Drawing the Line
We thank everyone for the lively discussion. Commenting to this post has been disabled.
I’ve been thinking about Voltaire lately. Specifically, one of his most famous quotations: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”
Last Monday, my campus newspaper printed a column by a male writer. In this piece, he called feminists and gay activists “a sniveling bunch of emotional cripples,” declared that date rape is an “incoherent concept,” and essentially that drunken flirtation is consent.
As a result, the internet exploded. Angry Facebook statuses and comments on the article grew. Some people said they were ashamed to go to a school where such views would be espoused, and that it was a sad day for the campus. Apparently threats were made against the writer, and the story grew until it got picked up on some major feminist websites and the local news, including the Washington Post. A quick google of my school’s name comes up with headlines along the lines of “’Rape Apology’ Angers Students.”
In addition to this, though, attacks were directed at the newspaper. Issues were stolen en masse from newsstands and the Editorial board was maligned and accused of having no journalistic integrity, and being rape apologists themselves. Amid the controversy, the paper has since admitted mistakes in their editorial process, and apologized for mistaking “better editing for censorship.”
I think the views the article espouses are uninformed, ignorant, misogynistic, and arrogant. But here’s the thing. I’m glad this article was published. I’m sorry it caused people pain and I agree there were editorial mistakes, but the potential of offending people is not grounds for censorship.
The writer’s opinion is extreme, but the fact is, he’s not alone—not close to it. I know people who tend to agree with him—that girls who get drunk too often cry “rape” when it was more accurately a poor decision. As romance readers, the issue is often presented to us, with heroes thinking “no” means “yes,” and we accept it because we know what’s really between these characters is True Love, and the heroine ends up enjoying it anyway so no harm done. Remember Whitney, My Love, whose first edition included the hero raping the heroine and hitting her with a riding crop? Most books wouldn’t get away with this anymore, but the issue of consent still finds itself drowning in shades of gray.
But let’s consider the result of the article. People are discussing what “consent” means and whether or not drunk sex (or forced seduction) is rape. People are coming out of the woodwork in support of rape victims and women’s rights and creating organizations that support victims of sexual violence. People are exercising their own freedom of speech by writing letters to the editor of the paper. There are plans to host a “constructive dialogue,” and students are debating censorship and the freedom of speech. Are these things bad?
April is National Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Sometimes we need something inflammatory to spark action. There is such beauty in the peaceful counter protest and the respectful exchange of ideas. We need more of that. We should be discussing what constitutes as consent and where editing stops being for the good of the reader and starts being censorship of ideas and opinions. Romance readers should be talking about whether heroes too often cross the line and if that’s okay in that context.
So don’t let even hateful speech create anger and retaliation. Let it create dialogue and discussion.
– Jane Granville
Well, according to other bloggers, who actually got to read it before it was pulled, it was more than just her resignation. It was a rant against everyone who had the temerity to question her opinion on this topic. Sure it was her right to do so, but maybe she should have had the courage of her convictions.
AAR Rachel’s resignation WAS posted to her own blog, but she has shut the whole blog down right now, saying she doesn’t feel like talking about some things. Her right to do so.
I’m sad about that, though. I think the discussion we’ve had here (can’t speak of the Twitterverse, as I don’t partake) has been valuable in airing our differences of opinion. There will always be differences of opinion, and there will always be people who will tell you are an idiot – in less-than-kind phrases, for having that opinion.
I heard Rachel has resigned from or been asked to leave AAR, is that true? She and that writer she agreed now have the same fate.
Will people please stop deciding that the board owners’ personal feelings are some kind of ‘official AAR policy’?
AAR Sandy and AAR Rachel *clearly* have very different views, so they can’t *both* be speaking for the site’s ‘official policy’, so how do you figure one is, and one isn’t? Why is the one you disagree with magically the site policy? I don’t get it.
Anyway… I, too, disagree vehemently with any and all posts/posters that assume men, even ‘lickered up’, are slavering beasts that can’t control themselves. If you follow that train of thought, then any man who drinks too much, gets behind the wheel of a car and kills someone must be excused, because ‘he was drunk and couldn’t control himself’. Really. Please. So the other innocent driver who got killed should have *known* better than to be on the road when the bars let out, because there are drunk drivers out there?
Also… to blame scantily clad women for rape is the height of ridiculousness. As people have pointed out, nuns get raped, elderly women get raped, rape has NOTHING to do with lust, and everything to do with a patriarchal society that lingers, giving SOME men the idea that women are to be used, controlled, dominated, etc. Until we correct that thought – and I do think we’re making progress – it will continue. Hiding in our rooms isn’t going to help.
I want to ask a few serious questions:
First, does anyone know if any studies have been done to show whether or not men are more prone to rape after viewing por**graphy or strip acts? I’m asking about po**ogrpahy in particular because of AAR Rachel’s comment: “”So I’d just as soon not have women teasing men into a frenzied rage and looking to vent that rage on a bystander to this sexual chaos (me). “” The implication is that a man so ‘teased’ into a sexual frenzy will take out the supposed *extreme sexual frustration* on any handy woman.
And then… what do you all think? If a study WERE to show that to be true – I’m not assuming it would, because I truly don’t know – do you think that the po**ography or strip act became an incitement to rape because of the sexual content , *or* because it showed women as less-than-men, there for men to use sexually, if they so chose?
Personally, I think it would be dangerous to assume that the sexual content in po**ography is all there is to it, because the subtext contains a message about a woman’s worth and her purpose on earth. I believe it subverts the truth by showing only one side of her life, the sexual part, and so likely encourages a warped view of women’s position in the world. *But*… and it’s a big *but*… only to men who are already inclined to view women that way. I don’t believe it can make anyone think a certain way, but it could support a belief system already in place.
In a similar way *if*, as AAR Rachel posited, a man was likely to rape any handy woman after being sexually teased, would it not more likely say something about that man’s sense of his lack of power in the world, and his desire to put women in their place (under him) than some imagined sexual overload that made him ‘crazed’?
The men I know and have known over my lifetime see women, for the most part, as equals, and therefore rape is as horrible a concept for them as it is to me.
I will never, have never, can’t imagine, writing a *romance* with rape in it, and would not read one. Rape is an abhorrent act and not about sex at all, but about power, and the loss of it.
Donna,
Many years ago there was a study done regarding violent reaction and porn which showed that men do have violent reactions to it. Many people had problems with the way the study was conducted.
This study, more recent, disagrees:
http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/12/02/pornographys-effect-on-men-under-study/9884.html
I think part of the problem in this discussion is that we seem to be discussing many different types of rape. I don’t think they are all caused by the same thing. Rape, the kind where a man grabs you in a parking lot, can actually not include sex. Penetration can occur with a stick or something else the rapist finds relevant (or convenient.) Everything I have been taught about it says this kind of rape is strictly violent, victims picked for vulnerability as opposed to lust.
Date rape, from my understanding of it, is a sense of entitlement. Still rape but different motivation and different circumstances.
I thought, like others, the rape we were talking about was two drunk people going back to a guys dorm room and the girl having regrets in the morning. Not the girl saying no and him pushing the issue (rape). Not the girl being too drunk and him continuing on (rape — and an added touch of necrophilia maybe??) IMO, if you are drunk but WILLING and have sex and regret it in the morning, not rape. You can blame the alcohol for clouding your morals but you can’t blame the guy. Many times in college my friends and I found ourselves asking “”How could you let me?”” in the mornings. But the fact is, drunks don’t make good chaperons for other drunks. Finding out something you did while drunk was dumb or disgusting doesn’t make it someone else’s fault.
If your drunk but UNWILLING, then regardless of how you are dressed or what you are doing it is still rape.
Sort of (though far worse) like theft. If I leave my purse out, I am careless. But the thief is still the criminal, not me.
maggie b.
Thanks, Sandy. Glad to see you didn’t just abruptly close down the thread.
Lee, the honest answer is that we think all points have been made, positions have been staked out, and it’s just time to move on. We wanted, however, to give fair warning to everyone who has participated before disabling further comments.
Sandy, can you tell us why?
Just wanted to make sure everybody saw the note posted on the top of the blog:
We thank AAR readers for the lively discussion on this post. Please note that commenting for this post only will be disabled at 4 p.m. eastern time today.
Jennifer, maybe what I should have said was that ‘it’s hard to have compassion for a woman who places herself in a dangerous situation’. And thank you for telling me I do not think, but the reality is I do think, a lot, and not just about myself but the suffering that others go through because of their choices. Calling me small-minded is not an insult, believe me. Some peoples minds are so open, their brains have fallen out.
Many here contradict themselves when they decide what heroines are ‘too stupid to live’ in the books they read, yet want to defend any type of behavior by a woman in real life, because after all, girls have to stick together, right or wrong. Right???? If certain things are wrong when men do them, are they suddenly right just because women are doing them? Give me a break, gender does not free a person from acting responsibly. We always tell our kids that if they play with fire they will get burned, yet when women play like the boys or with the boys the only ones to get burned should be the boys according to some. Which is it, you have to pick, really you do.
