 16, 2007 at 4:32 am
another Jo – No worries, as difficult as it has been at times, hopefully it’ll only be the first of many. I’ve certainly got plenty more I want to say about this (and related) issues. Cheers for your comments
January 16, 2007 at 3:33 pm
I’ve been thinking about this some more and reading some more of your site and have a question. If a man persuades a woman to have sex when she’d rather not, would you term that rape? Assume as mild a from of persuasion as possible. Assume roughly equal balance of power between the two people.
January 16, 2007 at 9:08 pm
This is taken from my blog, if u have comments i would prefer them posted there, just click on my name to go there,
Here’s something from Bell Hooks ‘Feminist Theory, From Margin to Center’ I really dig her writing, she has a v interesting perspective that I find refreshing compared to alot of the bourgeois white academic theory.
“It has been a simple task for women to describe and criticize negative aspects of sexuality as it has been socially constructed in sexist society; to expose male objectification and dehumanization of women; to denounce rape, pornography, sexualized violence, incest, etc. It has been a far more difficult task for women to envision new sexual paradigms, to change the norms of sexuality.
Ellen Willis asserts in her essay “Towards a Feminist Sexual Revolution”
‘From a radical standpoint, then, sexual liberation involves not only the abolition of restrictions but the positive presence of social and psychological conditions that foster satisfying sexual relations. And from that standpoint, this culture is still deeply repressive. Most obviously, sexual inequality and the resulting antagonism between men and women constitude a devastating barrier to sexual happiness.’
The inspiration for such work can only emerge in a environment where sexual well-being is valued. Ironically, some feminists have tended to dismiss issues of sexual pleasure, well-being, and contentedness, as irrelevant.
Contemporary emphasis on sexual revolution or anything-goes sexual expression has led many women and men to assume that sexual freedom already exists and is even overvalued in our society. However, this is not a culture that affirms real sexual freedom.
..Focusing solely on those aspects of male domination of women, they are reluctant and downright unwilling to acknowledge that sexuality as it is constructed in sexist society is no more “liberating” for men than it is for women (even though it is obviously oppressive to women in ways that are not oppressive to men)… To set the stage for the development of that sexual freedom, feminist movement must continue to focus on ending sexual oppression.”
Theres been much discussion on the Anarchia site and Capitalism Bad, Tree Pretty, about a case of non-consensual/ coersive sex, was it rape? much debate and point scoring from both sides, however a point I tried to raise about whether the sex was satisfying , pleasurable or of benefit to either of the fictional persons involved was deemed totally crazy.
I feel that Hooks quantifies what I was expressing, that of cause the sex from a non-consensual/coersive beginning is not going to be pleasurable and satisfying for both people, we can see this as rape, it is inequality expressed through sexual practices, expressing Jareds belief in his birthright as a male to get his end off without having to treat Jo’s body/thoughts/feelings as though they are of equal value as his.
Without blaming either of them for their conditioning, and ‘learnt’ lack of social skills and patriarchal values which they share. Isn’t the idea to make sex ‘good’ and pleasurable for both people involved.
January 17, 2007 at 4:57 pm
I thought I could perhaps clear up a few of the issues here for you! This scenario is used as part of our BodySafe Programme – which is a rape prevention programme in high schools in Auckland. The purpose of using it in the classroom is to start discussion with students. I have never had a class agree whether this is or isn’t rape. The purpose of the scenario is not to answer this question but raise the exact discussions you have had. The main purpose is to the facilitate discussion with the teenagers about how this situation could be prevented from both Jo and Jareds perspective.
The main message been:
That both parties need to be clear about what they want – body language can be very hard to read, especially when teenagers have had drugs or alcohol. Therefore, there are a number of things Jo could do – not go to the bedroom in the first place, make it clear at some stage (ideally before they even get to the bedroom) that she doesn’t want to have sex, or leave the bedroom. Of course there is the possibility that she could then be physically forced to have sex, so we cover this aspect too. We are also trying to educate the males that they need to ask for consent every time they are having sex. Something along the lines of “are you sure you want to do this?” when Jo pulled up her underwear, would have made the outcome of this scenario very different. Teenagers also need to be aware that every person, male or female, has the right to not have sex with someone, no matter what has happened leading up to the point of sex.
