June 06, 2011
Thoughts On Rape Occasioned By That Big Fat Groper Strauss-Kahn
By Evert Cilliers aka Adam Ash
1. MEN RAPE FROM LUST NOT RAGE
Let me start with a facetious declaration: the only reason I'm not a potential rapist is that I'm 5' 5" and weigh a 125 pounds. Unless I go on a two-year weight-training regimen, most women would be able to fight me off successfully.
Which brings me to the point of why men rape. It's because they can. Men have physical power over women. They're bigger and stronger than their victims, so they rape them. Being pragmatic, men have availed themselves of this advantage since the dawn of man.
In fact, rape is as natural to mankind as nesting is to womankind. We may frown upon it now -- thank heavens -- but a few hundred years ago men were raping and pillaging like locusts tearing up a cornfield, which afforded them a pleasant diversion from burning women as witches or killing them not-so-softly via childbirth. Back then, men had absolute power over women; accordingly, so did their penises.
Did that mean they had anger issues with women? I don't think so. They just did what came naturally. In fact, I don't buy into the notion that men rape because they hate women. I think most rapists rape because they lust, not because they're mad at women. Of course there are some serial offenders who are psychopaths, with the empathy section of their brain MIA. But I believe rape is a different story for most Ivy League students who date-rape co-eds, or for army guys who rape fellow soldiers, or for Peace Corp volunteers who rape fellow volunteers. We're talking about thousands of nice, well-brought-up lads, who will go on to marry and have children, if they haven't done so already. I don't think they rape because they hate women, as comforting a notion as that may be to the ears of pop-psychology feminists. I think these men rape because they want a particular woman and have few qualms about forcing themselves upon that woman; they know they can get away with it. Their physical power makes them feel entitled to having their way with their lust object. Heck, they probably think they're doing their victims a favor by throwing them a boner. It's not hate or anger that makes them do it -- they just want to screw a particular female. Some of these errant bastards will do it again. Some might even make a habit of it.
2. BHL AND DSK
A prick like Dominique Strauss-Kahn has most probably been leaping on French chambermaids all his life, and gotten away with it. The mistake he made was to try and rape an African immigrant in New York, a ballsy woman who was strong enough to fight back, and who let him stick his manhood in her mouth twice after he slapped her around a bit, but in the end she escaped.
Now a leading French intellectual like BHL, who must've been aware (as France's entire elite was aware) that DSL had problems with a libido that was as reckless as a financial derivative, comes up with this nouveaux philosophes drivel:
"I do not know -- but, on the other hand, it would be nice to know, and without delay -- how a chambermaid could have walked in alone, contrary to the habitual practice of most of New York’s grand hotels of sending a 'cleaning brigade' of two people, into the room of one of the most closely watched figures on the planet."
And this:
"I hold it against all those who complacently accept the account of this other young woman, this one French, who pretends to have been the victim of the same kind of attempted rape, who has shut up for eight years but, sensing the golden opportunity, whips out her old dossier and comes to flog it on television."
Perhaps BHL should button up his vulgar shirt along with his vulgar piehole while his friend is stuck with an electronic bracelet down where Achilles got nailed by an arrow. Going by BHL's example, one wonders if the French are not a bunch of pre-ancien regime misogynist sexists, despite their celebration of fashion and perfume and Truffaut-sophisticated dialogue about l'amour fair and fou, and le plaisir of sexual joie de vivre between sensuous, sensual and consensual adults, who are free to disregard the shaky shackles of le marriage.
DSK's moneyed friends (who include BHL) and his oh-so-understanding wealthy wife are probably going to buy off his accuser with a tidy package. By all accounts DSK is a brilliant man, the great left hope against the noxious Sarkozy, and a fine globalist-economist, who has cast a suspicious eye at the camp of the Wall-Street-uber-alles Slime Masters of the Universe like Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, Alan Greenspan and their odious ilk. Still, I sincerely hope DSK ends up in a jail with some African-American cons, where his posterior will be in for a world of hurt, which he richly deserves. Then he'll experience what it's like to be on the receiving end of the power equation. Guys like him are lucky our society does not chop off their winkies, which by me is the only appropriate punishment for rape. When you have to pee through a stump for the rest of your life, you're never going to forget that you got that stump because you were a pig.
3. RAPE IS NOT A TRANSGRESSION, IT'S AN INSTITUTIONAL HABIT
Rape is a much more prevalent institutional practice than is generally acknowledged. It happens in a majority of American institutions and other institutions all over the world, wherever men and women gather. Let's face it: rape is one of the most polished pillars of the patriarchy. That's the thing about rape that most people miss: it's not a lone-wolf enterprise -- it's a cultural, institutional enterprise.
For example, the cops rape prostitutes. That's a perk of the job in every country from ours to Cambodia.
In the military, many women can expect to be raped, and when it happens, they can expect to be told not to complain.
The Catholic Church is another example. For centuries the biggest church on earth has had what they call altar boys, which is code for boys who are free to be raped by those priests who are so inclined. The Catholic Church has been a resplendently respectable refuge for rapists. Nothing works as powerfully as religion to control the young and the weak. Only in our time, and only at first in America, did this centuries-old Catholic practice come to light, a practice sanctioned by most of its popes and cardinals and bishops through the ages.
Ex-IMF chief and would-be President of France Dominique Strauss-Kahn is only one example of powerful men who force themselves upon their subordinates. There are millions of them all over the world. And not all of them are as crazy as Idi Amin, of whom I will tell you the following story. If you don't like graphic violence, skip the next two paragraphs.
My friend tells me a girlfriend of hers was at a nightclub in Kampala, Uganda with her boyfriend. Idi Amin arrives with a posse, and starts dancing with her. The boyfriend briefly objects, then goes to the bathroom. She doesn't see him again. She leaves after a few dances, and drives home. When she opens her front door, there is Idi Amin sitting in her livingroom. He calmly announces two things. Number one, he's in her home to screw her. And number two, before he does that, he wants her to get him an orange juice. So she walks to the kitchen and opens the fridge to get the juice, and sees in her fridge, staring glassily-eyed back at her, the decapitated head of her boyfriend.
What does she do? She takes Idi Amin his orange juice, she lets him screw her, repeatedly, and when she wakes up the next morning and finds that she is still alive, she goes to the airport and takes the first flight out.
That's the kind of crap women have to put up with all over the world every minute of their waking days and sleeping nights. I can tell you worse stuff, especially about rape in war. (Was your granny a German woman when the Russians overran East-Germany in WW2? Was your great-granny a Chinese woman in Nanking when the Japanese took the city? Do you have a daughter in Congo?). But for now I'll spare us our delicate American sensibilities. Jon Stewart likes to make skull-f*ck jokes all the time, but he and me and his viewers wouldn't laugh if we came across the real thing.
Then there are young men all over the world who rape women: call them the institution of young bucks. I have a friend who is a barman, who's worked in a number of our American states, and he told me that there is guaranteed to be at least one young dude on any evening in every bar in the land who tries to slip a roofie into a chick's drink so he can shtup her later when she doesn't know what's happening to her. As an expert, my barman friend regularly spots these vagina jockeys, night after night, and what he does is alert the offender's friends, who usually take their friend outside and kick the crap out of him. If there is one potential rapist in every bar in the land on every evening, we're talking about millions of young-buck rapists.
One of my girlfriends once said to me, you know, you're the first boyfriend I've had that I'm not scared of -- the first one by whom I don't feel physically threatened. What do you mean, I asked -- I'm the first boyfriend you've had that you know won't hit you or anything? Yes, she said, that's exactly what I mean. Imagine that: this woman, who was in her thirties, had always lived in fear of the guys who loved her.
In fact, being a man, I have no idea what it's like to live with the fear of being raped. Besides going to prison, where men get raped -- and where you probably get used to being someone's bitch -- the closest thing to dreading rape that I can imagine would be a society in which penile amputation was a traditional custom, so that when you leave your home in the morning you'll be thinking that this might very well be the day that your willy gets abbreviated (if you instinctively wanted to cover your crotch while you were reading the above, you've got a smidgen of an inkling of a notion of what it might be like to be a woman).
4. FIVE OF MY GIRLFRIENDS WERE RAPE SURVIVORS WHEN I MET THEM
Of the eight or so serious girlfriends I've had, five have told me that they were raped when they were younger. One had to let an abortion doctor screw her before she got her illegal abortion from him. One was raped by her cousin while her mother was in the room next door. One was gang-raped by her boyfriend's four friends, an evening's entertainment arranged by her boyfriend. One was raped by an actual psychopath, who had an axe with which he threatened to kill her and her kid. He raped her repeatedly, and she got out alive by, Sheherezade-style, talking-talking-talking with him, until he finally left in the morning. He ended up behind bars; the others did not because they were not reported.
In South Africa, where I come from, rape is a cultural institution. Most boys experience their first sex by coercing a girl, and most girls are coerced out of their maidenhood. (Here in America, girls as young as twelve and thirteen give blowjobs to get out of having to screw boys, and because our sexualized culture and peer pressure force them to believe it would be uncool not to do it.) In South Africa a few years ago, grown men went on baby-raping sprees when there was a folkloric belief that this could cure you of AIDS. A white woman in South Africa who was gang-raped by a bunch of black teenage boys caused quite a stir when she wrote that the boys were out for an evening of fun, and that they enjoyed themselves. This didn't fit the feminist notion that rapists hate and detest women, and the victim was roundly abused by feminists for writing the truth. Just goes to show -- women might suffer as much from the aftermath of the rape as they do from the rape itself. Which is one reason why so many don't report any rape. And irony of ironies, they might even suffer at the hands of their sister feminists.
And then there are cultures in which a rape victim is murdered by her family because she is believed to have brought shame upon them.
5. IS THERE ANY SOLUTION TO THE CRIME OF RAPE?
I think the crime of rape will remain a huge and undisclosed problem everywhere until it is included in middle school sex ed in a way that I have no idea how it could be included --and if feminism not only flowers into the most powerful force on earth, but becomes as quotidian as jeans and as natural as water. Meanwhile, it would help if the crime itself is regarded as just about as heinous as murder. When I grew up in South Africa, the standard punishment for rape was execution. In one celebrated case, two white guys who were being prosecuted for serial rape got bail, and used their bail time to rape another woman. They ended up hanging by the neck until they were very dead.
I don't like the idea of capital punishment for anything -- not even a terrorist act that kills hundreds -- but I did not feel very sorry for these guys or their families when I read that they were dead. I acknowledge that's a dire chink in the liberal armor of civilization I affect to wear, but there it is. Some atavistic revulsion at the thought of a stronger person taking advantage of a weaker person makes me want to see the stronger person dead. Not very noble of me, but what can one do when, like Godzilla from the deep, one's reptile brain rears its ugly head?
Rape itself is an atavistic, reptilian practice. It's a way for even the most powerless man to exercise power over another human. It's freakily basic and quotidian to the testicular nature of man. Maybe that's why it elicits such atavistic feelings: Look, she wanted it! Hey, they should cut off his dick! It wouldn't have happened if she hadn't worn a miniskirt!
Rape is one of those ugly things that most of us can't think through calmly. Myself, I can sit through the most violent movie imaginable, and I have. But when there's a rape scene in a film, I look away. I find it totally distressing. I just saw a movie about what happened in Nanking, and it freaked me out beyond endurance. Yet many women who've been raped -- like my rape-survivor girlfriends -- pick up their shattered pieces, knit them together, and live on.
I think this speaks to something deeply heroic in women that men can only fantasize about. Men can't be the heroes that women are. Ever. Not by a chalk as long as the phallic symbol of a space elevator. By that I don't necessarily mean that ours would be a better world if it were run by women (although I think it would be, despite Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi not being my favorite world leaders). By that I mean to ask: what would a man do if he were in a women's shoes? I know what I'd do. I'd go get me a gun and kill my assailant. I'd be tempted to walk around with a gun all the time, and any time a man made unwanted advances or remarks, I'd be wanting to answer him with a bullet in his crotch.
Most women don't do that. They grin and bear it. They put up with the crap that men give them on a daily basis. They navigate the patriarchy. They move on, day after day. I think that's nothing less than flat-out heroic.
6. RAPISTS ARE RAISED BY MOMS
Someone always brings up this point, so I'll bring it up myself: rapists and sexists are raised by mothers. What exactly does this mean: that testosterone dooms too many men, despite their nurturing at the hand and breast of a woman? I don't know. But listen, if you're a man, dip your head politely in the presence of a woman at least once a day, just so your psyche can marinate itself in a habit of respect. And if you're a woman, hold your head high, as bloody high as you can. For that matter, hold your nose high, too: most guys don't deserve any better.
If the truth be told, a majority of men are pigs in one way or another. It's not a very comfortable truth, but it's nonetheless as true as the fact that a woman in South Africa has a better chance of being raped than learning how to read; as true as the fact that one in three American women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime; as true as the fact that only 16% of rapes are reported to our cops; and as true as the fact that if DSK had become President of France, he wouldn't have changed his ways one wicked bit. In fact, he would've been worse. For sure.
Because let's face it, folks. Power corrupts the penis. And absolute power corrupts the penis absolutely.
Posted by Evert Cilliers at 09:32 AM | Permalink






















Comments
Still, I sincerely hope DSK ends up in a jail with some African-American cons, where his posterior will be in for a world of hurt, which he richly deserves.
You left out the most important points, Cilliers:
7. EVERT CILLIERS THINKS THAT BAD PEOPLE DESERVE TO BE RAPED
8. RAPE IS FUNNY WHEN IT HAPPENS IN PRISONS
9. OLD MEN BEING RAPED IS HILARIOUS
Way to establish your moral authority, Cilliers! Now I'm sure we're all very much interested in the things you have to say about the problem of rape.
Jackass.
Posted by: Picador | Jun 6, 2011 10:47:06 AM
The only person being raped is DSK by this worthless article and the media and the corrupt New York District Attorney who willfully violates the U.S. Constitution. The 6th Amendment demands that all criminal defendants shall face their accusers in court, but she was again not present this morning at the sham hearing, nor was she present at earlier ones. She is being protected and likely paid by the corrupt city of New York.
