What About Feminist Porn?

The number one question I get asked in pornography debates is “what about feminist porn?” Everyone else seems to know about the existence of these unicorns, but I am completely unable to find any examples of feminist porn. What would that even look like? Given that we live in a society where women are valued for their appearance and sexuality above all else, it’s hard to imagine any kind of visual representation of female sexuality that doesn’t in some way pander to patriarchal standards and further, if nothing else, the idea that women exist as one-dimensional sexbots. Because we do not exist in a vacuum I struggle to imagine any kind of visual representation of female sexuality that doesn’t neatly package her sexuality for male consumption. Since women are already assumed to be in existence to service men sexually, even the most compassionate, respectful porn featuring the least conventional women would further the idea that women exist for male sexuality, rather than for their own. It is for this reason that any visual representation of female sexuality is problematic in a patriarchal society. But like I said, even before we get to that part of the argument, I have yet to see anything that could even begin to qualify as feminist.

Yet it is argued that feminist porn exists currently, and that people love it. In fact from how often this argument is made you’d think that “feminist porn” was the most popular genre, that everyone was watching it, and all of us cranky radicals had somehow just missed it in our research and writings. However as Nine Deuce said in her post on “janitor porn” there is very little out there even labelled as feminist porn. The vast majority of what is out there is not meant to be “female-friendly” in any way, let alone feminist. The VAST majority of porn out there depicts violence against women, which cannot regardless of label, be argued to be feminist. You can call the white horse purple, but that doesn’t make it true.

Further, this stuff with these labels of “feminist” is not what is primarily consumed, and certainly not by men (who are overwhelmingly the main perpetrators of sexual violence, meaning the ones who are most dangerous when affected by violent sexual imagery). When Ana Bridges conducted a study examining the content of the most popular pornography she wasn’t picking pornography from the most violent, brutal, horrible niches. She picked from the AVN most rented/watched/bought in a random pattern. What she found was that on that list was not “feminist” porn or “female-friendly” porn but overwhelmingly violence against women. In fact close to 90% showed violence, almost exclusively against women. The ones that weren’t blatantly degrading were still completely directed at men. Not only not feminist, but mostly violent, degrading, horrific things. Given that rape and violence against women are still happening on an epidemic scale, there is no possible way associating violence and arousal can be a good thing. So while 90% of porn consumers may claim to watch things that are made by female/feminist directors and not violent, the statistics say they are either lying or so brainwashed that they can think violence is normal sexual behavior (if it’s the latter we are in serious trouble).

But if I was to take this “feminist porn” seriously, where is this stuff? I tried to find some and in order to find any I had to search for several minutes and wade through many pages of cum shots and crying and rape to find anything labeled as “for women.” And this was searching for a very specific director who I had been told to look for due to her “wonderful” porn. In other words even knowing EXACTLY what I was supposed to be looking for, I could barely find it among the hundreds of rape porn sites. What I saw were extremely thin conventionally attractive blonde women with huge breasts roughly penetrating themselves with large dildos and giving a come fuck me look. As well there were images of the women being spanked, threatened, and in some cases choked as well as roughly penetrated by strap on dildos. The only difference I saw in this porn was that the violence was done by other women rather than by men. When Ana Bridges did a study on this she came to the same conclusion. That female directors are MORE likely to use violence against women than male directors, but that the perpetrators were more likely to be female than with a male director.

Seriously, stop with the “feminist porn.” It a) doesn’t actually exist, and b) it’s not what most people (even women) are watching and c) even pretending it exists, it’s just as violent as mainstream and therefore its existence is irrelevant since the two are just variations on different ways to treat women violently and as objects. Given how little “impact” this non-existant porn has on the industry and people in general, it’s clear that this question is purely a red herring designed as a way to justify a person’s individual use. No one wants to think of themselves as enjoying the suffering of women, so they pretend the group doesn’t include them by creating an imaginary category of “feminist porn.” Also it is clear that this “category” is so incredibly small that when we bring up a discussion of pornography, directing the conversation to the absolute smallest “niche” on the market ignores the reality of the 99.999% of what’s truly out there. Even if there was some tiny amount of “good porn” out there, no one is watching it. So whether it exists or not is irrelevant to the content of mainstream porn.

