Sunday, February 04, 2007

[rape] seven short posts on the matter [5]

The way it should be

Doesn’t the definition of rape come down, in the end, to not wanting him [and it is always him] to do it?

Do what? Where’s the line? Is the line the first touch? Is it the kiss? Is it the first time the hand touches a sensitive part? The woman wants the right to say “no” at any moment in the process and wants the weight of the law available to bring down on any transgressor.

Women rely on legislation but no amount of legislation alters the fact that man’s physiognomy is such that once he’s aroused, it needs release. She may not like that but it’s how men are biologically structured. What she has no clue about is how strong that desire is, even in reasonable, quiet men. And they’re not the ones she’s dirty-talking with in a bar or club. That desire is overpowering and a man need never apologize for that.

Alison says:
"Yes women need to take care of themselves, of each other when they are drinking, [or not], only a fool would think differently. But a change in attitude needs to take place on both sides ..."

I agree with the point but add that they should never have been in that position in the first place. This smacks too much of wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

There was a time where a thing called “chaperoning” went on and there was a lot of sense in it. The girl always had protection because she is naïve and doesn’t understand the male dynamic, no matter how worldly she might think she is.

But we threw all that out, didn’t we? Along with the Christian moral code which really did rein in man’s excesses in most cases and treated women as ladies. Anyone over a certain age knows that to be true, knows how society was. Even the statistics on rape support it. But people don’t want to concede that. They see this as an argument to put women back in the kitchen.

I say it’s just common sense – the more that unchaperoned girls freely drug around all night with absolutely no parental control, the more this sort of thing is going to happen. But parents refuse to admit any responsibility in this. They say it’s the type of animal now roaming around, raping girls. Nothing to do with them, the parents.

As for the aggressive male predator, the epidemic of porn and gaming on the web does affect their already jaundiced view of the female – have you seen some of those games? The porn of course you’ve already seen. We’re force fed it.

All of which does not take into account the unprovoked attack on an innocent woman.

1 comment:

  1. hello

    Im not sure i agree with all your points here but about the porn and the games i very much do. I cant take a feminist viewpoint because i dont feel im a feminist per se. But i feel women to a degree lost out in the sexual revolution. Instead of men accepting the liberty it brought women through the ability to decide when you want to have kids etc ( all good stuff really)..it seemed to allow men to triviliase womens sexuality. Im confused as to why and how that came about. Was it a reaction to feminism? I feel like a prude suggesting that porn, soft porn and some images and media portrayals of women are 'offensive'. But they seem to want to make us trivial and objectify us. It doesnt feel like something women can participate in and enjoy with men. Its all for men. Sometimes it feels all a bit much. Its intriguiing, no denying. But it feels too trivial, crass, graphic. It isnt 'celebrating the female form' at all. If that makes sense. Im not sure why men would want to think of women that way.

    ReplyDelete

Comments need a moniker of your choosing before or after ... no moniker, not posted, sorry.