Her lawyer stated she is not working, so who is supporting her? Who is paying her ambulance chasing lawyer and what does she need one for anyway if everything she is quoted as saying is true?
It is too bad the corrupt New York DA didn't spend as much time prosecuting the perverted priests in the Catholic Church as they are with DSK.
I hope the author of this garbage here finds himself in the same situation one day.
Just remember this could happen to any of you too. You could be gang raped by the media just like DSK is.
Posted by: Winfield J. Abbe | Jun 6, 2011 11:11:18 AM
Refreshing to see a feminist drop the rape-is-about-power-not-sex bullshit.
Posted by: Sister Y | Jun 6, 2011 11:22:18 AM
Sounds like Evert got caught watching porn again.
Posted by: Bystander | Jun 6, 2011 1:20:05 PM
Thank you, Evert.
Posted by: Zara | Jun 6, 2011 1:46:31 PM
A highly related horrible fact: 1 in 200 men is a direct lineal descendant of Genghis Khan (i.e., carries his Y chromosome). How many of those do you think got there consensually - especially in the first few generations of transmission?
Posted by: Sister Y | Jun 6, 2011 1:57:12 PM
Man, has 3QD jumped the shark, or what? Just last week I recommended this site to a friend. Having read this rant, which is about as interesting as being cornered in a bar by a drunken spittle-spewing idiot, I can safely say: never again.
Posted by: Ted | Jun 6, 2011 4:18:05 PM
What Ted said.
I thought about stopping when I got to "In fact, rape is as natural to mankind as nesting is to womankind" but kept going, motivated by some perverse desire to see how bad this wreck of an essay would get. And it got very bad indeed.
Little of this mess merits the respect of a serious engagement, but perhaps the author would answer one question: since rape is "natural" to men, can we safely assume that you would, in fact, be a "potential rapist" if not for your diminutive size?? That perhaps it is only your size that keeps you from engaging in what is "natural"? This seems to me to say far more about your desires than about the way a great many of the rest of us, perhaps even a majority, relate to the women we encounter in our lives. That, plus the narcissism of believing that you are some rare and special--perhaps even unique--exception to the "testicular nature of man," makes me glad to not be one of the women in your life.
Posted by: giotto | Jun 6, 2011 5:40:43 PM
I just wrote what I felt, hoping to stir up whoever.
And so it came to pass. Duck, cover.
I will always be prepared to make a jackass of myself, go where no one dares to go, get egg on my face.
I don't think I'm rare and special -- I think I'm a typical horse's ass.
One thing I'm not, and that is precious. Though I think there are a few too many precious, prissy 3QD readers, arbiters of PC taste, whom I delight to upset.
So OMG, I've done it again. My advice: do come back to 3QD, just give anything by me a wide berth.
Yours in frequent shark-jumping,
Adam Ash.
P.S. Bit busy at the mo, so will get round to engaging y'all individually tomorrow. Until then, sorry I upset you.
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 6, 2011 6:39:08 PM
Hey, he also left out
10. IT'S NOT RAPE IF SHE DOESN'T FIGHT BACK
Can we vote him off the site?
Posted by: Sagredo | Jun 6, 2011 9:08:49 PM
Too funny how men are angry at Evert for this essay and women are pleased. Among the male commenters here, I know and like Picador, Giotto and Sagredo -- I don't think I have interested with the remaining ones. So, guys, if comments are divided quite neatly by gender in this space, does that suggest anything to you? Not being snarky, merely wish to know your thoughts.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jun 6, 2011 9:57:23 PM
Elatia, are you in the "angry" or "pleased" camp?
Posted by: Sagredo | Jun 6, 2011 10:18:27 PM
Elatia:
Here is what a woman wrote me after she found my email address in order to write to me personally:
"your article about rape in 3qsdaily
Is superb
"I posted the link on fb & told my friends that if they were male & if they refused to read this article from beginning to end, they should unfriend me at once.
"If only this were taught in school, at home, at MacDonalds.
"We live in a sick culture, still."
It never occurred to me that the objectors were all male, but now that you've pointed it out, I wonder if I should even deign to reply to their malish mulish comments. I'll think about it.
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 7, 2011 12:52:38 AM
Elatia, this article does not anger me. It is disappointing, as I expect higher standards here on 3QD, but it does not anger. As I said before, it does not merit serious engagement; it is, at best, a cartoonish presentation of a tragically important issue, filled with unsupported and unsupportable hyperbole.
Let me go back to what was, for me, the first sign that this was going to be not worth reading: "In fact, rape is as natural to mankind as nesting is to womankind." Do you, Elatia, agree with both sides of that statement? Are you suggesting that I have problems with that sentence's incredibly obtuse essentialism only because I am a male? Would you suggest that it is proper for women to NOT have problems with such essentialist claims? Is there, perhaps, something essential in women that makes them susceptible to essentialist arguments?? Or something essential in men that make us heedlessly trip over essentialism's profound truths? Is it, perhaps the same essential thing that makes us all rapists, that makes us all decapitate women's boyfriends' heads and display them in refrigerators?? Of course, Elatia, I suspect that you know as well or better than I do that essentialism has been an incredibly influential and controversial theme in feminist theory. I don't get the sense, however, that Evert Cilliers is aware of that. An essay in which essentialism is the core concept really should acknowledge, at least in passing, that these are complex issues that are by no means settled. By failing to do so the author has consigned himself to floundering in the deep end of the pool.
Posted by: giotto | Jun 7, 2011 1:36:39 AM
Oh, come now, Giotto:
I wrote a provocative statement to provoke the crap out of all men: for you now to get all academic and accuse me of essentialism, which I am very well aware of, is to show that your maleness gets defensive at the slightest opportunity.
Don't be so sensitive, dude: enjoy the statement for its polemic sweepingness.
I did not write a paper for in some academic journal: I wrote a rant, a polemic, a piece laden with sarcasm and hyperbole, a full frontal attack on men and their attitudes. SARCASM and HYPERBOLE, get it?
So now you're all hurt and bent out of shape -- oy, poor Giotto, my heart bleeds for you.
Women read my intent; men don't. Therein lies a world of difference. I don't think it's the job of women to bridge that difference. For all I know, they're might be sick and tired of it. I think it's the job of men to bridge that difference, so why don't you chaps start now? It's never too late to wake up, guys. I'm still half asleep myself.
All the best, Giotto, I still love you because your read 3QD.
Yours,
Evert aka Adam aka Very-Bad-Boy-Essentialist-Oh-He-Needs-a-Spanking-for- -Sure-Well-OK-Me-Hearties-Take-Your-Best-Shots-and-Do-Defend-DSK-Because-He's-Innocent-Until-Proven-Guilty-As-for-the-Hotel-Maid-She's-Guilty-Until-Proven-Innocent
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 7, 2011 2:15:27 AM
I agree that rape in and of itself is not primarily an act of violence but a deplorable attempt at slaking one's lust. The perception of violence or hatred in all cases of rape has perplexed me.
