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

I think we're just interpreting it in different ways to be honest. It shows what a difficult subject this is and whether we like to admit it most of us do see rape as a hierarchy of abuse.
Violent stranger rape where a victim is dragged of the street, phsically threatened. (Everyone sees this as rape)

Violent rape by someone you know.
(Everyone sees this as rape)

Rape where someone knowingly drugs a woman to have sex with her.
(Everyone sees this as rape)

Rape in a relationship where the man has already ground his partner down and she is unable to say no and he is aware of this.
(Some people think, well why didnt she leave)

Then there is rape where a woman has gotten drunk and 'puts herself in a situation' where a man takes advantage (here she is labled a slut by some people)

A man and woman who are in an otherwise loving relationship where consensual sex does occur where a man sometimes has sex with his partner even though she isn't in the mood through pressure or guilt or by not reading the signs.
(Some people view this as normal and to be expected in a relationship).

The last two are almost impossible to prove so if more work is done on educating people that this is rape or sexual coersion than less people will be likely to do it and more people would realise that this is not ok.

The thing is rape isn't really like any other crime. You can't murder someone or rob someone without realising but men definitely rape women without even realsing that that is what they are doing.
Look at that dumb piece of shit Chad Evans, he told the police that she was really drunk when he just turned up randomly and had sex with her but he didn't realise that it was rape because men having sex with drunk women isn't seen as abnormal in his situation. Women aren't seen as having any agency and if a woman is in that situation it must be because she wanted to be there and she was happy to be used like that. Loads of people think the same because he had massive support!

This thread is so disturbing. Imagine the horror of living in a society where men got community service for rape.

There was another equally disturbing thread about it in Feminism the other day. Peng i agree with you about everything! And I thought I’d lost my mind when so many people in the other thread were endorsing GG’s comments. It’s very weird as everyone I’ve talked about this with in real life thinks what GG said was appalling. Trying to work out why MN is evidently different...

Assuming all the participants in this discussion are speaking in good faith (and not arguing black is blue for the sake of it or harbouring some misguided belief that we must say that BAD is BAD and there can be no acknowledgement of degrees of badness):

Rape is unusual in law: because the identical act could occur with or without consent. We require police and juries to look inside someone's head and decide what they believed at the time. I cannot think of other 'he said/thought: she said/thought examples

2 people could have consensual sex and within a moment one of them could be experiencing rape and the other not experiencing themselves to be a rapist.

For those of us who have been raped and who feel there was no doubt, I am very sorry. But we may wish to acknowledge that there are other events and experiences which need to be considered in this discussion.

We require police and juries to look inside someone's head and decide what they believed at the time. I cannot think of other 'he said/thought: she said/thought examples

All crimes require this. If I take a ten pound note from your purse, I could say you gave me permission. If I steal your car, I could say you have it to me as a present. If I punch you in the face, I could say I was defending myself.

In all cases, the jury has to determine whether the evidence suggests I am telling the truth, or you are.

Criminals lie.

SlothSlothSloth

Thank you. I was feeling a bit like I had fallen down the rabbit hole!

IDontBowlOnShabbos

Look through your 'hierarchy' again. Consider the point at which you stopped using the term 'rape' within your hierarchy. Why did you stop?

Why is the man who penetrates a woman who is so drunk she cannot consent 'taking advantage' rather than 'raping'?

Why is the man in a long-term relationship where consensual sex does occur, suddenly excused by the phrase 'through pressure or guilt'? Why can you not acknowledge that rape occurs in long-term relationships? That he might hold her down and rape her? Pressure and guilt does not equal rape, so using it to illustrate the point that there is a hierarchy within rape is nonsensical. There isn't. You either believe you have consent, or you don't.

All crimes require this. If I take a ten pound note from your purse, I could say you gave me permission. If I steal your car, I could say you have it to me as a present. If I punch you in the face, I could say I was defending myself

This is daft. The ten pound note and the car are ridiculous comparisons to a she said he said drunken rape. And there is less argument about the relationship with these examples, if I was in a private conversation with the car or money stealer for several hours before the crime was committed it would be difficult to know who to believe but it is a very unlikely scenario whereas it's likely that a rapist is seen in conversation with the rapee in a pub or party.
I really don't know why you have to shout down every good argument given over GGs comments.
I get you think rape is rape but others are entitled to their views, I'm an old gimmer and have a broad experience of life and have to say imv rape is rape is too simplified and sadly traumatised women get branded as liars as a result.

Fflamingo

Why is disagreement with an idea 'shouting down' in your eyes? Is it, maybe, because you know the argument doesn't stack up?

He said/she said is exactly what a jury would be dealing with in the case of a cash theft by a relative or a friend. There would be little evidence that a crime had taken place. There is a prior relationship that affords the opportunity to steal. There is one person saying X happened and another saying Y happened. The jury would have to decide whose version was correct.

Please explain how it is different.

SlothSlothSloth imagine living in a society where rapists regularly walk away scot free, more often than not. It’s not so hard to imagine, it’s literally happening as we speak.