There have been so many comments I do not remember who said what anymore but for the one that said that sex was not for procreation, answer me this, why is contraception necessary then? Contra (meaning against) ception (meaning conception). You’re obviously trying to stop something aren’t you? Like it or not, this is the way babies are made. And the other one that said that sex is not the cause of adultery, abortion, and std’s, I’ll believe you, the day that these things happen without sex. And I get accused of not thinking?? The truth is that if a person does not control their desires, their desires control them.
I’m really done because, ‘To the one who believes no explanation is necessary, to the one who doesn’t believe no explanation is possible.””
Lee – you are assuming I was responding to your last statement. Incorrect, read the one prior to.
Sorry, Nancy – didn’t know you were the Grand Poobah of the boards and that I couldn’t respond to another’s post without getting your permission. Why don’t you rest your fingers instead?
AAR Sandy – I rest my case.
@nancy You do know that you can unsubscribe from these comments at any point don’t you?
I would suggest that if you’re tired of the conversation going over the same grounds, then you either stop perpetuating it, or you unsubscribe, and leave people to carry on to their heart’s content. I believe you’re fond of the whole Freedom of Speech thing, so this shouldn’t be a problem for you.
Also, I find it interesting that you refer to other romance novels as smut. I’m pretty sure nobody else here mentioned the word smut. Is that how you view romance books in general, that aren’t written by the ladies you mentioned above? Because as far as I’m aware, there are many books where the hero and heroine have sex before marriage, which wouldn’t be considered smut by anybody except the very small-minded.
So I guess my question to you is, are they the only authors you read?
Oh for crying out loud, can’t people get over this persecution of AAR Rachel? Rachel stated her views, Maria stated her views, I stated my views, Lee stated her views, Karen stated her views. Every person has stated their views, we don’t agree, we are not going to agree, no one is going to make anyone agree, we have had arguments, frustrations, threats, misunderstandings, misinterpretations and nothing good is coming away at this point from this discussion. I have yet to see anyone state solutions for the issues, instead I’ve read indignation, anger, judgment, foul language and yes I’m guilty of that – not innocent by any means.
Give it up already, you are not going to change anyone’s view.
BTW – I’ve read a repeated question between every blog that’s out there – why would someone with my purported 1950’s views read romance novels? Where does it state that all romance novels are smut? Try Jane Austen, Georgette Heyer, Charlotte Bronte, early Mary Balogh, Betty Neels, no sex but fantastic “”romance novels.””
LB accurately construed my original comments.
Thank you, LB. To once again clarify:
Yes, date rape does exist.
Yes, date rape is wrong.
Yes, rape should be punished.
Yes, I have sympathy for people who have experienced this.
The original article was about hookup sex, at fraternities or parties, often between people who do not know each other well, people who have imbibed significant amounts of alcohol. Under these conditions the issue of consent and the understanding thereof by both parties often is confused. Avoiding these situations is a good way to not become a victim of sexual assault.
That is all I have to say on this matter.
Speaking for my prior post alone:
I do not think that teaching our daughters prudent, responsible behaviour is tantamount to blaming the victim.
I resent that accusation because I feel it is unduly inflammatory.
@DonnaLeaSimpson
Donna, I’m curious – how has Rachel been misconstrued?
Maria,
I can appreciate that you are an extremely religious person. However, when you say the following:
I have no compassion for women who place themselves in dangerous situations. Actions have consecuences!!
you lose all credibility. You want to talk about how women should take cautionary measures, that is fine. But, to say you have no compassion for a woman who has been raped, regardless of her own actions, is just hateful. It must be so blissful to view the world in such black and white terms. Keeps you from having to actually think, doesn’t it?
I was date raped when I was 16 by my first boyfriend for years I thought it was my fault for letting him in my house. I ran into him again while visiting my fiance at University and promptly had a panic attack. I told my fiance what had happened to my (the first person I ever told) and he got me some counseling. he also did some research, my ex hadn’t changed he was still raping young girls at the University. In fact it was well known among his dorm that he wasn’t a “”safe”” date.
His behavior was tolerated because he was an athlete and handsome if he went to far the girls had it coming.
FWIW, for those wondering and speculating, I think Rachel has not come back because she’s alarmed by the flamewar that has erupted. I don’t think she meant that to happen, and I don’t think anyone profits by speculating why she has not posted to ‘clarify’ her position.
Even though I just did! LOL.
It is what it is; as one of the site owners, she was probably alarmed to see that people were taking her PERSONAL opinion to be some kind of AAR policy statement. I don’t believe it is.
While I disagree vehemently with some of what she said, I will, truly, defend her right to say it without being misconstrued.
Shiloh Walker, since you used most of my comments, I will respond. I am deeply Catholic. Yet I did not use or state my religion at all in any of the responses I posted. My faith deeply influences my beliefs, I would never deny that, I am not two people. Contrary to some who think that faith is something to be hidden so as not to ruffle any feathers. But I also have a lot of common sense that seems to be getting lost a lot. Since you quoted some bible passages that agree with what you believe I will quote some too. Jesus said all those things you mentioned yet there were other things he said too. When he started his public ministry the very first words out of his mouth were, “”Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”” He did not die for our sins so we would have a grand old sinning, never ending party all our lives. He wanted us to repent of our sinful ways. He wanted us to imitate him in love, in mercy, in doing his Fathers’ will, and in beating sin. He was obedient unto death. He confronted evil and beat it. He defended the adulterous woman but never excused her behavior. He told her to, “”Go and sin no more!”” He ate with sinners not to celebrate their sin but to transform them. “”Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.”” “”For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”” His words, not mine! We are all sinners in need of a savior but some of us recognize it while others keep excusing and explaining sin away. He told us not to judge people. We cannot judge people because only God knows their hearts but we can judge actions. We make judgments everyday. Since you mention the Beatitudes, I will mention a couple, “”Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled.”” Also, “”Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake, For theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.”” “”Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.”” “”Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.”” God loves us so much he gave us limits to our behavior. His commandments are laws of love so we would live in harmony with him and with our neighbors. There is a reason God placed himself first. If we love God above all things we will love our neighbor with the respect and dignity they deserve and not as objects the we use and discard for our pleasure. That’s what an uninhibited sexuality does, it dehumanizes people to objects that are used for pleasure. You can deny it all you want but that is the main consecuence. I have a lot of compassion for people but to have compassion does not mean to deny that people bear responsibility for their actions. Mercy does not negate justice and justice does not negate mercy. For an alcoholic to accept help, first he needs to recognize he is an alcoholic. For society to realize that it is sick it needs to recognize that it is sick and what the symptoms are. Evil has existed from the beginning of time but it has always been called what it is, EVIL. “”Woe to those who call evil good and good evil!”” I will end with these words said by my beautiful savior, “”Whoever desires to come after ME, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.”” “”For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?”” “”For whoever is ashamed of ME and MY words in this adulterated and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when he comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.”” The Bible is not a menu where we only choose the things we like and agree with. And for those who bash and hate organized religion, I’ve seen disorganized religion. It’s called Secularism, in other words Moral Relativism. So if there is no wrong then no one should pay for any… Read more »
“”Many a college girl of the finest innate qualities, who sincerely desires to enter matrimony, is unable to find a husband of her own class, simply because she has been rendered (by advanced education) so cold and unattractive, so over stuffed intellectually and starved emotionally, that a typical man does not desire to spend the rest of his life in her company.”” Paul Popenoe, 1918
Want to say sorry for all the double posts, my computer kept returning to the screen with the message when I posted and the message was still in the box, I wasn’t sure if it posted or if it didn’t and intead of losing it I just clicked submit again, please if a mod can get rid of the icomplete ones that would be nice.
LB, that was well stated.
We do not instill our young girls with a sense of caution while we allow them to believe everything in their lives will be like they see on TV.
I have followed this discussion from the start & think that most points are very valid.
I hope that all who have shared their painful personal experiences here will run, not walk, to the next rape support group they can find, no matter how long ago it’s been. You will learn to take back control of your lives, trust me, it’s never too late.
Those who have young daughters will walk a very fine line between teaching caution and NOT teaching them to hate men, it can also be done.
This is an upsetting topic, people do not want to think about it. As I read the comments I found myself dismayed and cheered, but never did I wish for the sharing and learning and understanding to stop.
I guess we have to thank the author of the article for one thing…no one, who read this thread, will let their daughter go off to college without a healthy, heartfelt discussion about “”a little bit of caution can’t hurt””.
opps three posts and none finished. Don’t even ask how that happened. what the end was supposed to be is and I hope that we can use this discussion to evaluate the dangerous and other factors of date rape and pressure on girls and boys and maybe come to a conclusion about how to better prepare kids for college since the point of the article was about inflamitory speech resulting in discussion of unPC thoughts.
This may be a double post, my computer is being a bitch.
Thanks Lee, I would say I have too obsessive a head on my shoulders, but that’s a whole other topic. I know that not all guys are after sex, but when I go to a club I’ve just decided that it’s a good rule of thumb to assume that’s why they’re there, it’s really hard to have an indepth conversation while you’re ears are being blasted off!
