Woman writes a book with her rapist about forgiving him

[DeviTheGaelet]

www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/woman-writes-book-teen-sweetheart-9779992

What do you think about this?
I'm horrified that he seems to think it's enough for a rapist to just admit he did it (years after the fact). I think he should be prosecuted.
I've read other views suggesting it's societies fault that men don't realise this kind of scenario is rape and that those men aren't necessarily bad people.
Just wondering what people on here thought

First, that the words "rape" and "rapist" are so loaded that many men and boys will tell themselves they cannot possibly be rapists even though what they have done/are contemplating is indeed rape.

But what Tom needs to reflect on is why it is basically thought to be so much worse for a man to be considered a rapist than it is for a woman to be raped. The word rape is only loaded when it comes to men. It is a get out a jail free card for them. Rape is so terrible that people shy away from calling men rapists but when it comes to women rape is quite obviously not taken seriously or considered to be so terrible for us that much is done to stop men raping us.

That's fucked up. Maybe earnest Tom should go and talk to men about how they need to stop thinking that rape is an OK thing to do to women whilst simultaneously being the worst thing any poor man could be accused of or admit himself to be. The double standard is outrageous.

This makes me uncomfortable. What would she have done if he hadn't taken responsibility. So many rape endurers just have to find peace somehow knowing that their rapist will never take responsibility. It's her journey and if it helped her I'm glad for her but the way it has indirectly turned him in to some ''thought provoking'' public figure makes me uncomfortable. It casts him in the role of a good guy somehow and how can that be. He raped her and never spent a day behind bars.

yes Alice22 that's it. It sends a message that rape is forgivable.

Totally agree with Maeve.

I don't understand why this got air time/paper time/publication time.

there's shock value yes, but I had hoped that no one would buy into that or go to a talk and therefore there'd be no value in anyone doing business with them.

What is he doing with the profits of this book?

Is he donating them to an anti rape charity, for example?

Or any charity?

Or is he keeping them?

Because if so, then he's profiting from his rape and AFAIC, that means he's not really sorry.

I do believe people can be sorry. I do believe they can change. But you have to walk the walk, not just talk the talk.

He's donating them Ask. I believe he was originally donating part of the profits and has now been shamed into announced he is donating them all.

Beachcomber Tom should go and talk to men about how they need to stop thinking that rape is an OK thing to do to women whilst simultaneously being the worst thing any poor man could be accused of or admit himself to be

But he's not saying men like him think rape is ok whilst simultaneously thinking they are not rapists? At least I don't think so.

He is saying such men think rape and rapists are both terrible - and such men believe they are not terrible people, so therefore they cannot possibly be a rapist and what they did cannot possibly be rape.

I am not sure what the solution is to this however, and I don't think he proposes one. More education about what rape constitutes (date rape is still rape)? A sort of "even nice men can be rapists, make sure you have her consent" campaign? I don't know.

I feel like I'm defending him and that makes me uncomfortable. However, I do think anything that turns the focus towards men as the cause of rape, and considers why they rape which might lead to ways to stop them raping is helpful.

minipie " However, I do think anything that turns the focus towards men as the cause of rape, and considers why they rape which might lead to ways to stop them raping is helpful."

I feel the opposite in terms of things being played out publicly. Psychiatric studies are one thing - but someone saying "hey, I'm lovely really but I raped and look she forgave me" is exactly what is not needed right now.

Are men actually paying any attention to him though? Are they even aware of who he is?

I agree with you about the forgiveness being unhelpful Alice

Yes psychiatric studies would be better and without the downsides/risks of this approach. The thing is that psychiatric studies tend to get ignored. This has got a lot more attention. Though fair point from venus that the attention may be from women rather than men. I don't know if men are paying attention.

Minipie I find your post confusing

yes this has got more attention - but only in the sense of - "she forgave a rapist - free trips to TED for him" etc. I can't see any positive result that could come from this at all.

I suppose that might be what some readers get from it.

I had hoped that others might get "rape isn't just a stranger in an alley - it could be you and your drunk girlfriend if you aren't careful to check she's capable and consenting"

But perhaps that's optimistic

Lots of men all over the world are raping people. That includes men we may know and even like, but we don't know what they have done.