From a legal perspective, there are parts of the scenario that show she has not given her consent. The majority of the teenage population that we work with agree that someone pulling up their underwear during sexual activity is a fairly clear sign that that person is having second thoughts about having sex. However, I doubt that this scenario would ever reach the point of prosecution in New Zealand. However, this does not mean that such a scenario would leave lasting effects on both Jo and Jared.
It is great to see so many thoughtful responses on this subject.
January 17, 2007 at 10:38 pm
RPE,
hmmm… Good point. It would be (maybe is) a shame if you couldn’t do that sort of thing because some ‘PC’ group would jump down your throat.
February 2, 2007 at 10:15 am
It’s quite clear that Jo was infact taken advantage of & raped. She was not into what took place & her silence is a common reaction. Thus the fight, flight, freeze response comes into play. Even if Jo had consented, it was not a true consent because she was not of legal age to consent for one & she was under the influence of alcohol.
February 4, 2007 at 9:48 am
Linked here by the carnival.
I agree with you, though I think the “Rape Prevention Education” comment is right in pointing out that there are nuances in what kind of answer you’re trying to give: whether it’s legally rape, whether it’s actually rape, what each participant could or should have done differently.
I can’t speak for the legal side, but I agree that the situation fits my two criteria for rape: one partner did not want the sexual contact, and that fact was communicated to the other partner. It is Jared’s responsibility, as soon as he gets a “stop” message (which pulling up her clothes clearly is), to stop and say “would you prefer not to do this now?” or something similar. Otherwise, he risks having sex with someone against her will – which is rape, period. No, his intent may not have been as malicious as some rapists’, but that doesn’t make her injuries less real, or him less culpable for ignoring the warning signs.
February 4, 2007 at 8:23 pm
whilst on the topic of Rape, check out this link…
hopefully make the ‘not-so-anti-porn’ amongst u become a little more awares. stormcloud
February 4, 2007 at 8:31 pm
this is it here stormcloudhopefully.
February 10, 2007 at 5:09 am
RAPE!!RAPE!! This is Rape. NONVERBAL QUE OF PULLING UP HER UNDERWEAR IS THE CLUE!!!!!
February 10, 2007 at 9:00 am
jo, i don’t think that spam is representative of anything much at all – by its very definition it is unwanted. it would be better to analyse actual web searches if you wanted to find out what kind of porn people (with internet access) want. in a seminar i went to late last year, the data presented showed a really big spike in people searching for ‘alternative porn’ for instance. (if you want a definition of that i’d be happy to provide) and queer porn is quite popular too. ….
yours, a decidedly pro-(post)porn feminist
x.
February 11, 2007 at 11:54 am
What an interesting way to describe yourself, a decidedly pro-(post)porn feminist. I first heard this notion of alternative porn a few years back, but that was in the context of a distinction between porn and erotica. Erotica meaning visual representations of sex that do not carry all porn’s power inequalities and reinforcement of patriarchy baggage.
I was a bit skeptical at the time, but I have came to the conclusion that there must be a way to communicate the beauty and enjoyment of sex to others visually. Not in a stone cold, seperated from reality art gallery kind of way, but real sharing of sexual experience through image. I haven’t really considered this much since getting to that point, so interested to hear others think.
The stats on spam give an interesting picture of what is out there, the conclusions are supported by plenty of other stats and its a creative response to porn spam (don’t just get angry, draw a pie chart!)
Porn will not last. I have yet to see an example of porn that is not a manifestation of power imbalance. I tend to avoid porn for just this reason, though I do keep eye out for some beautiful, liberated erotica. My favourite being Naomie Sunner’s ‘girls just wanna’ http://www.naomiesunner.net/naomiemidsumma.html (Is looking a sexual act?)