I am happy that at least you can see I was coming at this from a different POV then what you think Rachel was, because the reason I posted was just frustration over the fact that many people were claiming that anyone who agreed with Rachel was saying that rape victims were to blame for what happened, and all I wanted to do was suggest that maybe that there is another POV which was overlooked. I don’t speak for any of them, and as I said I could very well be wrong in my understanding. It’s only because I saw frustration in those posts that I too feel that I think they are saying something other then what everyone else thinks they say. But I can’t speak for anyone else, adn you’re right, Rachel’s and others inactivity of late could mean anything, from they just don’t want to fight anymore because you understand them perfectly and there isn’t any point, or they are just frustrated because they aren’t able to make people see what they are saying. Either way I am wary of saying which I think it is. But I just want to make clear that there are people out there who think there isn’t enough being done in our society to prepare girls for the risks of the “”college”” years, and there are a lot of tv shows cough cough Jersy Shore, which make behaviors that could be dangerous look normal, there are girls who act sexually irresponsible and lead guys to think all girls act that way, which does lead to girls who aren’t willing to have sex to be painted with the same brush, to be pressured or forced, it’s scary and confussing out there and I hope
LB, you sound like you have a good head on your shoulders. That may not mean much coming from a complete stranger, but it is sincere. And not all guys are out for one thing – there are a lot of guys out there who know how to be a gentlemen. I married one. Keep looking.
However, if Rachel meant what you think she was saying, I wonder why she hasn’t come back to clarify her position. I think it is because she meant to say exactly what she said; that date rape is not real and that women are at fault for whatever happens to them because of their provocative, teasing behavior.
I think this post said it all. But I appriciate her letting me know that I wasn’t out of line suggesting that I understood what she was trying to say.
But my point is that the earler posts were (as I interpret them) not about blaming the victims of rape but acknowledging that girls aren’t being careful and the teenage culture and society is all about breakdown the perceptions which would make sure they were careful. Some of the explanations and wordings were agresive so I can see how it’s hard to look past that and too the point, but what everyone is saying is “”blame the victim”” speech, in my opinion, was really frustration at society and girls in general NOT RAPE VICTIMS how practice unsafe behavior and think it’s perfectly fine.
I know that there’s no way to prevent rape, I know that there are guys who make you think they are safe, then victimize you when you’ve out your faith in them. I am not saying rape doesn’t happen, or only happens because the girl did something to bring it on. Rape happens because as you said men are bigger and stronger then women, if it were the other way around women would probably be the ones raping men, because there is not something inherintly bad in men which make them rapists and something good in women which make us not. Also you should note that Rachel said exactly the same thing you said about men respecting women, that she would teach her son to respect a woman and her sexuality. The one thing I am trying to say is not that rape doesn’t happen, or that it only happens to girls who aren’t careful. It is that there has been a lot said on this blog, and many people, not only yourself, have gotten from the earlier posts something totally different then what I got, that what you all see as blame the victim I see as a commentary on the way the anything goes mind set of our society is leading to the rape and victimization of girls. And I may not be right, I am just expressing a view based on what I see when I go out, when I worry about friends who use absolutly no common sense. I also see it when I talk to a guy at a club or in class and have to wonder and worry what his expectations are because so many of the other girls my age are so willing to have sex fast, what reaction am I going to faced with when he realizes that I won’t.
LB, no one is saying women, and teenage girls for that matter, should not be careful in the big wide world. That’s just silly. Of course every young girl needs to know how to protect herself. But sometimes, all the best planning and training is not enough. Sometimes, you are in a car with someone you have trusted over a long period of time, coming home from a date, and you are forced into doing something you do not want to because he is bigger and stronger and you are a good girl. As a prosecutor, you would not believe how many times I heard that story.
You would also not believe the amount of sexual harassment I had to deal with as a female attorney where men outnumber women 8:1. I knew that going in, so I dressed as conservatively as possible. It didn’t matter. No real surprise, but still, unpleasant to say the least. We all know how we are dealt with when we have to bring a car to a male mechanic. How many times have you wanted to scream at a guy to raise his eyes to your eyes instead of your breasts? But, and it’s a big but, that is no excuse for the men to behave the way they do. No excuse whatsoever. I can’t imagine any mother on this board saying to their teenage sons, “”well, if you force a woman to have sex with you, that’s ok, I know she must have been teasing unmercifully your raging hormonal self.”” But of course, those posters’ sons are the exception somehow.
Women need to be careful. I teach my daughters this all the time. That is their cross to bear. But men need to be respectful, which I teach my sons all the time. And they know, if they are ever in the company of an incapacitated woman, that it is their duty to see her safely home, and not to take advantage of it. Perhaps that is a man’s cross to bear.
I agree with all of this. But, but, but, but, but — What does that have to do with a woman who gets drunk out of her mind at a party?
Nothing.
In the one situation, the situation that originated the war here, a woman throws caution to the winds. In all the situations you mention, a woman is going about her normal life in normal circumstances. They do not equate.
The almost universal response I’ve seen to this issue is that women can do anything they want, behave in any way the want, dance naked on a table in a dive if they want, and fully expect to be unharmed in doing so. Well, that is a dream world. It is not the world we live in.
Actually I mispoke it wasn’t the last paragraph that spoke about power highs, it was before that, I really actually agreed with the idea of the last paragraph because that is where she acknowledged that women are at a disadvantage to men and actually acknowledges that there is a real danger of being raped, for all women. And I also want to say I’m not trying to speak for anyone, I just hate reading something one way and seeing everyone else interpret it a different way, which is the only reason I have said anyhting.
First of all while I think I agree with the point htat Rachel was making there were a few comments which I initially overlooked that I don’t want to say I agree with, specificley the one in the last paragraph of her first comment which talked about power highs and tease, while I do think that there are women out there that do tease and are looking for a power high I do not think that belongs in a discussion about rape because it could imply blame which I wouldn’t do myself.
But aside from that comment I applude what she says, because in the society we live in risky behavior is glorified and acknowledging that it’s risky is apparently the same as blaming the victim. I would never blame a woman for being raped, no matter how drunk she was (unless the guy was also drunk two drunks equal mutual consent or mutual rape) no matter what dress she wore, no matter where she went alone with a guy. But even though I won’t blame, I will still acknowledge that some behavior take control out of a woman’s hands adn puts it in someone else’s. If you leave your group of friends at a club or a party to go off with a guy, there is no one to rely upon if you’re in a physical fight with a man, again not blaming, just pointing out you’ve just made yourself more vurnable to attack. If you get drunk you loss a lot of defenses and again make yourself more easy a target. Again no blame. Pointing out ways in which women weaken themselves and therefore open up the likely hood of attach is not blaming the women for the attack.
Now I do however blame. I blame tv, movies, and music which glorifies the risky bahvior and then doesn’t really show the likely results of it. I blame women who say because we have the right to be sexually free we should be able to do anything with that sexuality we want, it makes things difficult and confusing for both young women and young men, and puts pressure on young girls they don’t need and which can lead to risky behavior. Ultimatly what I am saying is that we live in a society which makes things dangerous for girls and women and it does so by screwing around with what is acceptable and unacceptable bahavir and what will and will not get you hurt. Having grown up in this generation I have always watched in horror as my friends did things that could have gotten them hurt if they weren’t in a large group. I’ve listened to stories about women walking at 1AM alone in the city, and never judged them for being raped but thought what could have given her the sense of safety to do that? I had a friend take care of another friend when someone slipped something into her drink, who said had she not been there the other friend would have been raped, from that moment on they both said they would never drink without at least one sober person. Girls shouldn’t have to learn how to be safe by finding out what they thought was safe wasn’t. It should be ok to talk about the dangers of the anything goes generation without someone being labeled as a victim blamer.
LB, I found Rachel’s comments highly offensive. I may have misspoke in calling them a “”diatribe,”” but I do think they were reprehensible. Both by blaming the victim and accusing all men of essentially being wild animals unable to control their beastly urges.
As to free speech, I was responding to sandy’s point that rachel’s comments do not reflect on AAR. Rachel has an absolute right to say them but by the same token it is not out if bounds to judge AAR and all it’s owners by the words of a coowner said as a coowner. Rachel signed her post “”Rachel AAR,”” not as an individual. It is fair to judge the site based on those harsh words. If you can still look at that as just one persons opinion that is certainly your prerogative. And im certainly not suggesting that Rachel is not entitled to express her views on a website she owns. I do, however, find it disengenuous to suggest that those views do not reflect on AAR.
Well! I too am glad I read this.
As a sexual assault survivor who happens to love romance novels, it saddens me to know that this woman finds it easier to blame me, my presence in my own car with a man at night whom I thought I could trust, rather than the perpetrator who violated that trust and forced himself upon me. I guess me being in what I thought was a relationship with him, going out at night, and wearing a dress in summertime made me a *tease*, and therefore I deserved what I got.
It wasn’t his fault at all! He’s just a man, after all, who was just doing what men do when stupid, seductive women like me wear dresses and drive cars on dates at night!!
I hope you and your supporters know that attitude was exactly what made me go home and never say anything to anyone until years later. Why even now, I feel like the simple act of wearing a dress is something akin to taking back a part of my life and dignity that was stolen from me.
I hope you and your supporters never know what that feels like. I hope none of them realize that yeah, some men are complete bastards and WILL assault them. And they’ll use this same ‘you asked for it’ blaming/shaming mentality to ensure your silence.
Because you know there are women out there just like this, who will believe it.
