The title of this post and the one before it are obviously a reference to the Nirvana song. This was deliberate - first because I like Nirvana and if I can put a reference in, I will; also because it helps to illustrate the point about men being raped by women and also the point that it is often made fun of. The song itself is about a woman who is held captive and repeatedly raped, and finally she numbs herself and just tells her attacker "fine, rape me again, get it over with". By doing this, she regains a bit of control over the situation and eventually her attacker leaves. I recall reading an interview with Kurt Cobain, in Rolling Stone I believe, where he intimated that he was generally not happy with the success of that song for the wrong reasons. He would look out at the crowd and see people he wouldn't have liked (i.e. jocks) singing "rape Me" and not getting it - but rather making a joke of the intent if the song. They wanted to be raped. (It's been a while since I actually read the interview. I may have some details fuzzy). But this as well I think illustrates the view about men being raped by women.
That was one of my longer preambles. Curious. The same definition of rape as in the previous post applies here. You would also have to look back for previous definitions of sex, as well.
Men can't be raped by women: There is no way that women can rape men. It is physically impossible. For a man to have sex, he has to be hard; and if he's doesn't want to have sex, he won't get excited and he won't get hard. It may be possible for men to be in sexually uncomfortable situations with women, but not raped.
The point about the song just furthers the point that men want to have sex with pretty much any woman. The jocks were singing along because they didn't care who they had sex with, they just wanted to have sex. It is pretty much accepted, whether biological, social, or genetic, that men want to have sex with as many people as they can; and since it is an innate need, it can't be forced. It would be like forcing a person to drink water.
From a feminist point of view, there is also no way a woman can rape a man. This is because rape is about power, and in our current patriarchal society, women do not have power. Men use their power over women in many ways, including by forcing them to have sex against their will. Since women do not have power in our society, they cannot force men to have sex. It would be comparable to a peasant forcing the king to provide free land.
If men can do it, women can do it too: Having a physical reaction - getting hard - is not the same wanting to have sex. Look at all the people who had hard-ons when they were wearing sweat pants and had to do a problem at the chalkboard. But adolescence aside, a physical reaction to stimulation does not mean consent; to seriously use that argument would be saying that if a woman's nipples were hard or her vagina became lubricated during an unwanted sexual experience, she was then consenting to sex.
Contrary to the myth of the constantly seeking sex male, sometime men don't want to have sex. Just like women, men get tired; they may be in committed relationships; they may just not want to have sex with a particular individual. Even if an individual is a nympho and wants to have sex all the time, there still has to be consent involved.
The feminist argument is relevant in many situations - but not in all. There is more than just the male / female power dynamic that exists in the current social world. In many situations, a woman may have economic power over men, she may be part of a privileged class or race, she may just be a strong woman who forces herself on a weak man.
What I think: I think that it is kind of obvious what I think. I think that there are many many situations that would be considered rape if the situations were reversed. I read an article about other situations where sex is forced on men by women , but men really don't have any way of expressing any feelings about it - either than to pretend they liked it. If they don't, people will assume that there is something wrong with them, or that they were the instigator in the attack. I also think that men are far less likely to be physically injured than women in a sexual attack, but this is where the societal training helps men: if a man is attacked by a woman, he is told he should just lie back and enjoy it; a woman is told that her "virtue" is important and thus should risk all to defend it.
How I relate: Never been raped, been in a couple of situations I probably wished I wasn't. And I have a ton of friends who have slept with people they never wanted to, but were inebriated. They would never admit to being raped - a rose by any other name - . There are also a lot of situations that would appear to be consensual but on examination probably weren't. An example: A woman could very easily say to man "sleep with me or I'll tell your spouse that we did".
That was a quicker post I've written, probably because I had a pretty strong opinion on this. That, and it was about sex. Not sure where I'll go from here, but I'm sure something will come up. Maybe I'll switch gears completely and go with something on animal rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment