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

Pengggwyn ok but that doesn’t make logical sense.

Can you please quote the bit where she wants to rename rape? I can’t find it.

Yes, I think she is saying it shouldn't be classified as rape but as 'bad sex' or non-consensual sex.

Isn't non consensual sex rape anyways?

Pumperthepumper

When she tells us to think of it, instead, as bad sex. I've directly quoted this about three times already.

RebelRogue

Yes! She thinks we should distinguish between the two.

Pengggwyn the same quote?! Are you serious? You think she wants the law to read ‘bad sex’ instead of rape?

Maybe Pengggwyn but I took it to mean that society doesn't really view these acts of rape as a 'proper' rape anyway at the moment, so if they were reclassified or had a different sentance attached more people would realise they were.

Like a man that meets a woman out when theyre both drunk and she agrees to go home with him and he sleeps with her even though he didn't get her full consent he might not think of himself as a rapist and she might not think of herself as a rape victim but if the law was changed for these kinds of rapes and the onus was on the man to prove that he got consent, not on the woman proving that she was raped, less men would do this and more women would realise what happened and come forward.

No she says that instead of always thinking of it as horrifically violent,sometimes it can be non consensual bad sex.

If i was to take an issue with what she said I'd pick on the term bad, as no non consensual sex can be good. But I believe she used it as that's the belief of most women in the situation she described.

I do wonder if her "redefining" is linked to the studies and general perception about rape.

Like men are more willing to admit to rape or that they would rape if it's not called that.

Like "Lie down and think of England" , that is rape... but not acknowledged as that by most victims and perpetrators.

Like judges that say(witnessed in court) " you can't have sex mondays and Wednesdays and be raped on saturdays".

Like the high percentage of men that plan to use alcohol as an aid. Even worse a fair number of women give the same advice when it comes to someone being unsure/insecure about doing something sexually. " Just down some liquid courage".

Pumperthepumper

I am deadly serious, because that is what she says. Why would I doubt it?

sometimes it can be non consensual bad sex.

And I object to the use of the term 'non-consensual bad sex' - that is rape. Why make the distinction at all?

IDontBowlOnShabbos

That law wouldn't make sense. The burden of proof is (and should be) on the prosecution.

Nevertheless, if you reclassify it, how is that going to result in people who couldn't understand what rape was when it was there in black and white, suddenly understanding it when we aren't actually calling it rape and have 'reclassified' the act as something different?

And I object to the use of the term 'non-consensual bad sex' - that is rape. Why make the distinction at all?

You’re arguing with yourself here. She’s asking you to forget the idea that rape has to be violent, not that it’s not rape. She’s making a distinction between violent rape and non-violent rape. Not: rape and not-rape.

Pumperthepumper

No, she isn't. She is making a distinction between violent rape and bad sex. She does not believe penetration without consent should be named as and treated as rape unless it is accompanied by violence.

No, she isn't. She is making a distinction between violent rape and bad sex. She does not believe penetration without consent should be named as and treated as rape unless it is accompanied by violence.

No, she isn’t. Because that doesn’t make sense with regards to the rest of her arguement - she’s looking for higher conviction rate FOR RAPE. Plus she literally says ‘he is raping her’.

I think we're moving away from it as a society now but certainly when I was growing up there were lots of mixed messages when it came to rape and sex.

Sex was quite often portrayed as something men enjoy and women do to keep men happy, espicially in long term relationships.

Men that have sex with lots of women were seen as better, there were loads of sceens in films where men went to a party and there were loads of drunk girls and the men saw it as an easy way to have sex. It wasn't something that was hinted at as wrong, usually was played for laughs or was just excepted as part of the story line of how men behave.

If you've grown up with these kind of messages then you're at a party drunk or in a long term relationship and end up having sex when you don't want to/haven't consented then you might not think of yourself as being raped. Just like if your a man and you pick up a drunk girl/have sex with your partner when they're not in the mood you might not think of yourself as a rapist.

If we can find a way of giving women the power to realise what these situations actully are and make men realise that what they are doing is rape then isn't that a good thing?

Pumperthepumper

And as I have said, I believe either that nothing she is saying is making sense, or she is saying that yes, at the moment we say 'he is raping her' but she doesn't think we should continue to say that.

So you think she stood up at the Hay Festival and said a load of words that made no logical sense OR you think after she said ‘he is raping her but we should change that to he’s not raping her’.

How likely are either of these scenarios? Is it not more likely that you’ve interpreted it either 1) wrong and can’t see it or 2) wrong but can’t admit it?

Pumperthepumper

I don't give a shiny shite how 'likely' it is. She made comments. Those comments mean one of those two things. They absolutely do not mean the opposite. So, regardless of how shocking you might find what she said, she said it.

Oh pengggwyn this must be mortifying for you!

Pumperthepumper

It is. I am mortified at the obvious failures in our education system, when people appear unable to comprehend written and spoken English, and instead rely on a magic 8 ball: "How likely is that that someone stood up at the Hay festival and said X?"

Who cares? She fucking did.

😂 you could just admit you were wrong though! There’s just no need to make yourself look like such a fool!

Pumperthepumper

Now you are getting personal because you can't deflect my attention away from what she actually said in favour of what you would like her to have said. It's embarrassing.

I am embarrassed for you - I was embarrassed when I posted that video because it made it so clear you were wrong. Not for a second did I think you’d actually continue to argue that you were the only right one and that she was talking illogical nonsense, and you were the only one that could see it. I genuinely did not expect you to try so hard to convince us that you were right and we were all wrong to the point you’d actually write something like ‘you don’t give a shiny shite’ about logic!

Pumperthepumper

She IS talking illogical nonsense. It doesn't make sense to instruct people to think of rape as bad sex or non-consensual sex, and to suggest we call it something other than rape and lower the tariff, AND to say 'he is raping her' UNLESS she wants to end the use of the word "rape" for penetration without consent but without violence.

If you cannot see the contradiction in that, that is your problem.

Pengggwyn ok chum 👍