Lee, It’s like gang mentality. Everyone nodding their heads at something they haven’t bothered to examine. Just agree. Not surprising and nothing new there with that attitude.
So I now see, Xina. I posted my thoughts on the “”attack AAR”” theme over on the KKB site. Not that I think it will matter.
Some of those posters (on the blog stated) are painting all with a broad brush. If we all agreed, I doubt there would be 122+ posts on the subject.
Shiloh, please read through the comments here if you haven’t already. There is speculation on Karen’s blog and on Twitter that the POV expressed by AAR Rachel is representative of AAR’s owners and the readership of AAR.
Lynn AAR and Sandy AAR, both site owners along with Rachel and Blythe AAR, expressed strongly opposing points of view. Further, many AAR readers have weighed in by disagreeing.
Rachel speaks only for herself.
Sandy, Rachel is an owner of the site. Whether or not you agree with her views, what she says does reflect upon AAR. She, as an owner of AAR, derailed a post on freedom of speech in the very first comment with an offensive diatribe. She clearly, as stated in Jane’s post, has the right as someone who owns the site to make the comment, but that there are disagreeing co-owners does not take away from the poor image of the site that she is propagating with her vitriol.
Ellie:
Sandy,Rachel is an owner of the site.Whether or not you agree with her views, what she says does reflect upon AAR.She, as an owner of AAR, derailed a post on freedom of speech in the very first comment with an offensive diatribe.She clearly, as stated in Jane’s post, has the right as someone who owns the site to make the comment, but that there are disagreeing co-owners does not take away from the poor image of the site that she is propagating with her vitriol.
I’d agree with this if 1. AAR wasn’t a site that has always said they aren’t here to play nice and sugar coat things, I find that AAR has always believed in saying it as it is, and never asks anyone, reader or writer to censor themselves. It Rachel had been asked to censor her opinion because it was different from the popular one or had it been deleted I’d have thought less of the site. If the people who run the site aren’t being true in their comments what’s to stop them from censoring the readers. 2. If what you said were true and Rachel’s first comment was an offensive diatribe. I do agree that maybe it wasn’t said as sensitivly as it could have been, the way she said what she was trying to say did leave a lot of room to be misinterpreted by someone who didn’t want to try and understand a different POV, but the post was about women protecting themselves, and how many women now a days don’t do everything in their power to protect themselves and get victimized. What I find ironic is that you mentioned the article was about the right to speech and yet you disregard Rachel’s right of it. Clearly everyone has a right to stop reading AAR if they don’t like the way it’s run, but I for one would be more likely to stop coming here if AAR picked and chose what their rules applied to and what they didn’t.
I heard about this thru Karen’s blog and commented…and I’m going to go ahead and post my comments here as well.
My apologies if this steps on any toes.
~*~
Most of this makes my head, and my heart, hurt. A Lot.
This bit:
Absolutely actions have consequences. Now without reading the entire article, I can’t be sure what the context is, and I’m not sure my blood pressure or my head can handle reading the entire thing.
I’m going to made an assumption here, though. I’m assuming there’s some religious beliefs playing into these viewpoints-if I’m wrong, my apologies.
But going on those assumptions, I have these few things to say.
Matthew 18:33
Luke 6:36
1 John 3:17
Matthew 5:7
No compassion…?
Actions DO have consequences, I agree with that. If a woman (or man) has unprotected sex, she needs to be prepared to handle the consequences-often, she isn’t and this is a sad thing. Sometimes it’s something like an unplanned pregnancy.
Sometimes it’s AIDS. I’ve watched people die from AIDs, have cared for them and sadly seen some of them die far, far younger than they ever should have. Are these consequences? Yes. Sad, heartbreaking consequences…and it’s just as sad and heartbreaking to think there are people who would have no compassion for them.
Sometimes a girl goes out for a fun night with a guy she thinks is a nice, fun guy and he ends slipping drugs into her drink. Date rape shouldn’t be an acceptable consequence and my heart hurts to think that somebody wouldn’t have compassion for those women.
I actually have no problems with virtue, but that’s going to be a personal choice, one people can’t really force on others.
But I also think that if more people would practice compassion…and if I’m right in assuming faith is playing in her viewpoints, I’ve just got one more point here to make.
Matthew 7:1
We were called to witness… not judge.
This whole thing kinda confounds me.
I can tell everyone how this whole discussion started, since I was one of the first posters. The blog by Jane was talking about free speech; i.e., that even the vilest of ideas should not be censored. Agreed. But then Rachel decided to jump in with her answer to this, quite off topic, that date rape doesn’t really occur. That young women should know what uncontrollable creatures men are and not frequent gatherings where they and alcohol will be. Most posters agreed with me that this was ridiculous. Some posters did not, and it went on from there. Should people who disagreed with Rachel not have said anything and let her comments stand? I don’t think so, Tim.
