For years it has been a curiosity of mine how the gap between how men and women view both sex and those of their gender who have it has grown so deep. We're all familiar with the the seemingly never ending stereotype that a girl who sleeps around, even a little bit, is a slut, and the boy that sleeps around is a hero.
As puberty strikes, girls are prompted to "protect" themselves against conniving and manipulative boys who are only out for one thing. As they get older, they're educated on the crime of rape, what to do if it happens, but more importantly, how to avoid it. Camille Paglia gives a slightly up dated version of this in her essay "It's a Jungle Out There" where she makes the claim that college girls are actually more susceptible to rape now because they believe themselves to be equal. They go to fraternity parties thinking that the gender gap is merely a concern of fashion, not realizing the evil, drunk fraternity boys are there for no other reason than to be on the prowl. The tone in her essay is entirely degrading and too forceful even for most college girls, but the generalized point that rape happens due to a misconceived notion of equality has a bit of weight to it, in more ways than one, and while no one agrees that the world is that black and white, they hardly ever admit that, in fact, that view of men and women is precisely what we consider Rape to be.
Rape is such an offensive and popular idea that when I ask my 101 students to provide more specific words for the general word of "Crime," Rape almost always appears. It is the most popular answer in fact. But how many of them, as they rush to finish their assigned work, consider Rape to be more than a man taking advantage of an unconscious woman or attacking her forcibly?
Besides the occasional inappropriate-for-all-audiences prison joke, or when we factor in age (in which case it becomes pedophilia), do we worry about, nay even think about, men as a victim of rape?
The movie Forty Days and Forty Nights came out quite some time ago. It is about a young man who decides that he is having too much sex (already "funny" right?) and decides to give it up for Lent. Sex to him includes masturbation. He shares his new found goal with his friends, and soon, a betting pool is put into place, everyone betting on which date he will fail (since failure is clearly inevitable). Of course, it wouldn't be a proper comedy, or challenge, without conflict, so in comes a love interest. He is embarrassed of telling her about his pact with himself because he's afraid she'll think he was addicted to sex or something. She however is a progressive young gal who eventually expects things to go to the next level. Comedy ensues until he has to tell her the truth.
It is an okay movie really. Not going to win any awards, but it if came on the TV, I wouldn't rush to change the channel -- until the end. On the 40th night, afraid he is going to not make it and possibly even masturbate in his sleep, our brave main character restrains himself (I believe with handcuffs) to his own bed, attempting to sleep safety through to his victory. Of course, obviously amped up, he begins to have a sex dream about his current love interest and nature begins to take its course, if it wasn't already there when he fell asleep.
Enter the ex-lover. She's appeared several times earlier in the film, enough for us to know both that they are through and that we as viewers don't much care for her either. She has also placed a bet that he will fail on his last night. She comes into his house dressed in a negligee, enters his room, and hops right on (if you get my drift).
This bothered me as I'm sure it bothered many. There is the unfairness of it all plot-wise, but for me there was more. It was just plain uncomfortable. Especially when he shortly wakes up, realizes what is going on, says "no," and she continues. Of course, enter the love-interest who then mistakes this as a kinky consensual arrangement, gets mad, and leaves. The rest of our movie the main character is generally understood to have broken his pact, which they all expected, and additionally has to explain and make it up to his love interest, which in the end they do, and our hero continues on, unphased or traumatized, to have lots and lots of sex with his new girlfriend.
Imagine this movie if he were a girl.
As I said, the movie came out forever ago. It bothered me then, and it still bothers me now. Yes it is a comedy, but it is a comedy in which a rape occurred and basically no body cares, simply because the victim is a man. The victim himself is not even expected to care. This came out in 2002, which is nearly over ten years ago now, but I'm sure it is not the only piece of literature where this occurs.
