Has Germaine Greer lost the plot?

[WeLoveFlowers]

Her recent remarks that ‘unconsiderate sex’ can be worse than getting raped by a stranger are completely baffling. Has she lost the plot? I can’t get behind her on this one and wish she was no longer treated as as a spokesperson for feminism.

[reads OP only]
[immediately rushes to keyboard]

YES.

It's the error of judgement in comparing one thing with another to make that point though...it causes me to question her judgement entirely. I think that has been constructed in translation, and her own attempts at explanation!

At Hay she didn't rank, just held them up as two quite different types of rape! Despite what many of the tabloids have said she said, I still have a clear memory that she was trying to get everyone in the room to understand that even consensual relationships have their problems and that the 'boring,' coerced, wheedled, expected sex within a relationship is just as damaging as violent rape but in different ways. No ranking, no hierarchy equal but different.

No, I lie! She did say that the 'boring' type of rape is more dangerous as we, society as a whole, haven't made our minds up about it and, until we had, and had come up with a very clear definition of what rape is, and so what constitutes consent, we wouldn't be able to prosecute all rapists appropriately!

And that is where she fell foul of a single lazy journalist, whose simplistic analysis was the basis of all other reports - as we discussed in one of the threads at the time!

I think rat, bowl and kitty (others too!) pretty much sum it up. All I can say on the "ranking" of experiences is that in my case my long term corrosive relationship had far more impact on my mh than my rape. But of course others will disagree based on their own experiences. I don't think there's a right and a wrong here, it's just subjective and GG just wants us talking about the effects of the cumulative little things as well as focussing on the big things, iyswim?

CuriousaboutSamphire

But hasn't she pooh poohed the idea that this 'boring' type of rape is even a problem in the past? Some anecdote about her friend being raped by her husband and her describing her own heinously laid back response?

I get the feeling that people want to perform mental acrobatics and give her the benefit of the doubt because it's her. While others would be crucified.

I heard her on Today yesterday - I agree that she needs to be heard in context - she is clearly trying to highlight the 'chronic' as well as the 'acute' (something that is often glossed over in many experiences in life - especially for women) - but unfortunately for the media that translates as throwing shade on the 'acute' where she maybe meant for more light to be thrown on them both.

I don't think she made what she was trying to say about the legal system very clear, but I think she has a point about our society as a whole stemming from a partiarchy. The roots of our laws are obfuscated by time and modern revisions - but those surrounding rape are surely stemming from a time when raping a woman was a crime against the man that 'owned' her - be that husband, father, etc. What she was trying to bring to light when I heard her was that even within the legal system the woman is still an object and without agency as a witness.

political Sort of. I think she has a very specific point she is trying to make, and a few less specific ideas get thrown in for good measure. I float in and out of agreeing/disagreeing with her over it.

She is right, sex is a blood sport. We may not like it but that is how it is. The Hunt, whether conducted in a pub or on line, is much the same the word and many centuries over. As a society we have to make up our mind what we want to do with that.

Read the boards here and your read so very many women whose dearly beloved has, on occasion or very often, overridden their wishes not to have sex. That IS rape, Greer has said that consistently (though that lazy journo at Hay got that back to front). But we don't prosecute and the world around us would not understand or agree if we tried.

So how do we continue with that apparent dichotomy! Answer: we have to look closely at what we want to describe as rape, and to decide how we want it to be punished.

I tend to remember her asking the question: what do YOU personally think is rape? And the quote ‘If you look over the whole world spectrum of what is sexual offence, it’s completely confusing.’ If you do look, it really is confusing. Even UK definitions have changed in the last couple of decades.

So, mainly because this is how I translated her' I think she is trying to get us to look again at how we currently talk and think about sex and relationships and then on to how we want to punish sexual offences.

And I agree with her - but am probably biased by having been an FE lecturer for any years and having been dismayed at the changes in attitudes over the years.f

She is an intellectual powerhouse and as forthright as any man in public debate which makes her a target for those who prefer women agreeable.

I saw a recent debate of hers where she clearly stated to an objecting audience member that nobody has to agree with her, she doesn't even agree with herself sometimes. That is the point of debate.

