Trigger warning: Germain Greer's opinion on rape...

[LokiBear]

I can't actually get my head around this. How can a woman think like this? I have two daughters and comments like hers frighten me. I teach consent to 15 year olds and this goes against everything I try to teach them. I just dont get how anyone can think like this.

news.sky.com/story/germaine-greer-says-most-rape-is-bad-sex-not-violent-crime-11390855

AutumnMadness

"I don't know" - that's your answer on whether rape should be called something else and the punishments shortened? And yet you're suggesting we have a discussion about what we think?

Tricky, that.

Pengggwn I have a view on the lesser charges for “not so bad rape”. If less violent rape (as in punching, pinning, dragging, using objects, group rape etc) carried a lesser sentence then I reckon a jury and judge will be more willing to convict. I say this because, the worry for wrongful conviction is high, if the sentence is lesser then it won’t be so bad if it turns out the man is innocent (I’m not getting into how often or no that is the case) if you lock a man up every time a woman says she was raped when there isn’t much “evidence” then a lot of lives can be hurt and people don’t like to take that risk. It’s awful but that’s the way it is. If it’s sometbing like community service for marital rape then people will be more willing to accept it’s possible rather than so many years in prison in case it isn’t. Does that make sense? It makes sense to me in a way. It will also mean the man is punished and may then make him realise what he did was wrong and the woman will be more readily believed, she also won’t have to look traumatised etc if she isn’t or get such a grilling because the conviction isn’t as great. I hope I’ve made myself clearer this time because to me it does actually make sense.

AutumnMadness Thank you. I don’t want to minimise rape but I do feel there are different levels to it sometimes. Well, for me anyway. I don’t want to take away from other people’s experiences.

”. If less violent rape (as in punching, pinning, dragging, using objects, group rape etc) carried a lesser sentence then I reckon a jury and judge will be more willing to convict.

That is already the case. Violence over and above the rape is added to the charge sheet.

Some really good, interesting debating on this thread. And incredibly brave posters.
I think we should all rise above the pedantics. All of us feeling able to offer our opinions and interpretations in a respectful, non preachy, non passively aggressive environment is surely the best way to move forward debate...

I didn’t realise that. Then again I’ve never told the police about any of mine so haven’t had to go through it. Wish I did in one case though.

QuackPorridgeBacon

...Quack your words are pretty clear to me too

If less violent rape (as in punching, pinning, dragging, using objects, group rape etc) carried a lesser sentence then I reckon a jury and judge will be more willing to convict.

This just sounds like codifying a slap on the wrist. And it won't do anything except normalise rape, in my opinion. And it'll just make rapists more careful about not using violence - over and above repeatedly shoving their penis into an unwilling woman's vagina or anus.
Which is clearly no big deal. Just community service.

Anyway, you're all looking at it backwards. We don't fix the fact that people don't convict rapists by minimising rape (quite literally, by minimising the punishment.) How on earth is that going to make people take the problem of men raping women more seriously?
We reduce the incidence of men raping women, and make people more likely to convict the rapists, by changing the societal attitude towards women, and rape. There's no quick fix solution here.

I also had what I now know to be a pretty typical university 'rape' experience (I feel weird calling it that), where I was blind drunk, went home with some guy, made out with him, woke up the next morning completely naked and generally aware of the fact that we'd had sex.

Now, I would have never reported this because I think frankly my intentions probably were to have sex with this guy (who knows, it was 25 years ago) and why would I subject myself to that. This was a different time, and while I had the impression of him as a cad and I thought it was a generally gross experience, the experience pretty much literally washed off of me with one shower.

If my husband forced me to have sex with him it would ruin me because I feel that we have such a great marriage (for the most part) and we have a super-active sex life, but if he managed to have sex with me while I was asleep I really wouldn't care. Different marriages are different. I've seen people here call sleeping sex rape.

Now, you might feel that this is only for the woman to say, not the law, and that's a perfectly reasonable view to take, but I think that my university experience in particular is not too dissimilar to a lot of women my age.

So what GG says resonates with me. I do think it's nuanced.

but if he managed to have sex with me while I was asleep I really wouldn't care.

With respect, whether you care isn't the issue. The crime - as I think you acknowledge - isn't defined by how much it does or does not upset you.

If your husband knows you have no problem with sleeping sex, then a reasonable belief in consent exists. If not, he is a rapist who has committed a despicable crime.

I think lessening the pressure and the conviction would make women more willing to report. In one case of mine I didn’t feel I could go to the police as describing what happened might not be convincing enough that it was rape. So he would walk free and I’d feel ashamed and avoid any possible interaction with said person due to living locally. If he got a sentence however small it would have given me confidence to carry on my life knowing he was punished and people know why and I was believed. I think feeling believed is more important than a larger sentence. At the moment, many men get off with rape and women tend not to report because of that and not feeling believed. That’s my opinion anyway.

