not a nice topic, but been annoying me all day

[ButWhyIsTheGinGone]

Hello All,

I've been dithering whether to post this as it's not really an "issue," and it's not the nicest of subjects, but I've been thinking about it all day.
After reading and watching the fantastic "Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" film, I was talking with a male friend in the pub about the horiffic scene where Lisbeth Salander (possibly my favourite fictional character ever) was attacked and anally raped by her guardian.

This led to a discussion bout how appalling an act that is, at which my friend claimed it would be far "worse for a man." I couldn't quite believe this and he said he couldn't explain it and I "really wouldn't understand." At this point a second man (drunk and not intelligent) pointed out that "women do it all the time." I didn't even acknowledge this fairly disgusting comment and the conversation changed.

But it's been bugging me all day. My friend is a sensible and intelligent man and would never say anything to deliberatly hurt or offend, but this view has shocked me and got me thinking. If a woman who has previously had consensual anal intercourse is attacked in this way....is it less "horiffic" than if a man is similarly attacked who has not?

Would be interested to hear any opinions - I'm no feminist expert but am lurkng around this board a lot more and finding a lot of the discussion really interesting.

It is because they do not understand that rape is about consent, or rather the lack of it, and not only about an act of itself.

Rape is a violation because it is an act of violence against the bodily integrity and autonomy of a person because they have not consented. (To an act that is loving and pleasurable in the right circumstances.)

The attitude of these men shows extraordinary misogyny. I think there is definitely an element of 'rape as an occupational hazard of being a woman' and 'women are used to being subjugated so it doesn't matter', to their options. It is the idea of women in a perpetual state of consent.

Would these same men argue that a man cannot be sexually assaulted by a women or that it wouldn't be that big a deal for him because PIV is an act he is used to doing? Probably actually.

Also worth remembering that we're all affected by the prevailing sexism and rape myths, like all the other crap going around

Mal.. this is something that you need to examine, I don't think you're alone in your thinking either. But you are seemingly more persuaded by rape myths that you imagine, it doesn't make you callous but it does make your thinking rather anti women. I've had more sexual partners than I care to remember you but I can't imagine being raped wouldn't effect me as much as you because of this. Or that if my husband raped me tonight in a 'supposed' safe relationship it wouldn't rock my very soul as much as a stranger...

[may I just say I am thinking about what dittany would say]

Mal I don't want to come down on you too but I really think you are very very wrong here.

I see that you have reported your own post so you are obviously thinking about this and not being intentionally misogynistic.

Basically some of what you have said is that prostituted women aren't damaged by rape/violation/unwanted penetration, in the same way as 'good' women because;

a) they are used to it.

b) they do not have the same right to bodily autonomy as non-prostituted women.

Think, woman.

It is the very dangerous notion that because a woman has consented at some point she is now unable to withdraw that consent.

Rape myth 101 - women are in a perpetual state of consent.

Men, of course, are not, because they are human beings with human rights. They are not the sex class.

Hello Mal,
I am certain you meant to cause no pain in your post but please, please think about what you're saying. I have had over 30 sexual partners, and have been raped. My 30 partners does not mean my experience was any less than awful. It absolutely fucked me up until very recently.

Fair enough, the fact that you've only ever had one sexual partner is important to you. But WHY? If you and your husband divorced and you eventually met someone new, would be think less of yourself for having sex with another man? Why is only having sex with one man something to be prized?

I think I get what you're trying to say about "degrees of rape." But we cannot think like that or the justice system for rape vicims would be even more appalling than it is now. ("Well, she WAS flirting with the alleged perpetrator and at one point was observed kissing him so was she REALLY raped?") In my case I was drunk - I didn't report even though I hate myself for it. Partly because I couldn't bear the speculation. I was sleeping casually with the man's housemate. Imagine what would have been said about me? Please, please don't think that made me any more "willing" or "likely" to be raped.

I have no ill feeling towards you at all as I don't know you, but I can;t help bet feel sad that I get the impression you somehow think you're worth more or "better" than me because you've had one partner. I don't know - may be I'm over-reacting. :-(

I think also these kind of views make it very hard for a date rape victim to discuss the situation for fear of being judged. I know I could never come out and tell my father of an "incident" that happened to me for fear of him saying "well you shouldn't have put yourself in that situation!"

I have name changed for this.
In defense of Mal, although I don't agree with all her post, the sentiment that there are degrees of rape I feel valid.
I have been analy raped. I was exceedingly drunk adult . It has of course affected me.
I have also worked with young people who have been abused. I am sure that my experience was not as devastating as that of a young woman who told me that she was regularly raped by her father over a period of 5 years.
Her self destructive behavior broke my heart.