We are living in a world where "women" are being reported in the crime stats as rapists, perhaps at this juncture it needs emphasised more than ever that every point of view is relevant, every opinion deserves discussion and "no debate " is not a catch phrase to be proud of.

www.aljazeera.com/programmes/headtohead/2018/07/metoo-failed-180717145036789.html

I find the overall lack of respect to GG as shown here really disconcerting. It is an extension of the no debate cult mentality, this idea that if I don't like your opinion I shall bully and insult and threaten you until you bow to my way or else.

A lot of older feminists are seen as out of touch dinosaurs by some young, woke feminists.

Experience and wisdom doesn’t cut it with them.

Personally I think GG makes a lot of sense and is worth listening to. You have to think about what she says, and do so in context.

Nickname I suspect that's why I find any conversation with the young, woke fems so bloody irritating. I can only take so much of the fake smile and head tilt response!

According to the very woke daughter of a good friend, I could never be a true feminist as I have been married to the same man for almost 30 years! I asked if pre- marriage shag encounters / 1 night stands counted for anything and she nearly fainted

But I still have no idea what she meant, or what she thinks feminism is!

I heard the discussion on radio 4 with Germaine Greer and another younger feminist ( sorry I can't remember her name) on this issue. Greer made me think, challenged me, and made me think about rape in the context of the society we live in. The other speaker basically said rape is awful. Well you know what we all know that and... Thank goodness for Greer, for those saying she is old and hinting at confusion, she was light years ahead of the other younger feminist.

Perhaps the thread title should be changed to "Is this OP Ageist?"

I seem to remember Greer saying that she liked to provoke people and get them angry, because it then made them think harder.

Yes, she often seems to make crashing mistakes, but I'm so glad there is still someone as fierce and brave and bold as she is out there, holding forth on difficult subjects.

Are there any mistake free humans?

It really worries me that feminism will be left to the woke.

Me n all Nick, I feel like feminism has been taken over by men eradicating women with the help of women.

"nobody has to agree with her, she doesn't even agree with herself sometimes"

I can empathise with her on that! I'm a pain in the arse for the annoying "trollish man habit" of playing devils advocate with my own arguments! Makes me wonder if there is something in the speculation that she is autistic (as I am)

disorganisedxx absolutely - I think creative people/thinkers tend to make more mistakes than most, if they're brave and allow themselves to do so, because that is how new ground tends to be broken. Without that possibility of failing, all thought runs the risk of becoming safe and reactive.

Are there any mistake free humans?

Certainly, that seems to be the only form of acceptable man.

Experience and wisdom

To be fair, only the first term could consistently be applied to Germaine as many long in tooth feminists are happy to agree. It worries me that people could think she speaks for women in general as she is very often mad as a chair.

Experience and wisdom of all of us older women, the ones who become invisible after 45.

No.

She hasn't.

She's still as sharp as ever and as ever, her complex, nuanced arguments are being portrayed simplistically and stupidly by journalists who are intellectually completely out of their depth with her and simply cannot represent her arguments accurately because they don't understand them.

her complex, nuanced arguments are being portrayed simplistically and stupidly by journalists who are intellectually completely out of their depth with her and simply cannot represent her arguments accurately because they don't understand them That was certainly the case with her talk at Hay... I was there, I know what she said, I heard here inflexions, her stressors.

What was published the day after, and soundly discussed here, was diametrically opposed to what she had actually said.

If you look at the talk I posted the link to you can see and hear how what she has to say will not fit into a convenient sized soundbite and so there is the increasingly lazy (and aggressive) habit of journos and critics to latch onto the first few words of a sentence or paragraph and force an alternative meaning onto them.

This is in addition to trying to force closed questions regarding out of context quotes from work stretching back across half a century, completely ignoring the original meaning and shoehorning words and opinions into her mouth.

When that doesn't fly she is disregarded on social media by being labelled "confused" or presumed diagnosed with "dementia" and a whole host of other ageist and sexist slurs meant to discredit.

I consider this extremely ignorant and rude. She never takes the bait. I think she deals with it better than anyone I know could and keeps her cool regardless. I have immense respect for that.