All this reminds me of a poem I composed a few eeks ago. I have forgotten most of it (words whipped away in the wind on Waiheke), but one line keeps popping up in my head:
When the revolution comes, women won’t put up with this Bullshit anymore
(by the way, the revolution is here already, women resisting bullshit everywhere being prove of this
February 12, 2007 at 6:37 am
‘post porn’ can be described as any porn that disrupts heteronormative , racist, male privledged porn.
i can’t see any distinction between erotica and porn really, its just a nicer word. the differentation is only between porn one likes, and porn one doesn’t approve of.
and, seeing as i’ve just come straight from a seminar on relationships between porn, BDSM and paraphilia (that is, when someone makes fantasys or carries out, sexual acts upon people who do not consent, ie. rape and abuse fantasies/acts) by a doctor who runs a sex offender clinic (in hamburg), maybe i can share some of what he said:
1. that in the percentage of people who regularly watch porn, the majority of it is not rape porn, or even porn wherein there is *consensual* violence. (ie in bdsm porn)
2. violent porn does increase aggression in some people *in certain circumstances*. for instance, if they are already feeling aggressive.
3. soft core porn *decreases aggression*
as to the blog story on rape porn stats that jo linked to, as fun as pie charts may be, it doesn’t make the data mean what she says it does. her blog was spammed about rape porn because her blog is about rape, and porn. it had all the key words it it needed to be totally slammed and targeted by shitheads in this way.
and to rant even further (which i am not sorry for
:
the industrial and digital revolutions allowed and massive upsurge in the distribution of porn , it became widespread, affordable and easy to get very fast. but have incidences of rape and abuse become more widespread too? i don’t think the problem has got worse , i think its just as shit as it always was . the rape culture in NZ and elsewhere has been deeply embedded for a very long time. (well, for as long as white people have lived in NZ anyway – i can’t comment on pre-colonial situation )
hell, at least now its (theoretically) illegal for a husband to rape his wife! this was quite a radical idea for some time.
and its really encouraging and giving me hope to see real discussions on active consent happening. (yay asher!)
anyway, i feel we have strayed far away from the original topic, and maybe theres a better place to discuss it…
ciao
x.
February 12, 2007 at 7:24 am
“…but I have came to the conclusion that there must be a way to communicate the beauty and enjoyment of sex to others visually. Not in a stone cold, seperated from reality art gallery kind of way, but real sharing of sexual experience through image.”
yes totally!! (sorry, i forgot to add this in my post, i guess i was on a negative streak)
and somehow images which communicate how totally hot active consent is
x.
February 12, 2007 at 10:48 am
The distinction between erotica and porn is one way of seperatig the wheat from the sheaf, so to speak. I find it useful. When I say porn read: “heteronormative, racist, male privledged” when I say erotica read: how I explained it above. This enables me to promote one and not the other.
Clearly the stats from the above link are a bit tongue in cheek, and all stats on porn lose any meaning outside of a wider context (lies, damn lies and pie charts)
It is not my place to approve or disapprove of porn (thats the job of the morality police at the dept of internal affairs), but it is my place to speak out against disempowering forces. Porn is one aspect of the culture of rape. To link it back to the original post let me share a story.
Once upon a time, as a 15 year old, myself and three friends got into a car with a guy I didn’t know and went to a party. He was a friend of my friends boyfriend. The party turned out to be a bunch of older guys and me and my friends. We got very drunk and stoned. Then the porn was put on. It was really quite boring porn with the world’s stupid’s plot, but anyway I was feeling very uncomfortable by this stage, but didn’t feel I could say anything, or leave the room. It was non-consentual porn watching. So things were not looking good. Luckily for me, I had a more on to it friend who hauled me out of there “for a cigarette” and we left the party and walked home.
Porn is everywhere in our society, it is so generally accepted, and speaking out against it is quickly dismissed as feminist PC whining. In this situation I was not allowed to speak out about how I was feeling, not beacuse anyone stopped me, but because I had internalised the oppression and was self regulating. So there is one example of the realtionship between porn and the culture of rape. Porn is disempowering.