Lessthanaballpark "I know I could never come out and tell my father of an "incident" that happened to me for fear of him saying "well you shouldn't have put yourself in that situation!"

EXACTLY!!! I got hit by a drunk driver once in my car late on a Sat night after picking a pissed mate up once. Told my dad and his FIRST words were "what the hell were you doing out at that time??" I know that says a lot about him, but can you IMAGINE telling him about being raped? The implication that YOU "got youself into" that situation. Makes me so fucking angry.

I feel like I don;t have much to contribute to thne feminism section unless it's about sexual inequality and attitudes to women and sex - sorry for that. It's just my personal experience of how unfair the world can be. (I'm rambling. Bloody red wine!) Really do like learning from here tho.

I think there are different experiences, different levels and kinds of suffering, but it's all too varied, you can't plot a neat scale in which type x rape will always be worse than type y.
so the idea of 'degrees of rape' is dangerous because it suggests that there is an objective scale, and that means some women will be told they are 'wrong' because their experience of it doesn't map onto it properly.

Farmwyfe I'm really sorry that you have been raped.

As you say, your experience is different to a child raped over and over again by a person she should have been safe with.

But nobody has the right to tell another person how they should feel about their rape or to tell them how bad their rape was.

There is just a minefield of impossibility to that way of thinking.

Rape is rape. There aren't degrees. You just don't do this.

Mal, I think you should let the post stand- I understand you don't want to hurt anybody, but it might be useful if people can see how prevalent those kind of misconceptions are, especially if you are prepared to deepen your understanding of it and listen to people, as it appears.

Although I don't think anyone can know how bad their experience of being violated would make them feel unless they've been through I think this acquaintance of yours has quite a common viewpoint. i.e. being made to do something that you never do is worse than doing something that you do with consent normally but have been forced on this occasion. I think he's wrong but I can kind of see how you would get there logically. (Subjective experience of being raped not being exactly explicable by logic).

It's pure sexism. It's the idea of penetration as submission. Because women allow themselves to be penetrated sometimes it doesn't count as much if they're penetrated without consent.

Malificence I don't know where to start. So if I'm raped it 'counts' less than if you're raped?

I think that sums up his viewpoint quite well, Fork But without going into too much detail... something as abhorrent as anal rape....well, even if you've had consensual anal sex... forced would be countless time more agonising and traumatising? So doing it consunsually would have no bearing on the agony caused by having it done forcefully? I had no inclination to continue the conversation at the time, but I'm glad people have talked on this thread.

I think his basic viewpoint comes down to:

Men's suffering is far worse than women's.

Whether this be man-flu, having a hard day at work, or rape.

I think the whole concept of "women do this anyway, that's what that hole is for" (in this case, that's actually not primarily what it's for) is just dressing up an extremely basic misogyny: that women's pain, doesn't really matter, while men's pain does. Because when the chips are down, women don't matter, while men do.

No matter how much you try and dress it up, that's what it comes down to.

My husband anally raped me during what had started as consensual sex. The shock of discovering he wouldn't stop, although I was crying for him to, was devastating as were my consequent injuries. I'd consented to have sex (and anal sex) with him, but not to be used aggressively like that. My consent didn't make the rape any more bearable, nor did the fact that I've had sex with a lot of men.

I'd resolved never to post about this again, nor to post on this board, but feel it's important to keep highlighting the errors in popular thinking about rape. Mal's an intelligent poster with definite views, so it's particularly depressing to see "not so bad" remarks from that quarter. Mal, perhaps you can imagine how I felt that night - I'd no reason to suspect he would do such a thing! - and, thus, soften your boundaries regarding what constitutes 'bad' rape.

I agree the bloke in the OP probably suffers from similarly (unconscious) sexist judgementalism: women get penetrated, it's what they're for, and men don't. So it would be more traumatic and humiliating for a man. Shame you didn't get the chance to quiz him on it.

What is really very gob-smacking about the popular view of rape - that there is a hierarchy of "bad" "terrible" versus "not so bad" "no big deal at all" "bit unfortunate but FFS move on", is that there is no need for anyone to say or think those things, because there is plenty of evidence that rape victims do not fall neatly into the hierarchy. If only people would listen to the voices of rape victims and allow them to be heard, they would not need to say silly things about who is allowed to feel devastated by being raped and who ought to simply pull themselves together because we chatterers have decided that their pain isn't as bad as someone else's, because we could actually take our lead from the victims - they know better than anyone else, how it feels to be raped and it is really quite extraordinary that as a society, we feel entitled to declare what rape is like for each category of victims without reference to those victims.

Which begs the question: why do the voices of rape victims, not get listened to?

Too right UPT.