Rape Culture – Part 1/3: What exactly is Rape Culture?

Rape Culture is an integral part of the patriarchal falsehood.

The Wikipedia definition is as follows:

Rape Culture is a term for social environments or societies in which sexual violence and rape are common and even tolerated to a large extent.” Rape Culture transfers the responsibility for taking precautions against and prevention of rape to the victims (victim blaming): Women are advised to be careful about their choice of clothes, where they go, and the kind of undertakings and contacts they engage in. That is accompanied by a belittling of rape and the reduction of potential victims to sex objects.

In its manifestation, Rape Culture means that individuals in the social role “woman” are seen and addressed as sex objects without a will of their own by individuals in the social role “man”. Self-determination over one’s own body, a human right, is questioned or blatantly ignored. As this is about social roles again, a man can harass a woman (the most frequent case), just as a lesbian woman in the social role “man” might stalk a biromantic transgender man in the social role “woman”, etc. The behaviours which express Rape Culture range from an insulting initiation of contact up to the creation of threatening situations such as being pursued on the street, or the victim being groped against their will, or being grappled. The worst form of Rape Culture is forced sexual contact in whatever form, in other words rape itself. All genders who live the patriarchal falsehood are equally involved in the emergence of Rape Culture: Those, which take on the social role “woman” as well as those which take on the social role “man”.

When the “Prince Charming” mask becomes too wearisome for an asshole in the social role “man”, he simply drops it. A deeply misogynistic person who is openly living their women-despising personality parts remains. These people are offensive and disrespectful individuals, who will not accept a “no” or “stop” from women, regard sexual compulsion as normal social behaviour and who will, in the worst case, even resort to rape. Such misogynist and disrespectful behaviours of men (“give it up already, you slut!”) teaches women to suspect any attempt at seduction by a man as a hostile action: “Fuck off, you rapist!” In a situation like this, the following thoughts will emerge in the potential victim:

  • How do I know that he stops, if I say stop?
  • How far do I have to escalate the situation until he listens (and stops)?
  • Where is the nearest escape route?
  • Do friends of mine know where I am?
  • In case of emergency, what could I use as weapon?
  • Can I defend myself?

Should the person in the social role “man” who asked for sex be an offensive, disrespectful asshole who continues unwanted activities after a “no” or “stop” it is a good idea to have these options ready, pre-emptively! Should, however, the man who asked for sex be a consent-respecting, respectful and friendly person, who would immediately accept a “no”, he will still receive an overly aggressive “No!!” as answer to his polite request, perhaps in combination with emotional violence (slut shaming) or even a physical attack (giving him a push or a slap) – in lieu of all offending men who have treated the addressed woman disrespectfully in the past. With the latter reaction the addressed woman has contributed her portion to the emergence of Rape Culture – a friendly and respectful interessent has been turned away with unearned aggression, who has experienced another disappointment of the sort which can contribute to him becoming an asshole with or without a mask over time.

Rape Culture – Part 2/3: The difference between victim blaming and the systemic participation of women

Individuals in the social role “woman” often get into a victim role in Rape Culture. A familiar reaction is to declare individuals in the social role “woman” guilty for offences committed against them. This behaviour is called victim blaming, which is a central part of Rape Culture. A typical trope of victim blaming is the alleged connection between the length of her skirt and her sexual availability. The artist Rosea Posey beautifully captures the absurdity of this connection in the following picture:

Source:
Rosea Posey (2012) Judgements [Online]. Available at https://www.flickr.com/photos/roseaposey/7173294256 (Accessed 26 May 2018). I do not own this picture.

“Asking for it” in the sense of “provoking an offence” is the most obvious of all victim blaming formulations, designations as “prudish” in this context simply ignore women’s rights for self-determination over their own bodies. While the length of her skirt might be a hint whether a woman is feeling more or less sexy that day, it does not constitute any form of “sexual availability”. Mutual consent of all individuals involved is compellingly necessary in any and all sexual activities (actually, in all human activities that involve more than one person). The person who breaks consent is committing a criminal offence!

Example:

A woman walks alone, at night, and in a mini skirt, through the streets of a large city. Time and again, police officers have issued warnings to not exhibit this behaviour as a woman and to dress less revealing. This advice is, however, quite the double-edged sword:

  • From a purely ethical point of view this advice is wrong: Because no matter how a woman dresses, self- determination over one’s own body is a basic human right. The responsibility for any form of assault always lies with the perpetrator, never with the victim. To blame the behaviour of a woman as a reason for a transgression against her is always an excuse of an offender, nothing else.
  • From a purely pragmatic view this advice is correct: Because in a patriarchal society women, who dress revealingly, are harassed more often than a women who dresses modestly. A woman who, due to such a warning, choses to wear modest clothing reduces the danger of disrespectful treatment and sexual assault.

The last point amplifies why I am of course not arguing that all people would suddenly become good and respectful, if only women would unblock their sexuality. Mankind will always contain stupid people and assholes. That is, for example, deducible from the fact that 80% of all crimes are committed by 20% of the population (repeat offenders). People can already be part of the 20% when their sexuality awakens, or become assholes due to frustration with the asshole dynamic over the course of their lives. As soon as people have become assholes, however, their personal history is ethically irrelevant, because all individuals, as soon as they are of age, are 100% responsible to treat their fellow human beings respectfully and do their part for a good and holistically functioning society.

Assholes, no matter how they became thus, will become offenders if and when an occasion presents itself. An occasion is any situation with one or more vulnerable individuals in range. That is, by the way, valid for all psychological and physical acts of violence, not only for offenses from the categories of Rape Culture. If no vulnerable individuals are present, offenders tend to project the social role “woman” on everything which is not clearly attributable to the social role “man”. This is why that projection can also affect people who have never assumed the social role “woman” or are intentionally working against the patriarchal falsehood. If most women fully lived their sexuality with all suitable, respectful, consent-adhering resonance people, there would notwithstandingly still be enough assholes, psychopaths and rapists in the world. And it would still be absolutely necessary for women to reject them and bring charges against this sort of individuals. But it might be possible to break the vicious cycle of these group dynamics which produce new assholes from originally respectful and consent- honouring people by disappointment if female sexuality was lived in an active and honest way. In the long term, the population would settle down on a constant subset of assholes (probably the 20% plus standard deviation), which problem would still have to be solved by the constitutional state.