Wednesday, February 25, 2015


Do not read this unless you think Google will approve.

On August 2, 2013, I wrote a blog called “What’s So Bad About Rape?”  The main illustration was a Dolce and Gabbana advertisement of a man holding a woman down while three men stood by watching, possibly waiting.  There was a certain amount of nudity but everyone was “pretty.”  The other images were not quite so suggestive, though there was one in which a man was being restrained by a crowd of men.

This was my pay-off bottom line:


So just recently a commenter asked me why the media thinks that a woman being thrown down and raped in an alley by a stranger is worse than a man being thrown down in the same alley, beaten into critical condition, knifed, paralyzed for life, etc.  The person doesn’t ask for a pure moral judgment but asks a straightforward question about the way people react.  The commenter does not seem to realize that a man can be raped or that a raped woman might also be beaten, knifed, paralyzed etc.  But that’s not what he asked -- he asked about the way the media differently weights the two events.

The post was essentially a list.  Part of it came from a friend who counsels violent rapists in prison: not to make them feel better about it, but to help them figure out what inner maelstrom or arrogance is motivating them so they’ll stop.  I’ll make another list.

First, I want to note that this inquirer is not gender-identified, age-identified, or, let’s say, “education-identified.”  Following are things to think about.

1.  Either males or females can be raped.  Physiology for both requires lubrication.  Rapists do not normally carry K-Y jelly.  Rape without lube means torn flesh. Rape is access to viscera which are vulnerable.

2.  Raped men can be aroused as easily as raped women.  It is a deep reflex, unconscious, not related to pleasure, often related to violence and death.

3.  All rapes are by definition violent and unwanted.  In a culture defined by pride in one’s individual flesh and immediate space, it is not just physical and not just moral, but also a sanity invasion, forcing the surrender of personal identity.  The brain and nervous system is deeply confused, scrambled, traumatized esp. in an inexperienced person, which is why the idea of raping nuns and children is powerful.  Not just a physical event or even a destruction of innocence, but an attempt to destroy what makes us human.  (For the rapist as well, but they don’t get that.)

4.  Rape is a formally defined war and terrorism weapon.  It is dominance behavior.  War is arousing.  Part of the arousal is terror, contempt, rage.  Playing rape for the sake of arousal is often defended if it is done with consent, but it’s risky business in more than one way.

5.  Part of the confusion about rape is that “statutory rape” is possibly with consent and even real desire, so it’s wanted coitus.  What’s the problem? One is the possibility of conception if it is a female being raped, which is a physical burden she will have to carry as well as a psychological problem as well as a social problem she will have to manage: like how to get a good education, where to find the money for a baby, managing stigma.  In many states if she wants an abortion she will have to find the money to travel to a clinic, maybe a long ways, because there are some people who believe that punishment makes problems disappear.  All for “love.”  In some countries the problem of dealing with a rape victim is solved by killing the victim.  Her family does it.

6. HIV/AIDS is not equivalent to pregnancy.  It cannot be aborted.  It will be far far more expensive than birthing and raising a child.  HIV/AIDS will be contagious.  For the rest of one’s life it means a formal regime that will only keep one healthy with medication IF a schedule is followed, one that means weekly travel which -- in a northern climate in a remote place -- can be life-threatening in itself, requiring constant medical monitoring and invasion, that is simply unpleasant --  the meds are not exactly aspirin.  Only one-third of people in any circumstances who have this disease will have the self-discipline and determination to follow the regime.  But that’s no different from, say, diabetes or the tissue-rejection meds after a transplant.

7.  Self-discipline is a skill.  It is not a moral issue nor a psychological issue -- which it becomes in our authority-defiant society -- but a learned self-management that cannot be acquired from authority-figures imposing monitoring like a parent making you get up in the morning or do your homework.

8.  Historically women and children were “owned” by men the same as if they were horses.  They were domestic animals.  Their labor, their bodies, their ability to produce more humans which would add to the man’s wealth, all belonged to the man.  This conviction still persists and may be part of the reason men rape their own children.  They think they are entitled by ownership.  The women and children “belong” to them and therefore must obey them the same as a horse would have to.  Since rape is a benefit of owning someone, then a stranger who “uses” them is the same as a thief stealing money.  It’s interesting that often the most prudish men are the ones who find money the highest value in their practical lives.  Not sex.

9.  Until recently matters involving sex were hushed up by newspapers.  Now that the internet has enlightened us, the other media can also finally let us know the particulars, the proper terms, and the estimated pervasiveness of problems.  As when Kinsey discovered “men having sex with men” and even homosexual intercourse in stable relationships, we are hearing statistics like 20%, one in three, and even higher figures about sexually abused children, physically invaded women -- so common and accepted that people like Joe Biden and George Bush don’t hesitate to put their hands on women at public, high status, formal, diplomatically significant events monitored by cameras, microphones, and many attendants.  The conclusion has to be that keeping everything secret did NOT persuade people not to put beans up other people’s noses.  Rather it seems to have taught them that everything is as innocent as the ball pit at McDonalds.  But ignorance is not even good for children, who must be taught to keep balls where they belong.

10.  This does not exhaust the topic but it exhausts the writer.  I have a strong suspicion that Google is pursuing what I’ll call the Obama boomerang strategy.  When you are constantly criticized for something hard to defend but which yields a nice profit, if you comply with whatever it is that the controllers want to control, the calculated outcry from the other side may intensify so much that they will provide all the arguments and ammunition that would be useless if they came from you.  Pretty soon the critics will be overwhelmed and have to withdraw.  I certainly hope that’s the case with this sudden moral turn Google has taken.

Oh, and what about Wikipedia?  Isn’t that our marker for what the People know?  Think of something sexual so extreme you don’t know what the term for it means, look on Wikipedia and you’re likely to find a detailed description and a photo.  

And isn’t censorship a form of rape in the sense of wanting to own for profit, take identity where it doesn’t want to go?

No comments: