The Feminist Version of Rape (Cathryn Crawford)

The Washington Dispatch ^ | August 15, 2003 | Cathryn Crawford

[Scenic Sounds]

There is a movement in this country to push women towards a victim status, towards an attitude that implies that a woman is simply a passive person, someone whom men can and will always take advantage of, both in public and private life. This movement is fomented and spearheaded by the liberal feminists, who believe that men are monsters and women are powerless victims against them (a clear contradiction to true feminism).

The symptom of this movement is that the liberal feminists have taken hold of the word rape and its connotations and associations and twisted it to mean something that it was never meant to. Rape, by definition, is anyone forcefully, through harm or threat of harm, forcing another person to have sex with them - there must be a clearly expressed lack of consent and/or coercion by force or threat of force. According to New York law, "forcible compulsion" ( i.e. rape) is defined as "to compel by either the use of physical force or a threat express or implied which places a person in fear of immediate death or physical injury to himself, herself, or another person."

However, this definition, which is widely mirrored in all fifty states, has been watered down. According to Dr. Andrea Parrot, a psychiatry professor at Cornell University who specializes in studying date rape, "Any sexual intercourse without mutual desire is a form of rape. Anyone who is psychologically or physically pressured into sexual contact is as much a victim of rape as the person who is attacked on the streets."

Now university counselors can convince twenty year old girls that since their boyfriend whined until they finally had sex with them, they’ve been raped. After all, under Dr. Parrot’s definition, that is classified as psychological pressure.

In many studies performed, especially those that focused on date rape or acquaintance rape, the women who were interviewed said that they did not realize that they had been raped until the interviewer described rape scenarios involving psychological pressure. These women did not feel violated, and the counselors and interviewers have to convince them that they have, indeed, been raped.

For example, the most comprehensive and most widely stated study for on-campus sex crimes is Mary Koss’s Ms. Campus Project on Sexual Assault. It was conducted through surveys, and it speculates that 1 in 4 women have been sexually assaulted. However - Koss obtained her data concerning the "incidence and prevalence of sexual aggression" with a 10-item survey featuring questions such as, "Have you given in to sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because you were overwhelmed by a man's continual arguments and pressure?" and "Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force to make you?". Questions 9 and 10 (which also refer to the use of force or threats of violence) seem to fit the conventional picture of rape, but consider question 8: "Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?" According to psychiatry, this question would be "double-barreled": What, exactly, is it asking? The meaning could change simply by what questions were asked leading up to this specific one. Does this mean that after a man buys you a drink and then you have sex with him, he has raped you? Did the girl express that she “didn’t want to,” or did the “didn’t want to” feelings come after the fact?

There has to be a clear boundary between what is and isn’t rape. Rape is not confusion or negative feelings after sex. Rape is not feeling that you don’t want to have sex, but giving in to please your boyfriend. That simply isn’t rape. Rape is when you are forced to have sex with someone, against your will, and when you clearly express that you are not complying with the situation.

This new way of defining rape, the feminist version of rape, gives women a way to simply be a passive victim, externalizing any feelings of guilt and shame about the sexual encounter and forcing responsibility onto the other person involved. Sadly, because of this attitude, rape is becoming just another everyday occurrence, something that some girls say with a shrug, as though it’s a normal part of life and is no big deal. Date rape has become the new campus hot button, and it has become so normal that girls discuss it as though it’s a trivial, almost normal thing to experience.

This attitude not only cheapens the value and independence of women, it sets women up for failure, and teaches them that they are victims of predatory men. More importantly, it trivializes sexual violence by making it something that is no longer horrible, but something that is typical and representative of the whole of society. It has become an expectation, and when true sexual trauma occurs, it gets swept away in the tide of indifference that this attitude has fostered.

Cathryn Crawford is a student from Texas. She can be reached at feedback@washingtondispatch.com.

[MHGinTN]

I wonder, could a male employee be psychologically forced to have sex with a powerful female executive or management type? It has been substance of court action, if memory serves.

[Scenic Sounds]

And even like it?

I hear ya. I think that Chad tried to put a spin on my post. I'm left feeling cheap, dirty and used. ;-)

[hocndoc]

""one of my criminology books had a stat showing that, in approximately 25% of rape cases (I'm pretty sure it was 25%, but I can't recall exactly), the alleged victim admitted that she willingly had sex with the accused AFTER the supposed rape occurred.""

That's not actually relevant to the issue of the initial rape.
It's called the Stockholm syndrome when the woman protects herself psychologically by developing love for the rapist, but often, the girl assumes that she has nothing to lose after the rape, since she's bought into the idea that she's been "ruined" by the rape or that she must have wanted sex in the first place.

From Cathryn's article:
""question 8: "Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?" ""

In order to be valid, the question in that survey should end with "without your knowledge or consent?"

Rape is an act of violence and control. Some rapists use drugs without the consent of the raped, just as others use ropes and imprisonment. If a woman knowingly accepts drugs or alcohol, then she is responsible for her actions under the influence.

[Cathryn Crawford]

Most rape victims are no longer brutalized on the witness stand by defense attorneys ("cotton vs nylon panties" as a sign she wanted it type defenses).

You are absolutely right, and, on that note, that is a good thing that's come about from the new discussions on rape.

Claiming that the woman was "asking for it" because of the way she was dressed or the way she looked or the way she smiled is becoming more uncommon, and that's great.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Thank you for your comments, your appearance here!, and your article.

