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

P.S - am tempted to say thank heavens for that, but that would be churlish 🤭

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 agree this is horrifying. I don’t really want to repeat all the arguments as I went through it all on the other post and I’m exhausted, but I think the fundamental point of difference between my thinking and some posters here is that I absolutely, 100% believe reducing rape sentences to community service would lead to more rapes not less, fewer prosecutions not more. I guess it’s how others don’t think that that I’m struggling with the most. For every other crime that has followed a similar path of gradual reduction in sentencing, it’s part of the road to being seen as inconsequential by society and eventually to full decriminalisation. As an example, see laws around smoking cannabis, which absolutely nobody takes seriously at all and which are clearly a stop on the way to decrim.

And the idea that you should be able to convict a man of rape JUST on the say-so of a woman with zero other evidences is just bonkers. That’s not how the justice system works. No matter the sentence for the crime. Why even have trials then?

Thoroughly agree the justice system is broken in regards to rape. Just feel it’s so obvious Greer’s propositions would make things worse not better.

And just to add, while Peng has clearly lost her temper a bit here, I can relate. It is so deeply upsetting to see women - women! - endorsing such an absolutely bleak view of things. Claiming that the only way to deal with rape is essentially to give up on it, regurgitating every rape myth in the book. I don’t exaggerate when I say I have cried over it. It’s easy for that sadness to turn into frustration and anger.

Sloth thanks for coming back. I think I agree with you - while it’s tempting to attempt to prosecute as many men as possible, as I said upthread, reducing the ‘seriousness’ of the crime probably leads to it being less of a stigma to be branded a rapist, and I don’t think that’s a good thing. I think it’s worth a discussion though. I’m not a rape apologist, I don’t see ‘grades’ of rape, I just want better justice. This is a totally academic discussion of how we could do that - and it’s probably one i personally feel wouldn’t work.

Just a quick note re: Pengggwyn - she’s totally entitled to be angry, it’s an emotive subject, anger is totally justified. What’s not justified is the totally dogmatic way she’s behaved on this thread - she literally posted she didn’t give a shit about logic, while calling us rape apologists and idiots. At no point has she attempted to engage with anyone past being arguementative and bickering over word choice. That’s why we’re pissed off, this discussion could have been so interesting and worthwhile if we hadn’t had to spend so much time dealing with that nonsense.

Pumperthepumper

Where did I say I didn't care about logic? I certainly don't remember that.

It is NOT bickering about word choices to critique the words someone uses, unless you are debating semantics. I am not debating semantics. There are people on this thread arguing that someone means the precise opposite of what she said. Yes, I think that is idiotic. If saying so is pendantic, then I am a pedant.

And of course, you don't have to spend time dealing with my 'nonsense'. You can choose whether or not to engage.

What it appears you want is for me not to state my opinion. That is not going to happen.

Sorry, Sloth I know you’re not looking to get involved so just on the off chance anyone else fancies a chat about this:

And the idea that you should be able to convict a man of rape JUST on the say-so of a woman with zero other evidences is just bonkers. That’s not how the justice system works. No matter the sentence for the crime. Why even have trials then?

I think that’s probably quite a literal interpretation of what she said - I interpreted it more as ‘start from a position of believing the woman’, not that we would just forgo all trials. Because again, that’s not something that’s happening just now.

I interpreted it more as ‘start from a position of believing the woman’,

This means nothing in legal terms.

@SlothSlothSloth

Pengggwn I’ll be honest, I don’t follow GG and I don’t know too much about her but I feel that personally I’d be more willing to convict a man as guilty with little evidence if the punishment wasn’t so harsh without much proof. It’s just what I feel though and I don’t know details on that or how to go about it or anything. I’ve only thought about it since this thread.

QuackPorridgeBacon

Then your conviction would probably be overturned on appeal. The standard is 'beyond reasonable doubt'. There will be no law that waters down that standard in cases of rape, and nor should there be.

Yes I agree pumper, I interpreted it as meaning ‘let’s create an environment where the woman is believed, supported’ and take it from there in terms of proving that what happened was rape. Rather than the woman having to enter an almost gladiatorial arena, where she can often feel alone, frightened and disbelieved...

Pengggwn I totally agree with “beyond reasonable doubt” I’ve been slated on here before for saying so when a man avoids jail based on no evidence and just the woman’s say so. Rightly so too because as much as rape affects a woman, because accused of rape when you actually haven’t done it also affects a man. Even when he doesn’t go to jail and is declared not guilty he still carries around a stigma and may not get rid of it. This is why it’s tricky and I don’t see any real way to solve any issues surround rape and conviction. I’m not very clued up on it all though so I won’t say much more than I have on the matter.

QuackPorridgeBacon

It is dreadful that people obviously evade justice for the crime of rape, as it is for any other crime that has such a significant impact on victims. I just don't see how lowering the threshold for proof would help, can't see a way to make it work and don't agree with it on an ethical level. So I suppose, all things considered, that means we both think GG has it wrong?

I interpreted it as meaning ‘let’s create an environment where the woman is believed, supported’ and take it from there in terms of proving that what happened was rape. Rather than the woman having to enter an almost gladiatorial arena, where she can often feel alone, frightened and disbelieved...

Yes, exactly.

Someone’s uploaded GG’s Hay Festival talk to YouTube, I think it’s the whole thing although I haven’t listened to it all yet. Here if anyone is interested:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=sOJyJRuRyxI

I'm part of the way through it, and just heard the sentence (regarding the cross-examination of a rape victim): "That humiliation must be even worse than rape."

I think she is passionate but arrogant. I don't think the word 'must be worse' is appropriate when talking about things that have been done to others.

I've got past the 'bad sex' bit. She was quoted perfectly accurately.

She also wants to make it a 'moot' point whether or not the man thought the woman was consenting. So, remove mens rea altogether and judge rape on god knows what criteria.

She is talking a load of shite, as far as I am concerned.

Pengggwyn I haven’t listened to it yet, I’m only just in. Before I do though, I just want to point out - I will not be reiterating the same points with you again and again. It is my opinion, and I suspect yours, that you have interpreted her wrong but you won’t admit it. So unless you’re willing to have a discussion about what’s she’s actually saying, I’m not interested.

I almost never post but just have to.

How can ANYONE listen to the clip in question (not to mention the whole speech) and not understand that GG is talking about re-framing rape as the whole spectrum, including marital rape? She is precisely talking about what posters on here are saying - the whole spectrum of forced penis.

When she talks about "bad sex" she is talking about how it is minimised as bad sex, not minimising it herself. When she talks about lazy, careless and insensitive, she is talking about how this IS rape, not denying it.

She's talking about how rape can be dismissed in our society as "bad sex". She's talking about how lazy and careless is actually rape.

When she talks about men "enjoying their conjugal rights" she is being utterly sarcastic and damning. She sums up these examples with "HE IS RAPING HER". Not entirely sure she could have made it any clearer.

Some of the debate on this thread is quite baffling but I think GG is absolutely right to raise these issues and frame them as she did

Very well said toomany
My thoughts exactly

I think what she is saying is very deeply thoughtful. For a lot of women their rape probably wasn't violent and it's this misconception about rape that makes it difficult not just for people to come forward but also easy for people to palm them off. Indeed it was along time before I even accepted myself that I had been raped because it wasn't violent, I didn't "fight back". It was someone I had been in a relationship with previously. It wasn't a scary unknown person lurking in the shadows brutally attacking me. This is why rape is an insidious crime and must be discussed in all its nuances, no matter how painful, for people to properly understand

I just listened again pumper, thanks for sharing 👌

Maldives1986 yes, exactly. I don’t even think what she’s saying is even particularly controversial, outside of the lowering tariff thing - I think most feminists would be aware that rape within a relationship or by a previous partner or a friend is still rape. It’s how we deal with that, how we get wider society to agree and how we get justice for it that’s the real issue, I think.

No worries Luisa 👍