The author, however, does not defend his claim that "rape is as natural to mankind as nesting is to womankind" with anything more than an appeal to his specious common sense. He could have linked us to discussions of rape research in evolutionary psychology but didn't either because a) he is ignorant of such research (unlikely); b) he knows about it but didn't want to field questions regarding its validity; or c) that bit of rationality would have softened his polemic too much.
The sweeping, ill-founded generalization that rape is natural to men, plus pretty much everything Picador said, plus the puerile attempt at upsetting the readership, makes this article a disappointment. The author could have better articulated his generalization and at least tried to support it with evidence but didn't do so because he wanted to look edgy. A chance for productive discussion was lost--or rather, discarded--on one of the most engaging sites I regularly visit.
Posted by: S | Jun 7, 2011 2:21:41 AM
Dear Mr. Ash,
You're absolutely right to believe that women get your intent. For those who don't, they will find any holes to punch through because that reality is just too harsh; the rape scene in the movie is just too loud.
Thank you for your rant. I am currently working with a sex workers' collective in India and I feel the gravity of the problem everyday, but the denial is even heavier. You recognize the bravery of women and an issue that women are forced to sweep under the rugs of brothels, college dorms, bars, childhood homes, and work places.
Please continue to write your truth. However it comes out! It is much needed and appreciated.
Sincerely,
Kat
Posted by: Kat | Jun 7, 2011 4:28:33 AM
Dear Kat,
Thank you muchly.
I shall continue to upset the applecart here at 3QD, as I have on almost every outing. Dem apples will keep on rollin'. I sincerely hope more men attack me; their inability at self-examination is somewhat amusing (besides of course being rather tiresome, but gadzooks, that's my gender, folks).
Myself, I'm disappointed that they're so resolutely disappointed. As was pointed out during the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas controversy, they just don't get it.
I salute you for your work, Kat.
Yours in truth & gonzo ranting,
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 7, 2011 5:19:26 AM
Cilliers writes: -- I think these men rape because they want a particular woman and have few qualms about forcing themselves upon that woman; they know they can get away with it. --
A man who rapes for that reason is absolutely raping for power and not sex. Plenty of human beings want things, but not everyone takes what they want just because they can.
Whenever we believe we can act to fulfill our wants whatever the cost to others, that is a statement about power and privilege, not lust.
Lust merely selects the target, be it a woman, a car, or the top position in a company. "I do it because I can" is the mantra of Wall street inside traders, rogue CEOs, dictators, the colleague that back stabs you, and rapists alike.
Posted by: Elizabeth@IfsheCryOut | Jun 7, 2011 5:36:15 AM
Elizabeth:
I actually had a line about the non-accountability raping of women and the non-accountability pillaging of humanity by Wall Street et al, but I took it out.
You're spot on -- it's the same exercise of power, whoever the victims are.
I just happen to think that lust drives the rape power thing more than anyone recognizes. So to me it's about sex first, power second.
We disagree, but I'm happy to disagree with you ... and less happy to make room for the whining by men on this comment thread about me saying that raping is as natural to mankind as nesting is to womankind.
The symmetry of this sentence pleases me no end: the fact that it is a rabid overstatement pleases me less, but if it upsets a few lads out there, I'm happy to cause that upset. Hearing men whine in their privileged state has always amused me.
If a few more men experience plaintiveness as their default state of mind, it's all to the good of humankind, in my humble yet often errant view.
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 7, 2011 9:27:54 AM
Do you ever wonder what the likes of DSK, or even less guilty inhabitants of that culture of impunity, teach their daughters about what to expect from men? It is exactly the picture Evert has painted. The counterpart of "She asked for it" for their daughters is: "don't put yourself in a dangerous position."
Posted by: Zara | Jun 7, 2011 11:38:23 AM
Some men are rapists; others wind up with their head in a refrigerator. I hate all violent and aggressive people, whether male or female. Women are not all saints, either. Remember that DSK's wife was proud of her husband's sexual aggressiveness.
Posted by: J.Hawkins | Jun 7, 2011 12:22:35 PM
(Sorry, I wrote above "not interested with" when I mean "not interacted with" -- I am interested in all our readers.)
Now, about rape being a sex thing, not a power thing. I have researched this, but it's all in pre-Internet storage across town, so I cannot oblige with sourcing. If that were entirely so, only hot babes would suffer rape. As it is, rapists are most likely to go after women of all ages who look easy to victimize -- elderly women fumbling for house keys, women in psychiatric wards in "restraints," women with mobility challenges or physical handicaps making self-defense difficult, women who are alone. And, in the case of date-rape or friend-rape -- are these women big turn-ons? No, but the amount of trust and familiarity they feel with the man who rapes them, perhaps after drugging them, disarms them; they are not willing victims, but unsuspecting ones -- raping them is not harder than stealing the purse of a woman who isn't clutching it.
Okay, how sexy is this? Most men and women would say it's not. But what about how sexy it is for the rapist? It's likely not great for him -- the vast majority of rapists don't ejaculate. This is one reason why they beat their victims up, or kill them, afterwards. Because they've risked much, and it hasn't been any good.
I infer from this that rape is about dominion and rage. But these things have intimately to do with sex, for some men. For the probable next president of France to chase down a West African hotel maid is a display of such asymmetry in power relations as to suggest that women in no strong position to fight back are sexy to him.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jun 7, 2011 12:35:21 PM
Elatia, I suspect there is a difference between rapists that we have come to recognize as pathological, which you describe, and the opportunist, "because I could get away with it" rapists that are much more creatures of a culture that sees rape as normal. I don't know if it's a difference of degree or kind.
Posted by: Zara | Jun 7, 2011 12:42:55 PM
If that were entirely so, only hot babes would suffer rape.
Um, I don't think that passes even minimal economic analysis. If that were true, only hot babes would get hit on. As it is, dudes hit on all types of women who look like they might be willing.
Rational actors try to maximize their expected payoff, which includes minimizing expected bad consequences.
Posted by: Sister Y | Jun 7, 2011 1:03:37 PM
Oh, but good news: rape has been steadily declining since 1979 (at least in the U.S.).
Posted by: Sister Y | Jun 7, 2011 1:05:48 PM
Sister Y, you haven't disproved my contention. If sexual pleasure with someone hot were driving rape, then calendar girls would be disproportionately raped. As it is, women who make the easiest victims are the targets. That's understandable, especially in light of how little sexual pleasure a rapist stands to experience. Attractive women do get hit on more -- that's quite different from rape.
Zara, you have a great big point. I hope people are reading. It's the difference between impulse shoplifting and home invasion. Not that shoplifting is okay.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jun 7, 2011 1:27:30 PM
Zara, your distinction between pathological and opportunistic rapists is great.
I would like to add the notion of institutional rape to your distinction, though -- the way cops rape prostitutes, priests rape boys, army men rape army women, etc. -- there is an institutional bias that makes it easier for opportunists to avail themselves of opportunities -- and I believe, encourages them to take advantage of opportunities.