If they were feminists they wouldn’t care so much about being liked

Whenever I describe “funfems” to my non-radical friends as a bad thing they always scoff and say, “so what’s wrong with being fun? Oh right feminists are against fun.” Usually the second part is in a joking way, but it shows what “funfems” are really about. They are not about promoting feminism, they are purely about discrediting and working against feminism. Were they about feminism they would have chosen a more descriptive name, something like anti-rape feminists, pro-choice feminists, etc… They would have chosen a name that had something to with what they stood for (I.e. Radical) rather than something to do with what they didn’t stand for and a name purposefully intended to stir hate. By going with “funfems” they intended purely to show that the other kind of feminists weren’t fun, couldn’t take the joke (because what isn’t funny about a rape joke?) because they were so busy being against patriarchy. They chose the same vile tactic as people who call themselves pro-lifers rather than anti-abortionists. In choosing to base their entire “movement” around what they are not, against fun, against sex, they have based their entire movement quite literally around being anti-feminism.

And this is something that they clearly are. One thing that really struck me today is that despite the constant, “we’re against rape and we’re pro abortion rights!” mantra that these “feminists” say, there is rarely, if ever, any kind of mention of misogyny, hate, patriarchy, or oppression. You know, what feminism is about. The entire movement is totally centered around destroying the image of feminism as being pro-women’s rights and changing it entirely to “feminists” who are pro-what what used to count as sexism. There is very little that actually discusses why rape happens, why people are so violently against abortion, why the wage gap happens, etc… In fact there is never any mention of rape being fueled by misogyny or hate or the underlying patriarchy. In fact when it is mentioned that rape is largely a hate crime against women, the response is generally that rape is a humanist issue and that men are raped too, despite the fact that rape is an extremely gendered crime. There is only mention that it’s bad, and how judgmental other feminists are of their “choices.” They are so desperate to paint themselves as man-friendly that they forgot that that the underlying reason for these crimes against women is hatred of women, largely from men. It reminds me of the kid in school so desperate for popularity that she sells her real friends out and loses her morals to sit at the “cool table.”

This was crystallized for me today in a post that was supposedly about some event they were organizing to end rape (I think we all know by now which event) by promoting it with porn stars where, instead of talking about why rape happened and what they were doing to change that, they spent several pages talking about how (not why, only that it was happening) other feminists were criticizing them and that they were big meanie-butts who wanted to spoil the party because they weren’t fun. They didn’t address why our criticisms were wrong, only that we weren’t fun, that we wanted to oppress sex workers (because trying to address sex workers being raped and killed and abused is oh so much worse than actually being raped and killed and abused), and that we were hating. The thing that really stood out to me was the complete denial of oppression or patriarchy. It was all about MY choice, MY fun, MY empowerment through stripping and porn. So much of their arguments are centered around their individual choices, that they completely forgot what exactly the original idea of free choice was supposed to be fighting. Misogyny and the patriarchy.

Talking about free choice and agency is for another post. But I find it hard to take any feminists seriously who refuse to acknowledge why it is that women get raped, or even that overwhelmingly rape is done by men to women. Despite the fact that women do rape men, overwhelmingly men are raped by other men. Obviously it’s important to change the idea that men cannot be victims, but to put equal focus on the idea that women rape men just to sound neutral and dude-friendly is ridiculous. It’s hard to acknowledge the fact that these women, who supposedly are against violence against women, are feminists when they are frightened of associating with the word feminism and instead need to have an alternative name, fun or sexy or slutty to tack on to make it more palatable to men. They can’t just be feminists, they have to be sexy fems or fun fems or slutty fems or just slutty. It’s hard to take any feminist seriously who cannot even acknowledge that patriarchy and misogyny are at the root of violence against women. And if they really wanted to be against violence, they would be able to acknowledge something that every dictator has known for centuries. That dehumanizing and compartmentalizing a group of people leads to violence against that group. Instead what we hear are people who actively seek out being objectified and commodified (and enjoy it), who actively attempt to shed the idea that feminism is about fighting misogyny on a massive scale, and who purposefully go out of their way to undo the work that previous feminists have done, you know the hairy legged man hating angry feminists who got you the ability to have a job and get out of an abusive marriage. Defending the right to dehumanize oneself, an act that has led to genocide and oppression hundreds of times before, simply because it is an individual choice makes no sense.