In fact, if you want a more recent example, we can turn to the ever popular True Blood where Jason, the brother of the famed Sookie Stackhouse, is captured by a 'tribe' of Werepanthers (yes, panthers) who, considering they have accepted the idea that no one outside their tribe can ever love and understand them, have been inbreeding for years and who have finally decided that it is bad for their genes. Their solution? Since his ex-girlfriend (for lack of a better term) is still so much enthralled by him, why not use him to freshen up the gene pool--- with every female tribe member. They tie him down, bite him deeply and repeatedly, hoping this will give him the Werepanther gene (which we later find out is impossible), pump him full of Viagra unbeknownst to him, remove his pants, and when the drug kicks in, line up to systematically have sex with him against his will. He is in pain, sick, likely dying from their bites, and the long line of women continues.
He doesn't want any of this to be happening, but it isn't until a little girl comes in that he is able to convince her to A) not rape him and B) set him free. The show at least goes on to show that he is, in fact, a bit traumatized by this, but it is a sideline, one that gives more weight to his concerns over being a Werepanther than his systematic rape (though it is at least addressed).
Again, for reasons that perhaps make more sense in this plot line, the crime goes unannounced and, at least traditionally, unpunished.
Even when men are raped by other men, a scene that at least everyone is willing to call rape, the crime usually goes unreported due to embarrassment and shame. There are the typical feelings of rape that makes so much of it -- from men or women-- go unreported, but men have a little more added on top. After all, society is telling the, "You're a man after all; you should be strong enough to protect yourself." That's not even taking into account that, despite great strides, there is still an underlining fear of homosexuality that runs beneath our society.
Literature, as I often tell my students, represents reality. This is no exception. The fact that it has made it's way into the mainstream media should be a hint that something is going on that we need to address.
Before you take my analysis of these two literary pieces as nothing but over analyzed hogwash consider this article that asks the questions "Can a woman really rape a man?"
First off, this question is being asked, quite seriously. That should be the first red flag.
But if you continue to read on about the author's male facebook friends who not only found the question absurd but also joked about it ("you can't rape the willing"), I think you'll begin to see my point. Despite their levity, the author, partly persuaded by a medical opinion, decides that yes, in fact, a woman can rape a man.
Another study that I read sometime ago (and which I cannot locate at current, sadly) reported that when given a survey, most high school boys did not in fact understand why girls would not want to have sex -- making rape a difficult concept. Their reasoning was that sex feels good, so why would you ever turn it down or feel bad that it had happened to you? This attitude of high schoolers was the same attitude present in the jokes of adult men in the article above.
Hopefully, you have heard of the concept that rape is not a crime of passion but of power. I think that the two fictional representations I described above demonstrate this (the ex-lover mad at her denial takes matters into her own hands, the Werepanthers deciding their superiority and cause out weigh Jason's feelings and rights). And too many people focus on the orgasm as the determination of enjoyment. For women, the disconnect is easier to make as many have difficulty reaching climax even in consensual situations. (Try reading up the facts on that one.) But for men who are stereotyped (and perhaps in many cases with reason) for not only being easily aroused but actively seeking that release, they find the concept of sex being sex without orgasm difficult, even when trying to consider themselves in a Rape situation.
If anything their easy arousal she would be the first sign that they are in fact in danger. After all, it is not their organ that ensures easy penetration via moisture (which can easily be provided another way), and they can all admit to having a hard-on at times that were inappropriate, even against their will. Yet, they still can't make the leap and see. Though orgasm is arguably more physical than mental, the fact remains that one is not required from the man or the women to constitute sex. Ejaculation should not be the determinant in whether or not a man was raped.
And this is where I return to the ever vicious Camille Pagilia's idea that rape happens because we conceive the world to be too equal. She preaches this in a way that seems to blame the victim for putting themselves idiotically in dangerous situations.
Let's be clear:
It is never the victim's fault, even if they make dumb decisions like attending a frat party and wearing no panties.
Let's try an equalizer here: Saying a girl dresses like a slut and therefore is an open invitation is the same thing as saying that if a man has a hard-on he wants to have sex with whoever and whatever is in the room, no matter what.
Any male who has suffered the embarrassment of a classroom inconvenience should realize that that isn't true. Just because you want sex, or even sexual attention, does not mean that you don't care who gives it to you.
Yeah that's right. I'm skipping right over the "fashion statement" argument and the "nudity is natural and beautiful and not necessarily erotic" argument.
Anyway, no, it is not the victim's fault, ever. However, the fact that Rape goes unpunished and often unreported is perhaps partially a result of how we view men and women and sex.
At least for women, Rape is an open discussion that everyone is working tirelessly to correct and defend against. For men, it is a joke, an intriguing plot device, an impossibility. If you beleive that or believe at least that everyone else does, how do you bring yourself to report when it happens to you as a man? On top of all the other psychological trauma, you have society saying they're really not going to beleive you, and likely laugh at you on top of it for good measure.
The error in the rape of woman is she is told, "how did you let this happen to yourself? You should know better."
The error in the rape of a man is that he is told, "If you didn't want it, something is wrong with you."
Imagine that. If you didn't want this awful traumatic experience to happen to you, you are not right. You are flawed.
I know this is long, and I am coming to my close. Rape is a problem for everyone. I don't write this because I am not concerned about the issue it is for women. And I am aware that women are more likely to be raped than men -- at least that is what I have been taught. But that information is based on statistics. Statistics that are based on reported crimes. Regardless, even if we were omnisciant and knew for a fact that women were indeed raped more than men (and historically, they probably likely are) it does not mean that Rape for men is an issue we should ignore.
There are plenty of troubles in the world, and we may not be able to fix them all at once, but it should not mean that we completely ignore the other problems in pursuit of one solution. Stopping the Rape of women is only one part of the problem with Rape.
-----
Just to clarify, I'm writing about this because it has bothered me for sometime despite not having any first hand experience with the crime. It is also quite long, and I will edit for typos later. I know they're in there somewhere (they always are), so please forgive me in that respect.
As puberty strikes, girls are prompted to "protect" themselves against conniving and manipulative boys who are only out for one thing. As they get older, they're educated on the crime of rape, what to do if it happens, but more importantly, how to avoid it. Camille Paglia gives a slightly up dated version of this in her essay "It's a Jungle Out There" where she makes the claim that college girls are actually more susceptible to rape now because they believe themselves to be equal. They go to fraternity parties thinking that the gender gap is merely a concern of fashion, not realizing the evil, drunk fraternity boys are there for no other reason than to be on the prowl. The tone in her essay is entirely degrading and too forceful even for most college girls, but the generalized point that rape happens due to a misconceived notion of equality has a bit of weight to it, in more ways than one, and while no one agrees that the world is that black and white, they hardly ever admit that, in fact, that view of men and women is precisely what we consider Rape to be.
Rape is such an offensive and popular idea that when I ask my 101 students to provide more specific words for the general word of "Crime," Rape almost always appears. It is the most popular answer in fact. But how many of them, as they rush to finish their assigned work, consider Rape to be more than a man taking advantage of an unconscious woman or attacking her forcibly?
Besides the occasional inappropriate-for-all-audiences prison joke, or when we factor in age (in which case it becomes pedophilia), do we worry about, nay even think about, men as a victim of rape?
The movie Forty Days and Forty Nights came out quite some time ago. It is about a young man who decides that he is having too much sex (already "funny" right?) and decides to give it up for Lent. Sex to him includes masturbation. He shares his new found goal with his friends, and soon, a betting pool is put into place, everyone betting on which date he will fail (since failure is clearly inevitable). Of course, it wouldn't be a proper comedy, or challenge, without conflict, so in comes a love interest. He is embarrassed of telling her about his pact with himself because he's afraid she'll think he was addicted to sex or something. She however is a progressive young gal who eventually expects things to go to the next level. Comedy ensues until he has to tell her the truth.
It is an okay movie really. Not going to win any awards, but it if came on the TV, I wouldn't rush to change the channel -- until the end. On the 40th night, afraid he is going to not make it and possibly even masturbate in his sleep, our brave main character restrains himself (I believe with handcuffs) to his own bed, attempting to sleep safety through to his victory. Of course, obviously amped up, he begins to have a sex dream about his current love interest and nature begins to take its course, if it wasn't already there when he fell asleep.
Enter the ex-lover. She's appeared several times earlier in the film, enough for us to know both that they are through and that we as viewers don't much care for her either. She has also placed a bet that he will fail on his last night. She comes into his house dressed in a negligee, enters his room, and hops right on (if you get my drift).
This bothered me as I'm sure it bothered many. There is the unfairness of it all plot-wise, but for me there was more. It was just plain uncomfortable. Especially when he shortly wakes up, realizes what is going on, says "no," and she continues. Of course, enter the love-interest who then mistakes this as a kinky consensual arrangement, gets mad, and leaves. The rest of our movie the main character is generally understood to have broken his pact, which they all expected, and additionally has to explain and make it up to his love interest, which in the end they do, and our hero continues on, unphased or traumatized, to have lots and lots of sex with his new girlfriend.
Imagine this movie if he were a girl.
As I said, the movie came out forever ago. It bothered me then, and it still bothers me now. Yes it is a comedy, but it is a comedy in which a rape occurred and basically no body cares, simply because the victim is a man. The victim himself is not even expected to care. This came out in 2002, which is nearly over ten years ago now, but I'm sure it is not the only piece of literature where this occurs.
In fact, if you want a more recent example, we can turn to the ever popular True Blood where Jason, the brother of the famed Sookie Stackhouse, is captured by a 'tribe' of Werepanthers (yes, panthers) who, considering they have accepted the idea that no one outside their tribe can ever love and understand them, have been inbreeding for years and who have finally decided that it is bad for their genes. Their solution? Since his ex-girlfriend (for lack of a better term) is still so much enthralled by him, why not use him to freshen up the gene pool--- with every female tribe member. They tie him down, bite him deeply and repeatedly, hoping this will give him the Werepanther gene (which we later find out is impossible), pump him full of Viagra unbeknownst to him, remove his pants, and when the drug kicks in, line up to systematically have sex with him against his will. He is in pain, sick, likely dying from their bites, and the long line of women continues.
He doesn't want any of this to be happening, but it isn't until a little girl comes in that he is able to convince her to A) not rape him and B) set him free. The show at least goes on to show that he is, in fact, a bit traumatized by this, but it is a sideline, one that gives more weight to his concerns over being a Werepanther than his systematic rape (though it is at least addressed).
Again, for reasons that perhaps make more sense in this plot line, the crime goes unannounced and, at least traditionally, unpunished.
Even when men are raped by other men, a scene that at least everyone is willing to call rape, the crime usually goes unreported due to embarrassment and shame. There are the typical feelings of rape that makes so much of it -- from men or women-- go unreported, but men have a little more added on top. After all, society is telling the, "You're a man after all; you should be strong enough to protect yourself." That's not even taking into account that, despite great strides, there is still an underlining fear of homosexuality that runs beneath our society.
Literature, as I often tell my students, represents reality. This is no exception. The fact that it has made it's way into the mainstream media should be a hint that something is going on that we need to address.
Before you take my analysis of these two literary pieces as nothing but over analyzed hogwash consider this article that asks the questions "Can a woman really rape a man?"
First off, this question is being asked, quite seriously. That should be the first red flag.
But if you continue to read on about the author's male facebook friends who not only found the question absurd but also joked about it ("you can't rape the willing"), I think you'll begin to see my point. Despite their levity, the author, partly persuaded by a medical opinion, decides that yes, in fact, a woman can rape a man.
Another study that I read sometime ago (and which I cannot locate at current, sadly) reported that when given a survey, most high school boys did not in fact understand why girls would not want to have sex -- making rape a difficult concept. Their reasoning was that sex feels good, so why would you ever turn it down or feel bad that it had happened to you? This attitude of high schoolers was the same attitude present in the jokes of adult men in the article above.