We reduce the incidence of men raping women, and make people more likely to convict the rapists, by changing the societal attitude towards women, and rape. There's no quick fix solution here.

Sure, well, you can see how there's been a seismic cultural shift in just the past five years. I have a 15 year old boy, and my parting words to him every time he leaves for a night out are something along the lines of 'Always be a gentleman' (referring back to the many conversations we've had about consent).

I think this is fairly normal now amongst parents of teenage boys (I know a lot of them). We're raising men who think differently.

QuackPorridgeBacon

You may well be right, but those feelings of shame aren't inevitable. We can teach people that it is not their fault when someone rapes them. We can teach people that women are not 'asking for it' when they say no. We can't do that if we start reducing criminal penalties for rape. All we will do is convince them of the opposite: that rape isn't that bad.

*We're raising men who think differently.^

Good.

At the moment, many men get off with rape and women tend not to report because of that and not feeling believed. That’s my opinion anyway.

Yes, and as Autumn says, would stop the victim having to prove a level of trauma in order to get a conviction.

Pumper Thanks, but I have had my shot at it and to come back pages and pages later to see the same old obfuscation is depressing, whoever it was who said Penggwn is just telling people off had it right!

I said all I meant on page 1. The discourse about whether or not Greer said that some rape is lesser than others is still depressing because that is based on sound bites and incomplete quotes. I too was at Hay and know that isn't what she said.

That many newspapers are shouting that she said most rape is just bad sex is on them, they have misunderstood,possibly for the sake of a good headline! The Telegraph has "Rape is rarely violent and doesn't merit a jail term!" Which manages to jam together bits of about 2 - 3 minutes of her talking! Worse, it removes her careful enunciated commas, so when they report "Instead of thinking of rape as a spectacularly violent crime and some rapes are, think about it as nonconsensual … that is bad sex,” you can see there were missed words, but you can't see that, the change of accent by changing the punctuation removes her original meaning!

What she actually said was more like "Instead of thinking of rape as a spectacularly violent crime, and some rapes are, think about it as non consensual … that is 'bad sex', sex where there is no communication, no tenderness, no mention of love."

She was describing, outlining what 'bad sex' really is, and that is nonconsensual sex and therefore RAPE!

But until there is a transcript, commas and all... newspapers will do what newspapers do and people will continue to believe what they believe!

You also have to bear in mind that EVERY report carries the same truncated set of quotes... so they must ALL be working off the original editor's interpretation, which will have been a stringer putting their notes out 'on the wire'. So it is not a surprise that they ALL report it the same way!

CuriousaboutSamphire

If that isn't what she meant, where is her statement saying that that isn't what she meant?

I am not 'telling people off', I am disagreeing with them. There is a difference.

Thanks for coming back @CuriousaboutSamphire, really interesting to hear your thoughts.

Here’s video I found off her ‘bad sex is rape’ quote, if anyone fancies a watch. It’s only 38 seconds long and finishes with ‘he is raping her’ - which I think is pretty conclusive that she’s NOT saying ‘he’s not raping her’

news.sky.com/video/most-rape-is-just-lazy-careless-and-insensitive-11390880

If that isn't what she meant, where is her statement saying that that isn't what she meant? Have you not noticed that she rarely does that any more? She speaks to people who ask her to speak and almost ignores anyone who wishes to No Platform her or misrepresent her words.

Maybe she will release a rebuttal, but, from past behaviour, she is as likely just to laugh and let the newspapers get on with it. It is all advertising for her new book! She would be more annoyed if there were no headlines at all!

But can you see that ALL of the reports carry the same truncated quotes, quotes you too have repeated a fair few times. Can you think why that might be? Can you see that there might be some truth to what I have suggested?

I had no idea that was 'out there' Good find!

"He is raping her" that is the bit no newspaper includes, the bit that clarifies all of her lead up to it.

CuriousaboutSamphire

If she said something else and was misrepresented, it is her responsibility to clarify it. I am not going to hold back from interpreting someone's comments to the media just because they may have been misquoted. That's what retractions are for. She shouldn't speak to the media if she has no intention of ensuring her comments are reported accurately.

Start retracting....

news.sky.com/video/most-rape-is-just-lazy-careless-and-insensitive-11390880

And no, it is NOT her responsibility to clarify someone elses mistake, that is their lousy journalism, she can choose to respond as she wills.

Maybe she is talking to a lawyer to see if she can sue them for defamation, bearing false witness or some such! That would be amusing!