Oppression and patriarchy are always talked about in nebulous ways. As though patriarchy and misogyny are perpetuated by imaginary beings who have nothing to do with them. It could never be conceived of that the “I love sluts” guy could be a rapist. It’s always someone else, some other guy with a giant face tattoo that says, “I hate women.” There is no oppressing or privileged class, everyone is already equal. These are people under the guise of humanist, as though they fight for human, rather than women’s rights. So why even pretend to be feminists if there is no oppressing class, no oppressed class. If everyone is already equal except that silly little problem of rape (which can be solved by more stripping and porn) why do we need feminists at all? Why do they even pretend to be feminist at all?

I think these women know that the balance is off. There is no equality. They know that women are by far the largest group affected by rape. They know that it is women not men who are affected by wage discrimination, by reproductive laws. the problem is, they aren’t quite willing to take the next step of shedding their popularity, of challenging the status quo in a real way. They know something is wrong, but they aren’t ready or willing to destroy their “sexy fun” image to fix it.

These are people so desperate for acceptance and a cool image that they forgot that the entire point of feminism is to challenge popular ideas. It’s not possible to be simultaneously seeking popularity and challenging the popular culture and ideas. That is the entire point of feminism, to challenge the status quo, meaning what the majority of people like and believe. This means a lot of what you believe in WILL be unpopular. Somewhere in-between gathering “I love sluts!” supporters, this got lost. In trying so hard to be cool, they completely forgot that there is no way to challenge the popular opinions without being unpopular. A group is oppressed because people hate them. Women are oppressed because culture and largely men hate them. It is impossible for women to both get these men to support them and think they’re cool and to challenge the oppression of women from these same men.

A group cannot base an entire movement around discrediting another group. They cannot honestly believe that it’s possible to fight something and not know why it happens. They cannot have their own beliefs without actually knowing why they stand for them. The entire concept of “funfems” is not to end violence against women, but to end feminism.

If you don’t like it, don’t watch it.

As I walk down the street a lingerie store is plastered with pictures of airbrushed women staring seductively at the camera. A popular clothing store for teens features thin girls modeling thongs, bikinis, and leggings while doing “porn star” poses and faces. A store specializing in little girls’ clothes features young girls jutting our their hips, pouting at the camera, and shoving their butts in the air. When I go to buy some gum at the store I see rows of women in lingerie, in bikinis, and nude with strategically placed captions staring back at me, promising the youngest and hottest at my disposal. In the women’s section I see scantily clad women looking seductively at the camera with captions promising to teach me how to behave like a porn star, how to pleasure my boyfriend, how to maximize my cleavage, how to diet to a size 2. There are ads on the wall for cigarettes, beer, soda, and potato chips with scantily clad women sucking the cigarettes, licking the beer, and caressing the junk food. In the backs of magazines are advertisements for live sex toys in the form of women. As I drive home I pass billboards filled with hot women promising to gyrate and pour water on themselves for my viewing pleasure. It’s insinuated that I can rent one of these women like a car.

When I get home and check my email my inbox is filled with ads for videos of brutal rape, women gagging on penises, and women being gang banged. I browse through blogs and accidentally click a wrong link, which floods my screen with graphic hardcore porn ads filled with animations of men ejaculating on women’s faces, women being anally penetrated, and of women with tears streaming down their faces while they are raped. I type in a search and many of the pages are filled with porn. I flip on the TV and see ads for completely non-sexual products such as deodorant featuring a porn-ready woman in a white t-shirt shaking her breasts while covered in water. When I look through cable channels I have to skip through several dozen porn channels to find a “regular” movie.

I go to a party with friends and they want to look through porn for entertainment. I start seeing a new boyfriend who requests to degrade and dominate me like he’s seen in porn. He is repulsed by body hair and thinks body fat is unnatural. He enjoys the thought of me being uncomfortable or in pain to satisfy his urges. A friend goes to a party and is raped according to a porn script the boys just watched.

If I have a child he or she won’t have to look for it, it will find him or her. I will have to put enormous effort into porn-proofing my home and even then he will almost surely see it on someone else’s computer, on his phone, hear about it from friends. I will have to arm him before he’s even hit puberty to know that what he sees on the computer isn’t real. I will have to live knowing that my child has seen a woman being double penetrated and ejaculated on before he’s had his first kiss and there’s nothing I can do about it.