The discussion of porn is open is all who wish to contribute, whether they are university educated or not.
Thanks for food for thought, x.
Peace be,
Anna-Claire
February 12, 2007 at 7:09 pm
this is taken from another blog, you can read the whole post by clicking on the link at the bottom of this…
I do not believe the majority (note she said ‘majority’ not ALL) of women in porn have chosen to be there, in the true sense of choice. How many girls sit there at seven years old and say, “Mummy, I want to be a porn actress when I’m grown up!” None. They are there because they have to be, for one reason or another – financial, drug addiction, abuse, human trafficking. The biggest thing that bothers me is when people say “But some of them do want to be there!” How do you know? When you are looking at a photograph or watching a film, how do you know, beyond doubt, that the woman or women you are watching are there of their own free will? How do you know they are not victims of human trafficking? How do you know they’re not there simply because their dealer will withold their next fix unless they ‘perform’, or because their abuser has threatened to kill them if they don’t do as they are told? How do you know, when you get right down to it, that there isn’t a person behind the camera pointing a gun at those women and threatening to shoot if they don’t perform? You can argue against this as much as you like, and say it’s ‘unlikely’ – but as far as I am concerned, if you don’t know for certain that those women are there of their own true free will, and you still use pornography, then you simply do not care if women are being mistreated. Someone who does not care when women are mistreated is known as a misogynist, no matter how much you dress it up.
3. Similar to number two in several respects, only this time it’s to do with age. How do you know the women you are viewing are over the age of eighteen? How do you know they’re not just cleverly dressed up fifteen or sixteen year olds? It can obviously happen, as with the case of Traci Lords. If you don’t know for certain that those women are over the age of eighteen, and you still use pornography, then you simply do not care if underage girls appear in pornography, or that they are being mistreated. Someone who does not care when women are mistreated is known as a misogynist, no matter how much you dress it up. heres the link… shutupsitdown
February 14, 2007 at 11:43 am
Actually it *is* the crime of sexual assault (under NSW law). Consent must be actively and explicitly obtained.
The reason we don’t have more rape prosecutions is that in the trial process its all he-said-she-said and the defence lawyers will destroy any credibility the victim has.
Legally, its so clearly rape. In other ways it is so clearly rape!
It is interesting to see the examples you gave of people hiding behind the law when they don’t want to tackle the issue: that Jared might potentially be a rapist; that *they themselves* may potentially be a rapist.
Sad thing is – the law calls it rape, but the trial process protects the rapists.
January 8, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Definitely rape[1]/sexual assault. The consent was never explicitly given, for a start. It was reasonably explicitly denied the moment Jo pulled her underwear up. Jo was unrealistically stupid, though, in that she somehow didn’t know how to say she wanted it to stop.
With regard to the legalistic approach…
That the Mrs Mac’s meat pie manufacturer felt the need to push for an exact definition of “meat”[3] so they can reliably comply with the legal minimum meat content in pies is a sure sign that they are not really in the business of making meat pies.
In a similar way, people who need to rely on the legal definition of consent in order to get their jollies may safely be regarded as sexual predators.
Jared failed so badly, he even crossed the the legal threshold. Even if Jo didn’t pull her underwear up, Jared is as guilty as a Mrs Mac’s pie.
—-
[1] “Rape” in the modern sense of the word: Violating another person by sexual assault[2], in contrast to the old meaning. Traditionally, the rape of a woman was an offence against whatever man owned the woman and the concept of raping one’s own wife was as meaningless as stealing from your own bank account. Rape was made properly illegal in New Zealand in 1985.
[2] IIRC, the definition of assault is unwanted touching, that is, touching someone without good cause to believe the touch is authorised. The rule is applied from moment to moment.
[3] Currently, skeletal muscle counts as meat. Mrs Macs have pushed for un-meatlike “meat flesh” to count as meat, too.