But why, given these inaccuracies, do the "femimisfits" persist in repeating (and promoting) the incorrect data?

A general (or inbred and culturally learned) hatred of men (whom they equal with white conservatives?) from their "intellectual peers" in the extremist education community?

[Scenic Sounds]

The constant barrage of incorrect info that young women are confronted with serves to solidify the notion that women are powerless, especially in sexual relationships with men.

I agree that it could and that's why I think your column is so important and valuable. ;-)

[Cathryn Crawford]

I wonder, could a male employee be psychologically forced to have sex with a powerful female executive or management type? It has been substance of court action, if memory serves.

How do you mean, psychologically forced? If he can say no, and doesn't, I'd say it's not rape.

But, maybe I'm missing something. What do you mean?

[Cathryn Crawford]

It's called the Stockholm syndrome when the woman protects herself psychologically by developing love for the rapist, but often, the girl assumes that she has nothing to lose after the rape, since she's bought into the idea that she's been "ruined" by the rape or that she must have wanted sex in the first place.

That's very interesting, and I hadn't given it enough thought. Thanks for adding that perspective to the discussion! :-)

If a woman knowingly accepts drugs or alcohol, then she is responsible for her actions under the influence.

Agreed.

[philosofy123]

"Now university counselors can convince twenty year old girls that since their boyfriend whined until they finally had sex with them, they’ve been raped. After all, under Dr. Parrot’s definition, that is classified as psychological pressure."

How stupid can you be. This girl sleeps with a guy, and the next morning she feels guilty--The reason for the guilt feeling is not because she did not want to have sex, or that having sex was bad; it is simply because HAVING SEX ACCORDING TO SOME WOMEN SHOULD BE A REWARD TO GUYS FOR DOING GOOD THINGS LIKE BUYING THEM DINNERS, AND GIFTS. When a girl gives it away without EXTRACTING a punishable cost from a guy she feels CHEAP!

[Cathryn Crawford]

A general (or inbred and culturally learned) hatred of men (whom they equal with white conservatives?) from their "intellectual peers" in the extremist education community?

Feminists have one goal, in my opinion - and that is to control women, through whatever means possible. Convincing women that men are monsters and they are powerless against them only serves to draw women closer to the feminist cause, which purportedly provides them with "power".

What the women don't understand is that they are giving up their independence, their pride, and their dignity for the convience of not having to deal with the negative feelings that resulted from their own actions. Any guilt or negative feelings get put off onto the man, and it becomes the exclusive fault of the man.

[Scenic Sounds]

The new line is no means no. Right!

I'm not sure that it's a new line, but the word "no" does have some implications with regard to the issue of consent. ;-)

[Cathryn Crawford]

I'm not sure that it's a new line, but the word "no" does have some implications with regard to the issue of consent. ;-)

Then again, so does rhinocerous. :-)

[wbill]

Good Article. "Take Back the Night" was big on our campus in the early 90s. I think that it did far more harm than good......as an engineer, I was always out late studying. I'd run into women at night, and they'd either run, or go in the other direction. Speaking solely for myself, they had as much to fear from me as they would from you, and I'd much rather make sure that they got to where they were going OK - but they'd been brainwashed into thinking that a rapist lurked behind every tree. Terrible.

We also had a splinter group on campus called WAR - "Women Against Rape". They advocated mandatory castration at birth for all men. That particular idea didn't offend me so much as the campus not only took them seriously, but also funded them with Student Fees.

I also think that the current definition of rape trivializes and minimizes what, in reality, is a despicable crime. Perhaps I'm just a chauvinist pig, but my feeling is that if you need see a counselor and ask if you've been violated....then you haven't been.

[LiteKeeper]

You da man babe - oh well, you're it!

[Scenic Sounds]

I wonder, could a male employee be psychologically forced to have sex with a powerful female executive or management type? It has been substance of court action, if memory serves.

That's true, there are civil cases dealing with sexual harassment, etc., but there can be civil liability for sexual harassment without there being any criminal rape.

[Scenic Sounds]

Then again, so does rhinocerous. :-)

Shhh! LOL.

And watch out for those double negatives:

;-)

[Servant of the Nine]

It's time to put the Liberal Clitorati down and out.

Relocating a clitorati is probably sexual harrasment.

So9

[Eowyn-of-Rohan]

what does that mean?

[Cathryn Crawford]

I did a quick search on WAR after seeing your post and found this rather...interesting list.

Any of the following unwanted behavior may constitute sexual harassment or rape:

leering

wolf whistles

discussion of ones partners sexual inadequacies

sexual innuendo

comments about womens bodies

accidentally brushing sexual parts of the body

lewd & threatening letters

tales of sexual exploitation

graphic descriptions of pornography

pressure for dates

sexually explicit gestures

unwelcome touching and hugging

sexual sneak attacks, (e.g., grabbing breasts or buttocks )

sabotaging womens work

sexist and insulting graffiti

demanding, Hey, baby, give me a smile

inappropriate invitations (e.g., hot tub)

sexist jokes and cartoons

hostile put-downs of women

exaggerated, mocking courtesy

public humiliation

obscene phone calls

displaying pornography in the workplace

insisting that workers wear revealing clothes

inappropriate gifts (ex. lingerie)

hooting, sucking, lip-smacking, & animal noises

pressing or rubbing up against the victim

sexual assault

soliciting sexual services

stalking

leaning over , invading a persons space

indecent exposure

-According to this list, a man that is pursuing a woman - i.e., asking for a date - is a harrasser or a rapist.