Hopefully, you have heard of the concept that rape is not a crime of passion but of power. I think that the two fictional representations I described above demonstrate this (the ex-lover mad at her denial takes matters into her own hands, the Werepanthers deciding their superiority and cause out weigh Jason's feelings and rights). And too many people focus on the orgasm as the determination of enjoyment. For women, the disconnect is easier to make as many have difficulty reaching climax even in consensual situations. (Try reading up the facts on that one.) But for men who are stereotyped (and perhaps in many cases with reason) for not only being easily aroused but actively seeking that release, they find the concept of sex being sex without orgasm difficult, even when trying to consider themselves in a Rape situation.
If anything their easy arousal she would be the first sign that they are in fact in danger. After all, it is not their organ that ensures easy penetration via moisture (which can easily be provided another way), and they can all admit to having a hard-on at times that were inappropriate, even against their will. Yet, they still can't make the leap and see. Though orgasm is arguably more physical than mental, the fact remains that one is not required from the man or the women to constitute sex. Ejaculation should not be the determinant in whether or not a man was raped.
And this is where I return to the ever vicious Camille Pagilia's idea that rape happens because we conceive the world to be too equal. She preaches this in a way that seems to blame the victim for putting themselves idiotically in dangerous situations.
Let's be clear:
It is never the victim's fault, even if they make dumb decisions like attending a frat party and wearing no panties.
Let's try an equalizer here: Saying a girl dresses like a slut and therefore is an open invitation is the same thing as saying that if a man has a hard-on he wants to have sex with whoever and whatever is in the room, no matter what.
Any male who has suffered the embarrassment of a classroom inconvenience should realize that that isn't true. Just because you want sex, or even sexual attention, does not mean that you don't care who gives it to you.
Yeah that's right. I'm skipping right over the "fashion statement" argument and the "nudity is natural and beautiful and not necessarily erotic" argument.
Anyway, no, it is not the victim's fault, ever. However, the fact that Rape goes unpunished and often unreported is perhaps partially a result of how we view men and women and sex.
At least for women, Rape is an open discussion that everyone is working tirelessly to correct and defend against. For men, it is a joke, an intriguing plot device, an impossibility. If you beleive that or believe at least that everyone else does, how do you bring yourself to report when it happens to you as a man? On top of all the other psychological trauma, you have society saying they're really not going to beleive you, and likely laugh at you on top of it for good measure.
The error in the rape of woman is she is told, "how did you let this happen to yourself? You should know better."
The error in the rape of a man is that he is told, "If you didn't want it, something is wrong with you."
Imagine that. If you didn't want this awful traumatic experience to happen to you, you are not right. You are flawed.
I know this is long, and I am coming to my close. Rape is a problem for everyone. I don't write this because I am not concerned about the issue it is for women. And I am aware that women are more likely to be raped than men -- at least that is what I have been taught. But that information is based on statistics. Statistics that are based on reported crimes. Regardless, even if we were omnisciant and knew for a fact that women were indeed raped more than men (and historically, they probably likely are) it does not mean that Rape for men is an issue we should ignore.
There are plenty of troubles in the world, and we may not be able to fix them all at once, but it should not mean that we completely ignore the other problems in pursuit of one solution. Stopping the Rape of women is only one part of the problem with Rape.
-----
Just to clarify, I'm writing about this because it has bothered me for sometime despite not having any first hand experience with the crime. It is also quite long, and I will edit for typos later. I know they're in there somewhere (they always are), so please forgive me in that respect.
I know there is a better website that I read about a new attempt at targeting males, but this is the best I can find on the issue. http://www.mamapop.com/2012/12/new-anti-rape-ads-are-somewhat-less-infuriating.html
ReplyDeleteI like that they even cover gay men. Even after searching for these ads, I found the ads that are supposed to motivate men to speak out against rape (if they were raped). They are very offensive and not at all encouraging. I agree that there needs to be a better method of focusing on guy getting raped scenarios.
Thanks for the link!
DeleteI too like that they even cover gay men. I like too that at the end it says sexual assault, which puts the emphasis on that it doesn't need to be "traditional sex" in a sense, on all the ads (which I take to mean inappropriate advances and touching etc. of any kind). I agree with the blogger though too that it is still evident from the way the ads are presented, that we understand that "Rape" is bad, but what "Rape" means is a much harder concept.