Mother of sons and feminism

[Adnerb95]

Germaine Greer's book The Female Eunuch was life-changing for me when I was at uni many years ago. I still consider myself a feminist, love to see equality of opportunity for women, hate misogyny, think we have a way to go still ... BUT I think some current branches of feminism are seriously messing with young men's heads! Any mention, for example, of a false rape allegation brings down the wrath of any number of online commentators, who immediately label you a rape apologist, as if you are making light of a hateful crime, with no excuse. Apparently, admitting that there are - not often, but occasionally - false allegations is something to be dismissed out of hand and treated as unimportant. A friend's son was recently accused of a rape following consensual sex because she was fearful of the repercussions from her (hitherto secret!) boyfriend. The hell of that family's experience which is now finally over - the police have decided on no further action and actually apologised to the young man - has been indescribable. But it was the online reactions to any mention of such an allegation possibly being untrue, that caused the most damage not just the this young man's thinking but to my sons and their friends as well. I have taught them to respect women, to be caring and thoughtful. Never to objectify women or use them in any way. But they find it difficult to deal with the attitudes which have ben revealed, which see all men as potential rapists, users and so on. Isn't it time for the feminist community to realise that one day they may have sons and they may find that their sons can also be used and abused? That sometimes their sons may have reason to fear the other sex, sad though that may be?

I still find it staggering that there are people out there who think "going back for coffee" equals "I've said yes to rape". Do you have no male platonic friends? If you are male and hold these views, do you have no female platonic friends?

And it's definitely not an age thing - my 75 year old father thinks this is a bonkers view to hold, because he's always had female friends as well as male friends, and guess what, they've always been safe alone in his company because he's a decent human being who likes and respects other human beings, not some crazed rapist solely in virtue of being male (which, basically, is the belief underlying the "you can't go back for coffee without having given a green light to being assaulted mindset" - once more I find myself reflecting on the strange accusation levelled at feminists that they hate men, when in my experience, almost all of the men hating comes firmly from women with "traditional" views).

Alone has said that anyone taking her seriously is "gullible". I think we can draw our own conclusions from that. A slightly more articulate and internally consistent version this time.........

I can't get into the Alone "I am raising rapists, but mothers of sons need not fear any accusations from my daughter" discussion.

What fascinates me about the OP and this kind of discussion is the presumption that if your son is accused of rape that the allegation would be false.

It is far, far more likely that your son would be accused of a rape he committed.

Doesn't that bother you?

What's even more likely is that he would rape a woman and never be accused, never mind convicted.

If you know the rape statistics and your fear for your son is that he will be falsely accused, when that is clearly the least likely rape scenario he will end up in, it really makes me wonder what kind of person you are raising.

The only responsibility women have is to not sexually assault people. I have been invited back 'for coffee' plenty of times in my late teens/early 20s and sometimes it has lead somewhere, sometimes not. Sometimes I wasn't 'up for it'. I can safely say I have never 'lost control' and stuck my fingers in a woman's vagina without consent and I have never had a woman do it to me. If I had 'lost control' then in would be 100% my fault and not the woman I violently assaulted over the nescafe.

Also, I'm pretty sure if you go for a run with your arse hanging out and flirt with someone then if you are raped, it's still rape

This thread has totally gone "off topic" so I'll say goodbye. Some pretty insensitive (to rape) posters are hijacking the discussion.

Everythings, I think what you wrote is what mothers of sons, wives of husbands and sisters of brothers find near impossible to get their heads around: that their loved one could be or in fact is a rapist.

I think teaching about consent starts when they are v little and that includes that their 'no' is taking seriously (so no coercion to kiss grandma, and no enforced tickling etc etc). It start well before sexual encounters with the opposite (or same!) sex comes in to it IMO.

Blistory, I think what you are saying about asking about explicit verbal consent is right but in practice I just cannot see it happening on every occasion.
I suppose like with any 'contract' the 'rules' are only required when there is any kind of conflict: 'Coming up for coffee' leading to consensual sex is not likely to lead to any kind of examination how it came to it - it's only when an allegation of rape is made (rarely enough) that the circumstances get examined.

'No means no' is such an easy concept to understand and IMO that should include non-verbal 'nos' i.e. pushing hands away/moving away etc.

I think the cultural/social conditioning of 'women not enjoying sex' and 'men have needs' is to blame for an awful lot.

And yes, it does worry me that my sons grow up in a society that sends very confusing messages about what it is to be a 'man' or a 'woman'. I wish they could just grow up and learn to be considerate and respectful to others whether they are men or women or halfway in-between.

I would agree, PW, but the problem is that the idea of non verbal consent or denial of consent appears to be subjective. And juries of normal men and women struggle with it.

I know it's not the norm but why shouldn't it be ? My understanding is that any fetish club clearly set out rules to make it clear what is accepted and to keep people safe. Why should vanilla sex between two people not in a relationship, have any lesser rules ? Why is the idea of requesting consent verbally so difficult for us to get our heads around ?

And I agree that regardless of whether consent is given verbally or physically, any sign of physical withdrawal or discomfort SHOULD be considered a stop sign.

Blistory - not just clubs, but in all my BDSSM relationships I've clearly talked about what's acceptable, what's not, and had verbal and non-verbal clear rules around when consent is given and withdrawn. And that has happened long before we got anywhere near anything remotely sexual.

And I've walked away from men who were wanting something I wasn't comfortable with.

I think I said something similar, Frau Helga (in my belated apology to you for not backing you up on that thread where some posters were so offensive to you - sorry, was at work, couldn't really post). I suspect that the BDSM community is much much better about this sort of thing than we vanilla fetishists!

And it baffles me - if you're not grown up enough to ask - whether straight out ("fancy a shag?"/ "want to make sweet, sweet leurve?" depending on your and your partner's verbal preferences on this one...), in a round about way ("got any condoms?") or hopefully by making the request sexy and part of the foreplay, then you're not grown up enough to be having sex and should stick to wanking.

Thanks Lurcio.

I know I am very strong (and perhaps a bit strident - sorry if that slips onto this thread) but boundaries boundaries boundaries. I have boundaries. You have boundaries. A sexual partner has boundaries. I don't cross them. Ever. Sexually or non-sexually.

For the record. I don't get paid for what I do sexually. Before someone comes along to say that I do.

Well, I am the most vanilla of all vanilla people and I think we could do worse than learn from the BDSM community

Bistory, no, you're right - I have no idea why the asking for consent is not a given , but it just isn't in RL, is it?
Does not mean we should not strive for it.

FrauHelga, I agree with you re boundaries. IME people with a good sense of their own and other's boundaries usually have a good sense of self, like themselves and are articulate about that.
Sadly many unhappy, needy and sometimes damaged people also have sex and they are so much more vulnerable and I can see how nothing but dysfunctional communication happens there.

I feel v strongly that we need to raise confident, happy children who understand about respect, empathy and consideration to others in all sorts of situations to enable them to have happen, consensual sexual relationships.

I still can't get over the fact that someone said that to you. Someone who (based on their posting history) should have known better and held themselves to higher standards. Very sorry you were put through that.

And for what it's worth, I thought the argument (that BDSM was inherently unfeminist because of the existence of male on female violence) was a crock (and I say that as someone who is aligned with rad fem thinking on sexual violence in a lot of respects). After all, you could equally well say that vanilla sex is inherently unfeminist because much vanilla romance and erotica (from Sleeping Beauty and Beauty and the Beast through to the average Harlequin romance) can be used to prop unequal abusive relationships - and much more dangerously so because it comes with the added stamp of approval of being "normal" and "natural" and "the way things are". We've already seen that on this thread - tropes of "men can't control themselves, so if you go for a coffee you're guilty of contributory negligence if you get raped."

I only have sons, but if I had daughters, I would tell them there's no green light but to be wary that some men will retrospectively decide certain things are green lights to justify their own bad behaviour so to be very verbal if and as soon as they feel uncomfortable. I think it's important they feel they can say no and stop at any point.

As I have only sons, I will tell them there is NO nonverbal green light and they MUST seek verbal consent AND watch for nonverbal red lights.

Lurcio - it wasn't just that thread. But hey ho I'm a big enough girl and I accept that by putting my sexual orientation out there, as it were, I have made myself a target. Ho Hum.

I have issues with whether BDSSM is unfeminist, I suppose from the outside it can look like that, especially when the "norm" is that women are submissive.

The one and only time I ever got a negative from a BDSSM situation was when I ignored my own inner voices screaming at me that there was something "off" with the other person and trusted the judgement of others who were telling me they were "one of the good guys". Not a mistake I will ever make again.