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 7, 2011 2:24:40 PM
You don't have to accept my reasoning, but your facts are wrong. Here's a recent paper that explains, summarizes, and cites the research that, in fact, "hot babes" (the most fertile women) are most likely to be raped.
It's evolution all the way down . . .
Posted by: Sister Y | Jun 7, 2011 2:30:14 PM
(The paper linked above also gives empirical support for Zara's distinction.)
Posted by: Sister Y | Jun 7, 2011 2:33:06 PM
The most lucid theory of malicious acts I've come across is that they are motivated by two things: greed and envy, sometimes mixed together. Applying this to rape, we might imagine the "greedy rapist", who wants sex regardless of lack of consent or of the suffering it causes, and the "envious rapist", who wants to hurt his victim, to bring them down, and uses rape to do so. Perhaps this corresponds to Zara's distinction?
Posted by: Sagredo | Jun 7, 2011 3:09:26 PM
Well, it's more nuanced than this, Sister Y, but the paper seems to suggest that rape is at the X-treme end of what goes on anyway, in circs where no criminal behavior is present. Is this, then, the most tenable thesis? If it's only evolution, then both women who become pregnant any way they can, licit or not, and men who rape, thereby diffusing their sperm no matter how many women don't want it, are equal -- not nice, but responding to very deep and undeniable imperatives. Am I missing something?
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jun 7, 2011 3:22:03 PM
Harms having similar etiology does not necessarily mean they have similar wrongness or badness.
Posted by: Sister Y | Jun 7, 2011 3:28:16 PM
Sister Y:
There's something odd about this "hot babes get raped the most" meme -- it sounds suspiciously like blaming the victim to me. I know one of my sisters became fat so she wouldn't get hit on by all the men who frequented the restaurant she ran, so she took defensive measures to get out of the exhausting existence of hot-babes-get-hit-upon tiresomeness.
Which would support your theory that you believe is supported by research.
But what did the researchers do? Decide who's hot and who's not? I would question the validity of this research on many criteria, but because it smacks of "she shouldn't have dressed so provocatively" i.e. "she shouldn't have been so sexy, it's her fault for being so hot" -- the whole research project leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Who did the research? Who were the women in their sample(s)? Etc. etc. What did the researches do? Did they ask dudes, hey, who would you rather rape?
Given that most research paid for by big pharma is mostly BS, you'd have to explain to me at length how this research was conducted. And don't tell me I should click on the link -- I'd like to see you explain it.
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 7, 2011 3:38:02 PM
Peak age of fertility (20s).
Blaming the victim? For being hot? Just because a fact "sounds suspiciously like" something noxious doesn't mean it is. Like if homosexuality were proven to be a choice, that wouldn't make it okay to ban gay marriage or such bullshit.
(Actually, there's also a set of evidence that more pregnancy-causing rape, like vaginal intercourse and intercourse with ejaculation, is more traumatizing to reproductive-age victims than other kinds of rape, which accords with the evobio hypothesis. I'd encourage you to read the paper, because there are more bodies of evidence supporting the evolutionary origin and sexual nature of rape than just the "hot babes get raped" idea.)
Here's a really sad study on what happened to your sister (albeit a little more extreme): Childhood rape linked to weight gain in females
Another thing: sexual coercion doesn't just happen in humans - it happens in insects, amphibians, birds, primates . . . tons of species. I doubt diving beetles get off on exerting power over other diving beetles.
Posted by: Sister Y | Jun 7, 2011 3:58:54 PM
Very interesting, Sister Y.
I shall have to eat my words and follow the link.
Thank you for your forbearance in indulging me.
Yes, I know it's more traumatizing for the unwilling victim to have the seed of the enemy dumped on her ovaries. That's one reason why men rape in war -- it's the final humiliation to get a woman with your enemy child.
They did that in the former Yugoslavia, they do that in Congo. The woman might end up being rejected by her own people, because she is bearing the child of their enemy.
What a sick, sick, world we live in, with many sick, sick, sick male puppies.
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 7, 2011 4:21:45 PM
Evert, Zara and Sister Y (and others still with us),
Are we in territory where rape performed by truly desperate men is akin to food theft by people who would starve if they did not steal? Some blame attaches to rape, in a moral universe, but no less than Fr. Ted Hesburgh said that "following the food" is not an immoral thing to do, if you have to take it from people who will give you none, when your need is great and their plenty is unquestionable. Assuming the evolutionary explanation is the last word on why men rape fertile women, then why don't all men rape them? And why rape any other kind? Finally, does a man die because he does not rape? Or just die symbolically through knowing his sperm is staying put?
Evert, I imagine that little could be more humiliating to vanquished men than to see their women raped, but don't you think the victorious group is annexing the vanquished population by impregnating its women? Making Romans where there were Sabines, etc. Historically they have won the right to that, if women are chattel.
None of this answers the most interesting question: what's to be done?
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jun 7, 2011 6:03:38 PM
Elatia, Adam Jones has some background on the gendered stages of rape and genocide in war, with studies of many cases. The general pattern is this: first the invaders kill the defending army, then they slaughter male civilians, and then they rape female civilians. So the vanquished men typically aren't around to be humiliated.
Posted by: Sagredo | Jun 7, 2011 6:22:08 PM
"...their inability at self-examination is somewhat amusing"
There we go again, implying all men have ever desired to rape someone. Stop doing that.
Posted by: S | Jun 7, 2011 6:47:15 PM
Very interesting, Sagredo -- thanks! And thanks to Giotto, far upstream, for addressing my question.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jun 7, 2011 7:06:19 PM
S:
A lack of self-examination does not mean that those men who lack self-examination desire to rape someone. Are you out of your mind?
A distinct minority of men desire to rape and I imagine an even smaller minority actually do it (except maybe in war time, when a sizable part of an Army could suffer from a rape psychosis, like the rough-hewn Russian peasant lads who were recruited into the Russian army, or like the Japanese in Nanking, or like the Japanese with their Korean comfort women).
It would be interesting if someone came up with the figures, but my guess is that it's less than one in a hundred or a thousand who ever thinks about it, and less than one in a thousand or ten thousand or a hundred thousand who actually does it.
A distinct minority of priests rape boys, for example, even if the church as a whole, from the Pope on down, acts to protect them and keep them out of jail.
Stop impugning all kinds of crap to me because you're stuck on the wrong side of the argument. Stop being so sensitive. Grow some thicker skin. What are you going to accuse me of next? That I masturbate with razor blades?
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 7, 2011 8:32:01 PM
No justice on earth until there is justice for women
Posted by: Louise Gordon | Jun 8, 2011 12:04:33 AM
Damn, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that 3 of the first 4 comments to this essay were written not to praise the writer's refreshing honesty and insight but to spew hatred at him (for exposing their secrets?)
As a man who grew up with three sisters, I would take it as confirmation that this slash at the truth struck bone, and add my enthusiastic applause.
Posted by: melior | Jun 8, 2011 3:19:15 AM
Melior:
Got three sisters myself.
Yours in sisterly comity,
Evert aka Adam.
P.S. Got a gay brother, too. Grew up with all my anti-het bases covered.