Even if I somehow manage to avoid ever seeing porn, it is expected that I dress like a porn star, wax like a porn star, perform in bed like a porn star, and fully embrace all of my partner’s porn-fueled fantasies. I am told that if I don’t perform to his demands I will be cheated on, dumped, abused, and it will all be my fault. I am told that if I refuse to date men who who use porn I will be alone or at best am a controlling bitch and will probably be lied to anyways.

So really, I would love to follow the advice that if I don’t like porn I shouldn’t watch it. I would love to live in a world where absolutely everything from children’s shows to pharmaceutical ads wasn’t influenced by porn. I would love to live in a world where most of the men I meet don’t think of me in reference to the last porn movie they just watched. The advice seems to easy, just don’t watch. I would love to avoid it. Just tell me how.

Amazing Story

Even a brutal gang rape is barely enough to send a man to jail for more than six months and unsurprisingly no one one listened to the “slut” at first. But this is absolutely amazing to read through. This woman is so brave for her actions.

Rape Justice After 20 Years

Rape Series Part 4: About Victim Blaming

Can women prevent rape as individuals? Is there some truth to the idea that women are raped because they dress or behave in a certain way? Short answer: no. The idea that a woman can prevent rape based on her behavior rests on the idea that men rape out of horniness when they don’t. It also rests on the idea that men rape out of miscommunication, when they don’t. And lastly it rests on the idea that men do not choose to rape, when they do. Men do not rape because they want sex, they rape because they want to dominate. No amount of sexual satisfaction can prevent rape, therefore no amount of sexual tension or arousal can cause rape.

It doesn’t matter if the woman was wearing the shortest skirt known to mankind, if she was dancing in the most provocative way a person can dance, if she smiled seductively at every single man in the room, and then led one (or more) of them to a private room, she still has the complete right to refuse sex. Even if at some point she says, “I really want to have sex with you! I am giving consent for sex, let’s have sex!” And then five minutes later changes her mind, she still has the right to not be penetrated or touched. To say otherwise denies that she has full ownership of her body. It places her body on par with a commodity, somewhat like a rental car. In that she is able, with some sort of action, to temporarily transfer ownership to someone else. If her body truly was her own, if the government respected a woman’s right to control her own body, there would be no question about when she ceased to control what happens to her, because there would never be such a time.

If you are to blame the victim for say, inviting a man up to her room in the first place, it ignores the conscious choice of the man to rape her. Even when you get to the point where there is kissing or touching, to assume that sex rape “just happened” is to ignore the fact that at some point the man had a choice. To proceed with sex or to not proceed with sex. It isn’t as though a person can “accidentally” slip into someone else unannounced. I feel a lot of discussions of this ignore the fact that the actual act of initiating sex takes effort, a bit of thought, and some time. It isn’t like a switch is flipped. He has to consciously guide himself there, and if she doesn’t want the sex, *trigger warning* he is going to have to consciously force himself into her. There is no accident, there is no split second action. It is a conscious choice that he made to disregard her choice in the matter and rape her. No matter how she acted up until this point, there is a decisive moment when he has to make the choice to rape her. At some point, he has made a decision to not listen or care.

But none of this matters to the law. There exists a point to them where the woman ceases to have control of her own body. Depending on the individual case, this point can be as early as when she decides to go to a party. It is easier to place the blame on the woman than to admit that at some point, the man decided to be a violent disgusting monster and commit a horrible act. This would force men everywhere to acknowledge that other men are frequently capable of being so vile and disgusting. It is much easier to assume that he couldn’t help it since she wore such a short skirt. It turns it into a sort of “flattery” that she should be grateful he was that attracted to her, rather than the act of a sick, twisted monster.

This isn’t even counting the fact that the vast majority of rapes are committed by someone the victim knew. That means it was probably premeditated. She probably would have seen him before and assumed him to be safe. It is likely she knew him well, in which case he must have known what he was doing. He already knew what he needed to know. Yet in spite of all this, I am still as a woman told that it is my responsibility to prevent men from raping me. Simultaneously I am constantly told by the media that the only way to be accepted by society is to be “hot.” I am told that to be hot I have to party, drink, wear tiny skirts and dresses, high heels, and learn to strip and pole dance. I am told that the ultimate goal is to attract a good man. But when a woman does this and all she succeeds in doing is attracting a monster, she is blamed and told she is a whore. In doing this, society trains women to be raped.