I don’t agree with everything GG says but it’s surely worthy of a discussion? How do you feel about the current conviction rates for rape?

please explain how it is different

Cos you don’t get 5 years for pinching 10 pounds.
Which was A major part of what the discussion is about- the lack of convictions possibly because sentencing is seen as harsh by the jury.
Your name appears 170 times on this thread, giving you the benefit of the doubt that half of those are others replying to you it’s still 16% of the posts reiterating the same view so I would consider that a form of shouting down.

Fflamingo

I don't care how often my name appears. I am not shouting anyone down. I am engaged in discussion. If you don't want to see posts from me, exit the thread.

Rape is a more serious crime than stealing a tenner, hence the longer sentence. We were not talking about seriousness of the crime, however. We were discussing your erroneous sense of the exceptionalism of rape on the basis of the evidentiary issues.

If you really need someone to explain that someone forcing their penis inside you is more serious than stealing a tenner, I suspect we have reached the root of your problem.

Jesus Christ.

I’d rather a lesser sentence for a rapist than none at all. If a lesser sentence was available I might have gone to the police in one case of mine. I’d feel more believed if it wasn’t so harsh for a one word against another situation. We may have more convictions. Surely when what we do now isn’t working it’s worth a try at least? I’d feel more comfortable with someone doing community service and ending up innocent.

QuackPorridgeBacon

You are entitled to think it is worth a try. I am entitled to think making rape a misdemeanour akin to stealing a loaf of bread would remove the stigma attached to being a convicted rapist and drive up the rate of offending, and to think it would make precisely no difference to the likelihood of proving any individual rape happened, as we would still need to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.

Further, I am entitled to be horrified at the attempts on this thread and by GG to imply that, provided no-one punches you or threatens you with a weapon, rape isn't a violent crime.

I didn’t say you weren’t entitled to an opinion... I’m simply putting mine across. I’d rather a sentence albeit lesser and then known to be a rapist than having none at all and the woman no te being believed. It’s a tough one but what happens now isn’t working and surely a shake up could help. It may not, but it’s not any worse than what’s going on now.

Cos you don’t get 5 years for pinching 10 pounds. Which was A major part of what the discussion is about- the lack of convictions possibly because sentencing is seen as harsh by the jury.

Yes, exactly. If we had reduced sentences though and women DIDN’T have to prove trauma on the witness stand if we agreed to reduced sentences, what do you feel the punishment should be? I’m not sure about community service because I think that’s a bit of a cop out but maybe a smaller prison sentence plus a fine plus a something? I don’t know what this reduced punishment would look like to still be a punishment IYSWIM.

QuackPorridgeBacon

I get that, but GG seems to think there is a quid quo pro to be had here, that by accepting reduced sentences we can somehow circumvent the requirement to prove a crime occurred and was committed by the defendant. Is that what you think too? If so, why?

I agree with you flamingo - whilst I enjoy hearing her point of view - I do find Pengg’s pedantic, repetitive, black/white, passive aggressive style of debating to be incredibly closed minded and lacking in intelligence.
Lots of people disagree with each other’s opinions on this issue - which is why the debate is such an interesting one, and for me, so informative and fascinating.
Pengg constantly, and often illogically, repeatedly demanding answers to previously answered points, in such a pedantic and passively aggressive manner really stifles the flow of debate. I hope not intentionally?
I also find her use of the f word to make her point and her ‘Jesus Christ’ comment (in this context) offensive on a personal level. And feel this use of language really weakens her point.
I, for one, enjoy hearing the views of others - especially when they differ from my own view....I feel this is how we develop and grow as people.
Pengg’s dogmatic, dominating, pedantic, often sarcastic approach seems (to me), to be an attempt to shrink the debate to an echo chamber of her views .This isn’t healthy, liberal or inclusive and I feel it would be great if we all allow each other space to debate freely - where intelligent, logical criticism is the norm...not this pedantic, repetitive black/white, “this thread isn’t rich it’s ridiculous”, mocking - and quite frankly ignorant style of debating.

Luisa27

Lovely personal attack. It really helps to cement your point about debating in a mature and civilised style.

Oh dear. Not a personal ‘attack’ - but a genuine criticism of the way in which, I feel, you debate - and stifle the flow of the thread.
As I said, I really enjoy reading your views Pengg - it’s interesting to live in a world where not everyone thinks/believe exactly the same things. Don’t be offended - try to take what I’ve said on board - constructive genuine criticism is a positive- not a negative.
One more thing I forgot to add - please try to stop reporting people so frequently, I’ve noticed you do this in other threads. Just my opinion.
But to reiterate - I do enjoy reading your thoughts and some of them are really interesting

Luisa27

Of course I think what you have said is offensive. It was a deeply inflammatory post. I couldn't care less, but it was designed to offend, so the faux-apologetic style of your last post is convincing nobody, I suspect.

And I very rarely report anybody. But when I want to, I will. Troll hunting is not allowed on this site, nor are personal attacks. Read the talk guidelines.

Critique of your debating style Pengg - reread my post carefully.
Just like when you stated someone’s opinion upthread was revolting.
Please don’t attempt to tell me how or what I think, or intend. Disagree with me, but you’re not a mind reader
Anyhow, enough of us - we’re clogging up the thread with the pedantry of intention.

Luisa27

Yes, please do sod off. In the nicest possible way. I will not respond to you in the future on any thread.

😂😂😂 - nuanced as ever Pengg