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 8, 2011 8:18:05 AM
NOTE TO ALL MY MALE CRITICS:
I've loved the spirited debate occasioned by your outrage. It's been a gas. And if I've wounded your tender male feelings in the piece or in the comments, so be it. You'll live.
Meanwhile, keep working on your essay for the Outer Hebrides Scholarly Journal, you know, the one entitled: "The New Masculine: A Derrida Reading of Richard Ford's 'The Sportswriter.'"
Remember, I still love you, because you read 3QD.
Best,
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 8, 2011 9:42:46 AM
Meanwhile, keep working on your essay for the Outer Hebrides Scholarly Journal, you know, the one entitled: "The New Masculine: A Derrida Reading of Richard Ford's 'The Sportswriter.'"
One of the best comments on 3QD ... ever!
Posted by: Ruchira | Jun 8, 2011 10:02:08 AM
Evert,
First you write that "rape is as natural to mankind as nesting is to womankind", and now you write "A distinct minority of men desire to rape and I imagine an even smaller minority actually do it". So which is it?
Posted by: J. Hawkins | Jun 8, 2011 10:17:38 AM
J. Hawkins:
Back in the day, like 19th century and further back, I think there might have been great validity to my line, though I put it there simply to provoke folks and also because I thought the symmetry of the line was beautiful (art above truth!). Now, these days in America, we've been enculturated to the point that it is no longer true on a cerebellum level for most men, even if it may be true on a reptilian level (the "natural" id level of my offending statement), brought out by war and such.
So yes, I don't think American men are a bunch of potential rapists en masse to the man anymore. And I hope the percentages are as low as my unfounded guesses.
At the same time, I think it would be quite right for most women to fear most men, because you never know what some drunken lout, or not even a drunken lout, might feel himself entitled to do. Ivy League students with the most illustrious backgrounds date rape. Wasn't there a Kennedy who was on trial for rape? Etcetera.
Since 5 out of my 8 or so girlfriends have been raped in their younger days, I sometimes wonder how many of my male friends have ever been rapists.
Evert aka Adam.
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 8, 2011 12:17:27 PM
Wow. What a lot of ink spilled over such a grimy little screed.
Evert, for all the self-satisfaction you show in your comments here, I haven't seen you respond to anything I wrote in the first comment that kicked this off.
Here's the excerpt, one more time:
Still, I sincerely hope DSK ends up in a jail with some African-American cons, where his posterior will be in for a world of hurt, which he richly deserves.
I didn't even bother unpacking the repulsive racism on display in this little gem. (Exactly what work is "African-American" doing in that sentence, Evert? We're all dying to know.) Instead, all I did was problematize your endorsement of prison rape. Still no response.
Posted by: Picador | Jun 8, 2011 12:37:28 PM
OK, Picador, darling, here we go again.
I'm sincerely sorry that I come off as self-satisfied. If I do, that is a big failure in me as a human being, and I apologize for being that kind of a dickhead.
What I really am, what you really don't get, my dear Picador, is that I'm so angry I could eat the fur off a rat. Maybe your girlfriends weren't raped when they were young, or your sister nearly raped twice, so you can sit in your privileged manhood and not be angry. Lucky you.
What is African-American doing in that sentence? I'll tell you what: because I figure African-American cons will avenge themselves because one of their own, an African-American lady, was attacked and humiliated by a honky Frog entitled serial groper bastard who thought a black maid was there as fodder for his appetite.
You live by the sword, be prepared to die by the sword.
I don't condone prison rape, it's ugly, and it's ugly that the wardens allow it to happen, and it's ugly that this is what happens in the world of men where they're incarcerated. It's an ugly fact of life, and the idea behind writing that line was a warning to every man who thinks he can get away with anything ... that this is the fate that awaits men if they break the law.
Of course, the reality is that if DSK ever goes to jail, it will be to one of those Connecticut jails where all the big rich Wall Street white-collar criminals go, where they can play tennis and all.
We have two Americas, the elite and rest of us, even when it comes to jail. No equality whatsoever.
I have a friend who knew a big-time marijuana dealer who was in one of those jails with Ivan Boesky and crew. This dope dealer said he played poker and tennis all day with these Wall Street insider traders and what with the hot stock tips he got, he made more money in jail than he ever did from his dope dealing out of jail.
Any more question, Picador? Or what thesis are you working on? "The Suppressed Male Shadow: A Jungian Rebuttal to Sylvia Plath's 'Daddy'"?
I still love you, Picador, because you read 3QD.
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 8, 2011 1:18:14 PM
Evert,
The only surprising thing is that the elite turned against one of their own, when they normally would have hushed it up. From this I suspect that the elite bankers want to choose someone even more compliant at this year's Bilderberg.
Posted by: J.Hawkins | Jun 8, 2011 1:35:31 PM
Ok, so reading all these comments about how well the article was written or what similes and just how many classical comparisons Cilliers made, really pisses me off. Who gives s hit? The man is talking about rape, and the fact that our society not only denies its profound consequences but the fact that many guys don't really have an issue with it.
Now before you get all puffed up and defensive, let me clarify: whenever I mention domestic violence, or rape comes up in conversation, they find some way to blow it off or change the subject. Not to say they're all intending to go out and rape tons of women, but down playing rape is the equivalent or saying "Oh, well, here's a band aid to put on that scratch. Next time you should be more careful." And then a little pat on the head.
Women deny it too. I'm a freshman at college, and there is a particular frat house that is known for ruffie-ing at least two girls per party. They usually are gang banged and contract herpes or some other disease. You know what happens next? Girls still show up to the party, the frat is still not shut down, and those victims are now labeled as sluts. Big, herpied up sluts.
The worst part is that it has become something of a joke. Gamers who are winning on Call of Duty or HALO, call it "owning", "raping", "reaming" or making other players "take it". Christ, sometimes I catch myself saying the same thing. Most of my friends are guys, and whenever there's a full car, guess who is called on to ride bitch? Me. Unless I get all "pissy and PMS-y" do I get out of it.
So, yeah, I think guys should quit getting all defensive about this article and simply say: wow, I am so lucky that I don't have to worry about rape in the office or by a professor, or my uncle. You will never have to appease your date with a BJ so he won't threaten to force sex on you. Wow. you are so lucky.
Posted by: gigi | Jun 8, 2011 4:58:29 PM
Gigi,
Here's a facetious suggestion: Take a few garden shears and enter that frat house when they're all passed out and wreak some excellent damage. You'll be world-famous in a day, you'll get 3 years at most in jail, where you'll be voted Queen of the Jail the second you enter, OR maybe if you get a jury and judge of your peers -- women -- you'll get a suspended sentence, and whatever the outcome, the world of women and a whole lot of men like me will bow our heads and curtsy when you walk by.
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 8, 2011 5:45:30 PM
Your claim to fame which you use repeatedly to get away with quite alot of obscenity, ugliness through words seems to rest on being in the proximity of women who were raped or nearly raped. So having dated five women who were raped--now is a badge of honor which you flaunt and put on exhibit and it seems to have given you a moral righteousness, a borrowed mantle of a victim and a licence to say whatever you like, leaping to judgements and condemnations-- and also yes racist. Interesting.
