Friday, June 22, 2007

Framing the issue of rape versus sex

Over at Pandagon, Amanda Marcotte presents some apt analogies for what she calls the "conservative-sexist" and the "liberal-feminist" views of sex and rape: engaging in battles versus playing music. She extends the sexist battle concept into a basketball analogy:

The conservative-sexist model of rape is the same one used to define a foul in basketball. Basically, when sexual intercourse happens, the man team has scored a point against the woman team. Each team is allowed some strategies and disallowed others. In basketball, you’re supposed to snatch the ball from the other team, but you can’t cross certain lines or you’ll get a foul. This explains why rape trolls are so eager to find out what the “rules” are, i.e. when they are permitted to force sex. (”Is it rape if she’s drunk? What if she says yes and changes her mind? Is it okay to bully someone into it, so long as you don’t actually hold her down and force her? Are guilt trips okay?, etc.”) If there’s some ambiguity when the referee calls a foul, your teammates (other men) are supposed to clamor to your defense, regardless of whether or not you actually fouled. If the foul is called, then the woman team scores a point (or a free throw in basketball, but you get the idea). The idea that it’s wrong to have sex with someone unless she really, really wants to do it makes about as much sense as saying that you should only be allowed to get the ball in basketball if the defense hands it to you.

Whereas from the feminist angle, figuring out how to bend the rules doesn't enter into it at all. It's all about collaboration, about both people wanting to have sex with one another.

Go read Amanda's post, will ya?

No comments: