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

My response was to curious

So Greer is arguing that not all rape is harmful? I am really confused. How does she decide this? That should be up to every single individual woman to work through themselves.

I've lost track of who is talking to whom here.

What a load of cobblers. Prosecute rape - all rape - to the full extent of the law. Educate as to what the law says. Can't see what we can do outside of that.

I agree Penggwn this is all smoke and mirrors and perpetrators will welcome and exploit any and all nuances.

KataraJean

Which is particularly ironic given that rape is not in any way a nuanced crime. Whether or not you are married, whether or not someone gave you a blow job last Friday, whether or not they are drunk - those factors are all irrelevant to what constitutes the act and the intent to rape someone: it simple requires penetration with no reasonable belief in consent. Not hard to understand at all, and certainly not 'nuanced'.

@KataraJean @pengwynn Hear hear. I need to hide this thread now as I'm finding it very upsetting. But I completely agree with both your posts.

I am not saying it is nuanced, for goodness sake, the nuances have been introduced by GG and people on this thread!

So Greer is arguing that not all rape is harmful?

I'm hiding this in a moment, all the weirdneses are becoming too, well, weird .

But no. She is not. And if that is what you take from this thread then someppsters need to give their heads a wobble!

Pengggwn is now repeating my words, as though she just thought of them! Why she can't just say "Yes, we do agree on that, but have different ideas on how to get there" I don't know. It's all so fucking combative.

How likely is it that a long standing feminist herself a victim of rape who has spent most of her adult life beng vilified by men, and many women, likely to say "Oh shutup ladies, it's just a bit of cock!"

Really? How likely?

KataraJean

Sorry - wasn't clear. We are 100% in agreement and I was saying what I was saying in support of your point, not against it!

CuriousaboutSamphire

Bollocks do we agree.

I rephrase ‘perpetrators will exploit any nuances offered to them’ - is that clearer?

peachgreen

KataraJean

I understood you to mean that. I understand you don't actually believe it is nuanced.
My post was more directed at those trying to create the idea of 'nuance'.

X- post Penggwyn sorry

Curious I was questioning what AltogetherAndrews said about GG when I asked about harm.

How likely is it that a long standing feminist herself a victim of rape who has spent most of her adult life beng vilified by men, and many women, likely to say "Oh shutup ladies, it's just a bit of cock!"

The 'how likely is it...' argument is wavering in the face of the fact that this is - essentially - what she is saying. It doesn't matter how surprising it is.

Well, you have just posted

Prosecute rape - all rape - to the full extent of the law. Educate as to what the law says. Can't see what we can do outside of that.

Which is almost the exactly same as my post shortly before, I added added "and change societal perception of rape"

So yes, we do have points of agreement! We have had all through the thread. Belligerance doesn't cover that up!

At risk of getting banned FUCK OFF does it! You have a weird agenda running under this Penggwn.

Not quite sure what it is but it is unsavoury, at best!

CuriousaboutSamphire

You want the law to change (although you have failed to specify how) to reflect societal attitudes. I don't. I want the law enforced. Fundamentally we are not in agreement.

I agree it’s still rape, and still a crime, but if we only have one permitted discourse about rape that says it is necessarily violent and necessarily causes significant harm then that stops people like me from talking about my experience. It certainly stopped me from understanding that what happened was rape, because it wasn’t like what I was told rape was. So I didn’t do anything about it, and didn’t leave the arsehole who did it.

All that is happening here is people are exploring ideas around what GG has said. I don’t know if I agree with her or not, my ideas are not fully formed. But coming on to the thread and acting offended at the exploration of ideas because you don’t agree with them isn’t helpful, it just makes people feel like it’s offensive to question the orthodoxy. If as feminists we are not free to explore ideas and experiences, then nothing will ever change, and it becomes a cult, not a movement.