Posted by: Bano | Jun 8, 2011 6:46:28 PM
Bano,
I don't wear my proximity to rape survivors as a badge of honor.
Maybe in your offended mind, but not in my own mind. It's just that I like to write from direct experience, anecdotally as they say, not from an ivory tower, or from the high horse you just rode in on, that you will probably ride off into the wilderness of your self-delusion.
Your hatred for me is telling, I must say. Because you're not man enough to deal with my arguments, you gleefully pounce on my use of rude words, and like to call my prejudice against privileged white males racism. Being a privilege white male myself, I'm happy to be a racist against my own kind.
Bano, sweetheart, darling, dear, I just love it when guys like you launch these ad hominem attacks from behind the safety of their internet nom de plumes. Interesting.
And I still love you, because you read 3QD.
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 8, 2011 9:26:36 PM
Thank you, Elatia, I like you too. In answer to your original question, I don't think the guys are objecting to what Evert has to say about the rape and suffering of women, or defending DSK or BHL (well, besides Winifred). Rather I and I think Picador and J. Hawkins object to what he has to say about the rape and suffering of men. This is something women might be less likely to pick up on.
For instance, men in prison apparently "get used to being someone's bitch". Do women get used to being raped? The usual strategy for vulnerable men in prison is something called "protective pairing", which is essentially chosing one rapist to protect you from the others. HRW has an interesting report on the topic:
Surely this is the strong taking advantage of the weak? But for some reason it doesn't trigger the same kind of atavistic reptilian revulsion in Evert. A very "ugly" business which he doesn't condone, we are reassured, but somehow not the same: these "punks" are not the heroes women are, nor worthy of dipping ones head politely in their presence in recognition of holding it together while being raped daily for many years. But perhaps this is because they are criminals, or because anal rape is not as serious as vaginal rape, not being reproductive and all. Or because hey, they get used to it.
For instance, after a particularly horrifying story from a friend of a friend of Evert's, we are told
By "crap", Evert can only mean getting one's head cut off and placed in a refrigerator. I mean, that's surely the greater horror, on balance? And one can only imagine how they extracted her address from him. But no, that detail is only there in this story to sharpen up the woman's suffering.
For instance, I have no doubt rape in war and genocide is as bad as Evert suggests. But as I mentioned earlier, men bear the brunt of suffering from our fellow men in war, always. They rape the women after they've first killed the men. Your great-grandad probably wasn't a Chinese man in Nanking when the Japanese took the city, unless he was lucky. Men are expendable in wartime.
--
Here's a somewhat related issue that bothers me (I'm not sure about other folks):
Most people are like this. I am too. Actually, our reaction to the rape scene is not noteworthy. Being totally distressed by representations of rape is entirely appropriate and expected for anyone with any compassion. What is noteworthy is not being bothered by all the other kinds of violence. A more extreme form of this dissonance comes from those who are upset by metaphoric verbal references to rape while identifying with a first-person-view player character inflicting all kinds of other violence depicted in state-of-the-art software fidelity.
But maybe there are reasons for this. Perhaps the rapist is threatening in a way the killer is not. Perhaps killing is easier to watch because the it's shown as justifiable or understandable or at least somehow necessary within the killer's logic, while rape can never have any justification. Perhaps we are reacting to suffering rather than death, since everyone dies eventually anyway. But I think it's worth examining why images of violence (besides rape) are so normal and unremarkable in media and culture.
Posted by: Sagredo | Jun 9, 2011 1:38:51 AM
Great points, Sagredo. You are right about prison rape, and I am sorry I treated it so lightly in my anger about what DSK did. I shouldn't have.
Apologies, Sagredo. I wrote like a jerk. At best I made a bad joke, which was inexcusable, and at worst I thought prison rape was an appropriate punishment, which is even more inexcusable.
But how about that last attack by Bano? This dude tells me I wear my proximity to female rape victims like a badge of honor, when the truth of the matter is that he and every male on earth is surrounded by female rape victims.
My suspicion is that in his case, the female rape victims he knows are unwilling to share their pain with him, because they wouldn't be comfortable sharing their pain with a total jerk.
Evert aka Adam.
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 9, 2011 3:41:11 AM
Sagredo, Picador, Elatia & others:
Another reason why I treated prison rape so lightly is that I know a dude or two who came out of prison -- and both of them, who went in as heteros, came out bisexual because of their prison experiences. Since I've always wanted to be bisexual myself, but am not (being bisexual would allow me a broader life experience, I figure), I thought that these two guys were in some respect fortunate to have had bisexuality thrust upon them, in a manner of speaking.
They themselves were very matter-of-fact about what had happened to them. No big deal matter-of-fact ("you get used to being someone's bitch" matter-of-fact). Far be it from me to speculate about what pain they might've been covering up when they were explaining their sexual proclivities to me.
Anyway, Sagredo, I'm glad you stayed with this. And your point about the representations of some kinds of violence being so "normal and unremarkable" while others are distressing, is very spot-on. The question is often asked: why is porn unacceptable while violence is not? Let me rephrase that: why is porn made by women, which does not represent the woman as a sexual victim, unacceptable while a violent scene by Scorcese or Tarentino etc is OK?
Yes, it does say something about our culture, and no doubt there are a shaft of papers about this very thing out there.
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 9, 2011 4:11:40 AM
On the other hand, Sagredo, when I'm writing about a particular crime, suffered by women, called rape, done to them by men (in other words, I'm not focused about men being raped by men, in and out of prison -- though I did do a little drive-by shot at that -- or women raped by lesbians, in and out of prison, etc) ...
then for you and other MEN to bring up the suffering of men -- hey, our pain should be acknowledged! we men suffer more than women! sniff, cry, weep for the suffering of men! we out-suffer women! why don't you, Evert you jackass, acknowledge the suffering of men! we live in such terrible affliction! we get killed in war! we get raped in prison! Evert says raping is as natural to us as nesting is to women! how terrible of him to say that!
well, I don't know, it smacks of something, and you tell me what it smacks of ... or ask Elatia or Gigi or Kat or any of the women who chipped in to tell you what it smacks of.
Maybe it smacks of entitlement so entitled, even your pain has to be bigger than anyone else's?
Just a wild guess, Sagredo. The women will know better than me.
Evert aka Adam.
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 9, 2011 6:25:49 AM
Evert,
Sagredo expresses what I thought. Violence against women is horrible, but so is violence against men and violence against children. All forms of violence are disgusting. Men suffer at the hands of other men just as women do. Think of the millions of men killed in wars. There is one difference, and that is that men are far more violent than women. They murder and rape at a far greater rate than women, but their victims are not limited to woman. Like Sagredo, I keep thinking of the poor boyfriend's head in the frig. And to say men are "entitled" is a red herring. Who is to say whether men suffer more or less from other men than women? Does it matter? The read conflict here is not between men and women, but between sadistic victimizers and innocent victims.
Posted by: J.Hawkins | Jun 9, 2011 9:32:39 AM
You're right, J. Hawkins. Of course you're right.