Many of these have tried to square it in their minds as just sex. They also justify it in their minds for various reasons.

Unless other men speak up when they begin to recognise it for what it is, nothing will change. Perhaps some young men who have done something similar to what this man did will begin to question themselves and each other.

Reactions on this thread though, hiwever understandable, seem to show that no man would be wise ever admit having done this, even to themselves.

There was a documentary film called Winter Soldier where Vietnam veterans got the chance to admit what they had done. Some admitted they, and others had raped people as a matter of course. It was called SOP/Standard Operating Procedure.

The debate needs to be opened up properly with the perpetrators. What does the present day army do for example to train its young recruits how not to rape, and how to be prepared for unexpected feelings on their part where they might might want to rape, or be under peer pressure to do so?

But he's not saying men like him think rape is ok whilst simultaneously thinking they are not rapists? At least I don't think so.

He is saying such men think rape and rapists are both terrible - and such men believe they are not terrible people, so therefore they cannot possibly be a rapist and what they did cannot possibly be rape.

I didn't say such that men think rape is OK. I said that they think it is an OK thing to do to women. Which is subtly different. Obviously Tom thought it was an OK thing to do because he did it. And lots of other men have too. If these men recognise that rape is so terrible that they cannot bear to admit that they are rapists, why do they do it?

As I said upthread, they indulge in a deeply misogynistic double standard.

And this particular rapist raped his victim brutally and over 2 hours. And then he tries to claim that he is a precious flower that finds the idea of rape so abhorrent he just cannot bear to think of himself as a rapist. How handy for him.

The double standard over the awfulness bothered me but I hadn't thought it through. That explains it really well.

The part of the petition to the Southbank centre re the talk that resonated with my experience of the TED talk was the feeling that having an open conversation felt like the rape was being normalised.

It would be extreme pragmatism (beyond what I find palatable) to say men don't see themselves as rapists, the word is loaded etc, so let's make it all seem a bit less awful, we might convict more. There are other things we could do.

And in terms of who he is reaching, that really bothered me about WOW. What was that message meant to be? Women if you don't want to be raped, you're going about it all wrong. We're not monsters, we're nice guys who feel very entitled. I think all too many women know affable Aussie bloke can also be a rapist. Maybe I tuned out but I didn't feel there was much more content.

Rehabilitation is challenging indeed but how did we skip past the fact we hold virtually no rapists to account to thinking about rehabilitation.

Reactions on this thread though, hiwever understandable, seem to show that no man would be wise ever admit having done this, even to themselves.

How about just not raping girls and women?

What's so hard about that? I don't want men to rape women and then admit it or not admit it. I want them to not rape in the first place. What's done is done. Any admission doesn't change that and it doesn't give girls and women their unraped selves back.

SolidGoldBrass (I guess a few people on here will remember her) had a phrase for this: the "good guy rapist." The man who publicly abhors and avows "violent" (i.e. aggravated), in a dark alley, stranger rape, but categorises what he does as "determined, alpha male seduction", or "taking full advantage of the situation because, heck, she's drunk, she's back in my room partially clothed, she's a bit of a slapper so she won't mind", "well, she'd already had PIV with me, and everyone knows the natural follow on to that is anal, even though she tried to push me off..." or any range of bullshit like that.

What bothers me is of course Tom is not going to go, yep I like it when women are drunk, it means I can get away with doing whatever I want to them with no comeback to me. Yes I ruined your life Thordis but hey, never mind I got a shag out of it.
He's a manipulative rapist. So why are we listening to him saying he didn't realise it was rape? It's bollocks, pure and simple. It's feeding into this accidental rape bullshit and I hate it.

Good point Quentin.

I agree with Quentin - it's all just rape-normalising bollocks. Nice guys don't rape. A nice guy would never look at a girl who might need an ambulance and get turned on and decide to fuck her for a couple of hours. TWO HOURS. It must have been painfully clear that she was suffering. Accidental my arse, he didn't think doing it was bad because he didn't ever stop to consider she was fully human. I will only support the idea of him standing on a stage if he's there in stocks to be publicly shamed and have dog excrement thrown at him.