I don’t live in Tweetland, so I don’t know what you all are talking about wrt that. But if this blog has gotten attention, so much the better. Maybe it will finally expose the out-dated notion that date rape doesn’t occur for the nonsense that it is. If some tweeter is misconstruing things, well, so are quite a few of the posters here. It can’t be helped. But maybe it will get someone else to come read the whole discussion and come to the correct conclusions.
And if you come here for romance, maybe you should stick to the boards. These blogs are set up for discussion of other topics and like any discussion, other things crop up. When it gets out of hand, the moderators step in. If your feelings get hurt, take your marbles and go home. Nobody can make you stay.
Lee: Lee
Interesting. Since you were one of the first posters, you must have been one of the first to equate “”Women can not count on absolute safety no matter the situation. They still need to exercise common sense.”” with “”date rape doesn’t really occur.””
After which there were many heated comments about veils, old school romance, and ‘why do you people even read romance?’ During which comments, this: “”that even the vilest of ideas should not be censored. Agreed.”” was most definitely not agreed upon.
And just FYI, my feelings are not hurt. I’m just disgusted by the unreasoned arguments occurring on a blog that styles itself “”All About Romance: Romance news and commentary.””
I’m not surprised. Leave it certain Tweeters and bloggers to manipulate this discussion to their own advantage. Anyone who can read, will realize that the opinions are varied. Sorry to add more fuel to this fire. I came to it late, but will leave it now.
I’ve now read several comments on Twitter and other blogs making the giant leap in logic that the entire AAR community must be intolerant right wingers.
Now come on. Since two of the AAR owners and numerous long-time regulars have spent the last couple of days passionately arguing against a blame-the-victim mentality, that’s unsupportable and unfair. This fire doesn’t need any more fuel.
Gaah. What an amazing mass of hyperbole.
Since quite a few commenters made giant leaps of logic, I’d say that turn-about is fair play.
AAR Sandy – Yes ma’am.
Okay, time for everybody to take a deep breath.
We don’t have to agree with each other — and we certainly don’t — but please do not ridicule the beliefs and passionately held personal opinions of others.
Disagree all you want. Just please do it respectfully.
Xina – would you prefer the arguing that’s going nowhere, accomplishing nothing? What answers do you have when at fraternity’s girls are date raped? Castration could be a start, but our laws don’t allow castration. So, what are your solutions?
Dhympna,
You are correct this site is about fiction not personal political and moral views.
Xina,
You are correct our children should be taught from an early age to respect each other, and when they are adults, you can only hope and pray that they will practice what they were taught. Unfortunately, that is not what society is witnessing i.e. the fraternity problems and the bullying.
Karen,
You are correct in your opinions/beliefs because they are yours and you have a right to believe in them, just as I have the right to believe in mine.
Historical romance novels are not about the sex, there about the stories of a h/’sh who fall in love and ultimately commit to each other, after circumstances try to tear them apart/bring them together. Real life isn’t like that as has been discussed throughout this thread. Romance novels are fairytales with some semblance of reality.
Ah well, sanctimonious drivel in the name of religion. Isn’t that the answer to everything?? I hate when it comes to this. Like beating head against wall. Not interested.
@Xina I still wonder at the amount of people willing to blame the victim.
It would be interesting to note if these people would blame their daughters if they were raped. Would they say, “”Honey, that skirt really was short, and you only said no once, so waddaya expect? Boys will be boys after all!””
Also, the whole marriage-is-the-answer-to-everything stance is just baffling. I guess if you’re married and you refuse your husband sex, and he forces you, that doesn’t count as rape?
As somebody pointed out on Twitter earlier, there was a 91 year old raped in her own home the other day, had she not been married, would they have blamed her for not having a man around? I shudder to think.
Karen, I’m thinking that many of these posters with these opinions do not have daughters who are young women…who go to clubs or live on a college campus. I’m also thinking that dressing them all in Burqas would solve a boatload of problems. And the young men would be off the hook. sounds lovely doesn’t it??
@nancy
The bible most anglophones (and other languages) use is a product of organized religion. Most practitioners would not know the unexpurgated words of JC if it bit them in the arse ;)
*****
Really. I expected a discussion about fiction, rather than the flagellating of RL victims and a discursive flogging of post modernist feminism.
JC does not believe in Organized Religion.
According to who’s bible?
Described Organized Religion Perfectly? Bah – JC does not believe in Organized Religion. The Choice of Freewill and Independent Thinking – Yes!