But I could say that of platonic and vanilla situations I've been in Helga - that's not a BDSM thing, that's a "social pressure to be nice to people even when your inner warning voice is screaming at you" thing (which is a feminist issue, because women are much more strongly socialised to be conciliatory, doubt their own judgement and give people the benefit of the doubt).

FWIW, (and going wildly off topic) I write erotic fiction for a hobby (partly because most of the good erotica out there is not vanilla - vanilla stuff seems to be terribly bland - and I'd quite like to redress the balance, and show that there can be such a thing as cordon bleu, Michelin-starred vanilla) - and that's made me really think through issues about the relationship between some of my sexual preferences and their broader social implications. And think a lot about the way so much mainstream romantic and erotic fiction trades on an eroticisation of male dominance that isn't explicitly billed as BDSM, and think about what it is that makes a situation sexy once you've knowingly stripped that aspect away.

Absolutely Lurcio - boundaries boundaries boundaries

Can't comment on vanilla erotic fiction - it would do nothing for me. But yes, a lot of fiction generally trades on that male dominance. And actually, thinking about it, might be why so much fiction, in general, pisses me off.

I have a real problem with "no means no".

Consent is not an absence of "no".

Rape is an absence of "yes".

Teaching boys that if they don't hear a loud and unequivocal "no" that they are in the clear is part of what leads to some otherwise potential non-rapists into raping women.

It is far more worrying (and likely) that all your good work as a parent will be undone by societal signals that tell teenage boys that exploitative, coerced sex is fine, and that women who object afterwards are guilty of 'misunderstanding".

(Yes, misunderstanding their right to sex without your enthusiastic participation.)

We need to be teaching boys that it is very wrong to want sex with a person who isn't as excited to be there doing it as you are.

No means no. But the absence of a no does not mean yes.

Consent needs to be a positive thing, rather than the absence of a negative.

And anyone who tells boys that exploitative, coerced sex is fine needs to have a good long look at themselves.

Porn tells them that.

Ched Evans tells them that.

"Boys will be boys" tells them that.

The emphasis on "false" (defined by whom??) accusations tells them that.

IMO "no means no" also tells them that.

A person who is passed out, drunk, asleep, frightened, drugged doesn't say no.

But "having sex" with them is rape.

The idea that if someone says no there is any chance you would proceed, and that we need a slogan to point out that obvious non-consent is rape, makes me a bit crazy.

The "misunderstanding" loophole needs to be closed down.

"No means no" implies that there is room for misunderstanding even where a clear expression of lack of consent has been given.

"No means no" implies that there is room for misunderstanding even where a clear expression of lack of consent has been given.*

Consent is not the absence of 'no', I agree, but even 'no' still gets seen as a 'maybe' by many men: "She wants to, she just doesn't know it yet" crap.

I never understood why anybody would want to have sex with another person who is semi-passed out.

Bold fail.

I was agreeing with you, Everythings, even though I had just posted 'no means no' - i suppose I meant that as something so obvious that it is really quite upsetting that it still gets debated.

Yes, you're right, Pacific.

But those guys are the out and out rapists.

We need a slogan that is clear to younger and/or more decent men who might imagine that exploiting the "no means no" loophole is OK really, and that it's totally understandable that they would "take sex" from an unwilling, but not actively protesting, person.

They need to know that doing that makes them a rapist, just as bad as all the other rapists.

And that even if they never get accused, or charged, or convicted, they are still a rapist if they do these things.

There seems to be an idea that you are not a rapist unless a court says you are.

But (as much as I hate the comparisons with theft), if you steal stuff you are a thief. Even if nobody can ever prove it.

Same with rape - if you have sex without consent (that is obvious, and enthusiastic) then you are a rapist.

If you don't want to be a rapist, don't rape people and then start justifying it afterwards as a "misunderstanding".

We need to challenge this perception that women are in a constant state of consent unless explicitly told otherwise.

We need to turn that on its head.

Any young man who takes sex from an unwilling, but not actively protesting person is hardly "more decent".

And the message I have given my sons (I hope!) is that if they aren't sure their dick is welcome - keep it in their trousers.

But then, in that I think the BDSSM has given me a skewed perception because of how much we, as a community, talk and talk and more talk before any sexual activity takes place - I think I might be naive to how much of an issue it is out there in the vanilla world.

Afternoon all. It looks like, for the most part, we are all in agreement here, but someone mentioned our We Believe You campaign upthread so we thought we would post a link in case anyone wanted to take a look.

www.mumsnet.com/campaigns/we-believe-you-mumsnet-rape-awareness-campaign