We already normalise and excuse rape enough. The US president has a credible child rape charge against him. I'll never be in favour of stunts like this and I really think it takes the conversation backwards, not forwards.

Also he describes rapist as a "weaponised term". No mate, it's an accurate term, it describes you, you're a rapist, and the only weaponised thing here is your dick. Now go off and look earnest and solemn somewhere I don't ever have to see your snivelling hipster coffee bar face ever again.

Yes, what sort of man refuses an ambulance for his possibly alcohol poisoned 16 year old girlfriend, takes her home instead himself, takes off her vomit covered clothes and then rapes her for 2 hours whilst she lies comotosed?

He sounds sociopathic. And he comes across as sociopathic in this fucked up thing. He comes across as STILL not really seeing himself as a rapist. He said in an interview that the reason he brutally raped her is because he thought he deserved sex after a date. So he not only acts like a rapist but thinks like one too. And like most rapists he got away with it. And now that he has admitted it, is he in trouble, is he in jail, is he shunned by friends and family? No, he's giving TED talks, writing books and saying how supportive people are. All whilst being earnest contrite Tom who understands now that brutally raping your passed out drunk girlfriend is rape.

Give me a fucking break.

Yes, exactly. It feels a bit gaslighty to women if I'm honest. While making all the "right" noises. He is still putting himself in a position of power.

And just in case anybody really thinks that all men think being called a rapist is so terrible

glosswatch.com/2015/03/22/how-great-is-the-stigma-attached-to-rape/

For those of you concerned by the 'slickness' of the way this story is being presented, I would ask you to consider how important it is that we choose the right words to talk about this subject.

Thordis is a writer, presenter and playwright. Precision with how she tells and presents a story is something she does professionally, very well. She is not (or no longer) a traumatised rape victim who is struggling to articulate their experience. It feels very jarring to us to hear a rape narrative told so precisely and calmly, because so few people who have been raped are able to move to the place of being able to talk about it with this extraordinary eloquence and clarity.

Both Thordis and Tom have obviously worked very hard to find the right words to tell their stories. I think we do a massive disservice to both of them by misrepresenting what they are saying.

'But someone saying "hey, I'm lovely really but I raped and look she forgave me" is exactly what is not needed right now.

This ^^ for example isn't what Tom is saying. This is you very badly paraphrasing his position, which is much more nuanced and complicated than you are presenting it.

I have no more wish than anyone else to defend his actions, which were inexcusable (although have to be seen in context of being raised in a patriarchal culture, something which is explored carefully in the book). But I do think we are capable of holding two things in our minds at the same time: condemnation of his actions at 18 (and probably repulsion towards him as a result) and also open-mindedness and - yes - respect in regards to the difficult task, which very, very few men have attempted, of saying in a public space what he is saying (which I am not going to paraphrase here.)

In regards to the idea that this is normalising rape: I think it's doing the opposite. Sadly, rape IS normal. Sex in non-consensual circumstances IS very very common. And there is a lack of dialogue around it in the public sphere, because it's such a hard, complicated, painful, charged, fraught conversation to have. Let's not demonise people for trying to start it, particularly when they have worked so hard to choose the right language to bring these complicated issues into the daylight.

I would ask you to consider how important it is that we choose the right words to talk about this subject

But maybe it's about more than the words. Maybe it's about the way in which the message is being presented. Or the format is simply inappropriate. Or there aren't the right words for a rapist to stand alongside the woman he raped and give a TED talk. Maybe a rapist who hadn't been held to account legally is not the person to stand up and talk about it. Maybe any discussion about rape presented in any vaguely similar way needs to pay due reference to the trauma (more than just words), whether the speaker has moved beyond that or not, if it is not going to be painfully minimising for women listening. Maybe the most carefully chosen words are insufficient if you do not have the right message.

nuanced and complicated I don't recall anything complicated or nuanced.

That's a lot of maybes! I'm not sure which of those was the problem for me.

there is a lack of dialogue around it in the public sphere, because it's such a hard, complicated, painful, charged, fraught conversation to have
but i don't think the wrong conversations help.