CuriousaboutSamphire

"Unsavoury at best" - please explain.

but if we only have one permitted discourse about rape that says it is necessarily violent and necessarily causes significant harm then that stops people like me from talking about my experience. It certainly stopped me from understanding that what happened was rape, because it wasn’t like what I was told rape was. So I didn’t do anything about it, and didn’t leave the arsehole who did it.

I am very sorry that this happened to you. It isn't a problem for me that your rape didn't cause you significant harm (if that is the case). It is a huge problem for me if you tell me that, should my husband rape me, that is necessarily less harmful than someone else raping me. The crime is the same.

I agree with AltogetherAndrews, I’m also not sure how I feel about GG’s proposal either but I do think what we have now isn’t working, it’s failing too many victims. So unless society’s views on rape changes, I can’t see how we can get better conviction rates for rapists. And unless the law changes, how will society’s attitude change? It’s a bit chicken and egg, I suppose.

Bloody hell! There is a possible explanation... or 2

It isn't a problem for me that your rape didn't cause you significant harm (if that is the case) . So, you don't believe her and are saying quite clearly that not only do you not care, but that she cannot describe how she feels about it as she see fit.

And with the same breath It is a huge problem for me if you tell me that, should my husband rape me, that is necessarily less harmful than someone else raping me. you demand that your feelings are paramount.

Then, you have again misunderstood, twisted a post, to present it as something with little in common with the posters actual meaning.

Andrews said that insisting that all rape is violent means that women like her cannot frame their rape as rape, as it was not violent. Hearing someone say thatnot all rape is violent might have helped her recognise her rapists actions for what they were.

And you dismissed that out of hand!

Yes you are right, the crime is the same, whether violent or not. But the discourse HAS to be had or there will always be women who do not know that what is happening to them is not normal.

I think you are also right when you say we fundamentally disagree. I don't know any woman who could dismiss the lived experience of another quite that callously!

I am not sure I was offended, I said I was confused.

I do think some of the things said by Greer and posters on this thread are very problematic though, and clearly cause distress. I have read Greer’s comments again - she is not saying we need to view all unwanted sex as rape; she is saying we need to view rape as unwanted sex, bad sex in some cases. I think there is an important distinction here. The situation you describe may have been helped by understanding that rape is unwanted sex, it does not need to be stranger rape to be rape. I hesitate to ascribe what may have helped to you, that is how I understand what you are saying. That seeing rape as stranger rape is dangerous and leads to it being not recognised properly and more harm being done. If so, I agree with that.

But Greer clearly says it might help to think about non-violent rape as ‘non-consensual, that is, bad sex’

That is what she is quoted as saying. She is not saying bad sex, without consent, is rape, she is saying to think of rape as bad sex.

This window has been open for a while so I may be cross-posting again. I have nothing against debate, but Greer’s words seem clear to me, and problematic. I was and remain confused by what posters have attributed to her, and what she actually said.

My response was to AltogetherAndrews sorry

I wouldn’t ever dictate whether someone else’s rape was or wasn’t harmful, and I agree it’s a difficulty in what GG is saying. I am uncomfortable about the legal idea that we prosecute some rapes as lesser crimes.
I am however relieved that someone is talking about the fact that rape can be something which is not significantly harmful. I didn’t report either of the two times I was raped because they didn’t feel like rape as it was discussed by society. It took me a long time to understand what they were. I don’t talk much about it because my experience somehow doesn’t feel valid, that people won’t believe it happened because I wasn’t harmed in the way they would expect. I would like to live in a society that punished the rape irrespective of the harm caused, and would put a stop to those doing it. I am aware that just because I didn’t feel hugely harmed by those two men, doesn’t mean that they didn’t go on to do it again, to someone who was harmed, and doesn’t mean their behaviour couldn’t escalate as it was left unchallenged. I feel an opportunity was lost because rape is only discussed one way.
I think the discourse allows people to be dismissive of rape and what we say about it because they know it is a more complex situation than the standard discourse.