I just find it rather icky that a discussion of women and rape had to all of a sudden NOT be about women's suffering, but for some folks here, suddenly it was actually all about MEN. A piece about women's suffering had to be hijacked to be all about men's suffering -- men start wars and kill each other, so let's all feel terribly sorry for the plight of men.
What grace this reveals. What generosity. What a lack of mean stinginess this is, to not cede the stage to women this one time, but carry on about men and their suffering, the poor souls. How great that I should be voted off the site because I had harsh words for entitled men. If you can't stand the heat, lads, get out of the kitchen -- don't try to vote me out of it, like little spoiled brats.
I'm sick and tired of men thinking it's all about them; half the human race are women.
So yes, J. Hawkins, it is about a conflict between sadistic victimizers and innocent victims, but I chose to write about women as the innocent victims and men as their sadistic victimizers, and if you and Sagredo think I was out of line doing that, well good ... why don't you & Sagredo write a piece about prison rape or men dying in war or whatever, but please, my subject was the rape of women, so deal with that, and go use your own time and place to go write all about men, like men always do.
This piece was not about the suffering of men, and it was not about me and my arrogance or whatever you don't like about me .. but you guys chose to make it so. At first it amused me, because that's how men are. But by now I'm getting a little cranky about it, OK?
Let's end this discussion before I go off on a rant about you guys.
And I still love y'all, because you read 3QD.
Evert aka Adam Ash
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 9, 2011 10:44:00 AM
But Evert,
You didn't just write about women being raped. You also wrote about men being beheaded. I'm not trying to divert this discussion into one about men's suffering, but one about all victims of violence. The majority of violent people are men - I agree with you on that. But many of their victims are men and children. Why pretend otherwise? Why mention the beheaded boyfriend at all? You broadened the discussion yourself. I am simply pointing out that the majority of men, among whom I include myself, are not violent and could well be victims of other men.
Posted by: J. Hawkins | Jun 9, 2011 12:18:30 PM
That's OK, J. Hawkins, I brought in some other stuff about DSK's posterior & the beheaded guy. Next time I'll know better, I won't mention a single man thing so as not to get diverted. But besides those two references, I tried to stick to a few points about women getting raped. Funny I don't think I got slammed by women, but I sure did by men. Maybe it's just verboten mentioning women's suffering in this it's-all-about-men world. I need a nap. Bye.
Evert aka Adam
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 9, 2011 1:15:14 PM
What I really am, what you really don't get, my dear Picador, is that I'm so angry I could eat the fur off a rat. Maybe your girlfriends weren't raped when they were young, or your sister nearly raped twice, so you can sit in your privileged manhood and not be angry. Lucky you.
Evert, you're the one advocating rape, not me. You don't know anything about me, or my family or friends, or my personal experiences with rape. But I will tell you this: I'm against rape.
Unlike you, I don't think anyone "richly deserves" to be raped.
Unlike you, I don't "sincerely hope" that anyone gets raped.
I appreciate that, by hamfistedly trying to walk back your previous advocacy of rape, you're obliquely acknowledging how disgusting your comments were. But I'd prefer it if you dropped the camp, and the righteous indignation, and just earnestly apologized for wishing rape on another human being.
Posted by: Picador | Jun 9, 2011 5:11:35 PM
"Of course, the reality is that if DSK ever goes to jail, it will be to one of those Connecticut jails where all the big rich Wall Street white-collar criminals go, where they can play tennis and all."
You're really an idiot Evert. DSK is being prosecuted by the state of New York, which doesn't maintin prisons in Connecticut, or prisons anywhere where inmates play tennis.
Posted by: davyh | Jun 9, 2011 5:28:45 PM
My dear, sweet, darling, so-quick-to-be-offended Picador about whom I know nothing:
Let's get personal, because that's what you've been itching for all along. It's a male thing, isn't it?
OK.
You're against rape. Good.
So am I. Good.
But I enjoyed the tit-for-tat, eye-for-an-eye, Old Testament fantasy of a rapist being raped. I positively ENJOYED it, Picador. That's how ugly and disgusting I am. And I apologize that I advocated and wished rape on another human being. But I will sincerely ADMIT to you that the tit-for-tat idea of a measure-for-measure revenge ... ooh, it gave me a horrible, reptilian, sick, id-like thrill.
Satisfied? Now go crow to everybody you know that there's this guy on 3QD who is an unmitigated bastard and that you, as always, really called him out on it, and that you, as always, remain as pure as the driven snow.
So yes, I remain, in all sincerity,
Your jackass,
Evert aka Adam.
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 9, 2011 5:52:33 PM
Davyh:
This idiot is telling you now that if convicted, DSK, as befits his former status in society, will be living a privileged existence in jail, wherever the jail is.
Posted by: Evert Cilliers | Jun 9, 2011 6:04:19 PM
"Of course, the reality is that if DSK ever goes to jail, it will be to one of those Connecticut jails where all the big rich Wall Street white-collar criminals go, where they can play tennis and all."
Since my comment on this idiotic remark was for some reason removed, I will repeat it. DSK is being prosecuted by the state of New York, which does not maintain prisons in Connecticut, or prisons anywhere in which the inmates play tennis. If DSK goes to prison upstate, and he almost certainly will, he will suffer terribly, as do pretty much all inmates in state prison. It is foolish to pretend otherwise, or to shrug it off with the smirking remark that he will be having a good time, and making millions of dollars on the side.
Posted by: Dave H | Jun 10, 2011 11:45:37 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/01/nyregion/strauss-kahn-case-seen-as-in-jeopardy.html?_r=1&ref=global-home
Enough said.
Posted by: maniza | Jun 30, 2011 11:30:12 PM
I was a victim of childhood sexual abuse by 3 out of four brothers. My family told me not to tell anyone so that they could hide the abuse so that my brothers and my parents wouldn't get in trouble. My parents felt that the knowledge that someone had raped me would ruin the family name. So for these reasons, I had to endure it. I was guilted into not telling because my parents said that it would break up the family. I was afraid to tell because I was told that I would be taken away and that I would be treated worse elsewhere. Rape is multi faceted. I can tell you that there is no one motivation for rape. One brother raped me because he just plain liked seeing me in pain. One was in pain himself so he raped me for comfort. Another raped simply because he could, and there were no adverse consequences from my parents for him doing it, so he didn't stop. Rape goes on more frequently than what's reported, because the victim is blamed, even in her own family. My dad is going on trial for possibly raping my nieces. Does the family blame him? No. They blame my nieces for telling. As for girls who get raped by acquaintances, of course they don't ask for it, but would it really kill girls to show some inkling of intelligence. Point: don't go off alone with a guy you just met. Don't walk outside alone, especially at night. If you have sex with your boyfriend, he's likely to think that he can get it again, even if you don't want to. That happens in marriages, I can tell you from experience. No, my husband didn't rape me, I simply gave in so that he would stop bugging me and I could sleep. Face the fact that men will try to manipulate you to have sex if you're alone with them, period. And if you're a male taking offense to this, consider the source. I'm an abuse victim. I don't care how rape works. I think that women should take steps to prevent it. Look in the animal kingdoms, males go after lone females, who cares why.
Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 12, 2012 9:55:12 AM
Post a comment