Yet, despite all this, I am still warned to follow precautions. These precautions, despite not being applicable to 99.99% of rapes, I am told will protect me. If I imprison myself, I won’t be raped and if I am I won’t be blamed.

I have received the following things that tell me how I can prevent being raped, as though I somehow possess the key to controlling the male thirst for power. I shouldn’t wear my hair in a ponytail, talk on my phone while walking, listen to my ipod outside, carry things, leave my keys in my pocket, open my windows, get into my car without checking under and in it, walk past vans, take the time to put my groceries in the car without a male guarding me, walk through a parking lot (crowded or not) without male supervision, walk through parking garages without a male supervisor, go to parties, drink alcohol, wear clothes that are remotely revealing or remotely tight, turn my back on my drink even for a second to look across the room, turn my back on the room to have a sip of my drink, be alone with men, dance, be outside alone, go into the woods, mention sex around boys, make eye contact with men, act timid around men, ask for directions, go into public restrooms, walk away from main streets, basically I shouldn’t exist if I don’t want to be raped. And this isn’t even a complete list. If men were told this was all risky behavior that would put them at risk for having their bodily cavities pried open and tortured by women, hell would freeze over and the world would cease to exist until every last woman was locked in prison to reduce the risk. Any person with a 7 year old’s reading comprehension can see that this list restricts women’s freedoms to such an extent that she could be sent to prison and have more freedoms. So why is this considered common sense? It doesn’t even protect against the vast majority of rapes, the ones committed by people the victim knew, the kind she is most often blamed for.

The fact that victim blaming is the norm just shows how little regard the law and society has for the idea that women control their own bodies. The idea that women’s bodies aren’t public property is upsetting to many men. If society respected the right of a woman to choose what happens to her body, abortion rights wouldn’t be a question. Victim blaming could not exist because there would be no question about when a woman ceases to control her own body, since the point would never come. There are even laws allowing dead people and people in comas control of what happens to their bodies, so why isn’t the same privilege awarded to living women? When someone is rear-ended in a car accident, no one wonders why the car in front didn’t see the other car coming and move. So why are women expected to see rape coming and avoid it?

Rape Series Part 3: The Myth of the Rape Fantasy

Rape fantasies are one of the top 10 fantasies women describe. So it must be fairly perplexing to a rapist or potential rapist (aka MRA) when rape is a crime. How can a woman’s sexual fantasy be a crime? But that’s fairly clearly just an excuse to rape someone. No one would argue that because someone wants to give a ton of money to a charity that he wants to be robbed. The “rape fantasy” is a high ranking fantasy, but it isn’t actually rape she’s fantasizing about. It’s freedom and desireability. I know that makes no sense, having her freedoms taken away is fantasizing about freedoms. But it is.

As I’ve stated several times, we live in a culture that demonizes female sexuality. Women who have sex are sluts, whores, and skanks and aren’t worthwhile human beings. Meanwhile she’s also expected to look the part of the “whore” while not actually being one. This is a ridiculous constricting double bind. A woman’s entire life worth revolves around a penis and her relation to it. Most women enjoy orgasms and enjoy physical affection and some kinds of sex, but when they show this, society outcasts them. Even though men aren’t the only ones who enjoy and want sex, they are the only ones who get to define its rules. So if you are a woman who enjoys sex, what are your options to not be ostracized? Either sign over your sexuality to a husband, or keep quiet. Obviously there’s a bit of leeway in there, but according to a poll by the Guardian the average number of sex partners a man will tolerate from a girl they want to date is 4, maybe 5 if he really likes her (regardless of his number). What’s a woman to do?

There is an exception in the stultifying of women clause, and that is if she didn’t choose to have sex. This is shown by the very weird exception most anti-choicers will make to allow abortions in the case of rape or incest, in that women don’t need to be punished for sex that wasn’t up to them. While people do usually attempt to blame women for being raped, generally if people can accept that a rape actually happened, the woman is not responsible.

And voila, the “rape” fantasy is born. If she is not responsible for the sex, then it does not make her a whore to enjoy it (which it shouldn’t anyways). If women did not have to feel guilty about sex, enjoying sex, or masturbation, they wouldn’t feel obligated to blame it on someone else in their fantasies. In other words, in case you didn’t catch this, women do not fantasize about rape, they fantasize about being able to enjoy sex guilt-free. But because most of these women have no idea what a situation of completely egalitarian seduction and sex would look like, in order to feel guilt-free they fantasize about an anonymous pleasurebot coming in and ravishing them. Society puts into women the idea that if they say to someone, “yes I would love to have sex” she is a whore. So in her fantasy, she has to imagine not having said yes in order to be ravished. In the real world that would be rape. But that is not what rape is. Rape is the most soul-destroying horrific crime on the face of the Earth (short of murder) and no woman fantasizes about being raped. Women fantasize about guilt-free sex in a word that makes them feel guilty about having sex.

Further, people often incorrectly assume rape is a crime of lust. The the woman was just so hot and sexy the man could not control himself. And our society tells women that their only value is in their sex appeal. I’ve heard numerous (horrifying) times men saying women should be flattered that they got raped. People also assume ugly people cannot be raped. So the woman is picturing herself to be so sexy and desired that he just can’t keep his hands off of her.

No woman actually wants to be raped. Even women who fantasize about having some control taken away do not want to be raped because she would need to have ultimate, “get the fuck off me” power and the power to choose her partner. And even if women feel flattered when some men desire them, the real life act of being lusted after like meat is creepy, unsettling, and sometimes frightening. I’ll say it again, the rape fantasy has nothing to do with rape, it has to do with enjoying sex guilt free and wanting to be desired. Comparing a rape fantasy to actual rape is like comparing someone’s statement, “I’m so hungry I could eat a horse” to then taking a horse, slaughtering it, and shoving it’s putrid remains down said person’s throat. Comparing the two trivializes the actual crime of rape and it does not excuse anyone from actually raping someone. The very act of fantasizing about “rape” makes the sex wanted, and the very definition of rape is unwanted. Therefore it’s not even a rape fantasy.

Rape Series Part 2: The False False-Rape Accusation

Wait, before you get all angry, I know, some are false. I know, I’m not saying they never happen. They do, just rarely. This article from Yes means Yes will tell you more. What I’m talking about are the anecdotal things we hear, mainly from anti-false-rape groups. Many MRAs claim to have a false rape story, something that set them off. They were terrified, they didn’t know what was happening some girl they boned is suddenly crying rape (cause all women secretly just want to put all men behind bars, right?) Most of them include a sexual interaction with a woman that they enjoyed and thought was consensual, and then BAM out of the blue, she’s calling it rape. Before I launch into my analysis, here are two stories to ponder (trigger warning).

My friend went to a party in high school. The most popular boy in school was there. They flirted, she liked him, he liked her. They went upstairs, both got naked, and made out. She didn’t want to have sex, but he did. She was about to protest, but he kissed her so she couldn’t talk and held her wrists so she couldn’t escape and raped her. She was traumatized, and ended up screwing up her life after the incident. The boy, on the other hand, called her for dates several times after and gushed to his friends about how cool she was and how great she was in bed. He honestly had no idea that he raped her.

Another friend of mine was raped in college at a frat party. She told her friends about it, and word got around what had happened. Several days later, the boy was overheard ranting on and on about how much of a lying slut she was. He genuinely seemed to have no idea he raped anyone. Noticing a trend?

So here’s what I want to get across. Very few rapists know they raped someone. In one study by Diana Russell, approximately 25% of men said they had participated in an event that was legally sexually assault. Far fewer than that knew they had committed a crime. By a factor of about 25. So you can understand why I have some trouble believing most of the claims of false rape actually being false. In the event that a false accusation TRULY did happen, they would have my sympathy. Truly. But it’s exceptionally rare to happen. Most studies put false rape accusations around 2-5% of all accusations. Barely higher than all other crimes (which is approximately 2%). While this is tragic, it would be impossible to lower this number to below the percentage of other crimes. The only way to possibly make false rape accusations lower would be to lower rape accusations in general. This would either be accomplished by decriminalizing rape or by lowering rape rates. It’s absurd to suggest that rape laws become less strict since there is already an epidemic of rape and almost none are reported. A lot of people who claim to have been falsely accused think rape is worse than other crimes to be accused of and therefore, no one should be punished unless it’s “real” rape (like violent life in danger jumping out of bushes and holding a gun type rape, which makes up the extreme minority of all rapes).

Let’s review some of the evidence from the men frequently claiming to have been falsely accused. I researched the topic at great length on MRA forums and found the following to be almost universally true and agreed upon:

-Real rape is heinous.

-Real rape happens very very very rarely

True rape is more around 1 in a 100 000, it is a very rare incident rate in our culture.

-Force must be used for it to be rape.

The true meaning of rape is to use physical force or threat to have sex.

-Consent does not always have to exist, she must say no and fight for it to be rape.

So the problem is not that the girl consents, she never consents —- she just somehow omits to say no.

-Women rarely say if they want sex, so persuasion is frequently necessary and OK.

If a person is “overpersuaded”, too bad, they’re responsible for not getting up and leaving.

They will have to ignore minor “no” signals in some situations.  It’s impossible to tell if she means them, or if she enjoys the attention and just wants you to try harder!

-Most rape isn’t really rape at all, it is simply miscommunication.

-Men rape out of sexual frustration.

-Women who wear revealing clothing are asking for it.

I just find it difficult to sympathize with female rape victims because (in general) women use sexuality to thier benefit so often, so frequently and in so many forms, that I cannot feel sorry when it is *forced* upon them.

[We should allow] immodestly dressed women to be raped. … This is needed to prevent women from exercising too much sexual power.

slut culture comes first, rape culture is the response.

-Having sex with women with impaired consent is not rape since the woman chose to get drunk or take drugs.

if a woman gets drunk, and she doesn’t remember what happened, tough.  She got drunk on her own.  She voluntarily vacated her faculties.  Ditto if SHE takes drugs.

If they have too many drinks, they’re responsible for having too many.

-Consent may be implied in any number of ways.

If your in that situation, you must have done something to say/indicate “This is ok”.  At the least, at some point you let him into your room(s), onto your couch.

-Many women secretly want to be raped.

a serious crime isn’t something that could just as easily be the fantasy of a lifetime fulfilled. Especially when that fantasy of a lifetime is actually being forcibly raped. It can even be rape if the woman enjoys getting raped, as some surely have.

-Rape is more serious for men than it is for women.

If a heterosexual male is raped by other male prisoners in jail, it is a completely unnatural and perverted experience as well as being against his will. A woman who is raped by a man is still experiencing a relatively natural experience since she voluntarily has sex with her husband/boyfriend

-Ugly women can’t be raped. In fact, they should be grateful.

Am I the only one who has noticed that the ones who go on and on about the dangers of rape, wearing rape whistles and carrying pepper spray are the ones who couldn’t get a decent looking guy to have sex with them much less rape them?

-Rape just really isn’t that bad. Prison is far worse, even if the man did rape someone.

Is rape really that bad? It’s a horrible experience but you get over it. Prison is worse then being a victim of any crime.  I would say life in prison is worse then death.

I would much rather be raped once than be locked in a cage…I have come to the conclusion that there are lots of things in this nasty world that are  much worse than vaginal rape. There are only a few ways to physically rape someone – there are apparantly limitless ways to rape a person’s soul.

They also frequently used terms such as “over-persuade” and made a distinction between rape and rape-rape. So let’s review. These men claim to have been falsely accused of rape, while at the same time basically believing that nothing counts as rape if it wasn’t “stranger rape.” If the rape didn’t fit the Hollywood drama account of rape, then it’s not real. They claim they were falsely accused of rape while also believing it is legal and OK to take advantage of drunk women, believing that no doesn’t usually mean no, that some women secretly want to be raped, that women who wear slutty clothes deserve to be raped and it shouldn’t be a crime, and that when women say no it just means push harder. In case that wasn’t clear enough for you, I’ll say it again. They don’t think they raped someone, but according to them, the vast majority of rapes, (i.e. “acquaintance rape”) aren’t actually rape. I have a hard time believing that a “false” rape accusation against a man who believes that inviting a man into your room is consent is truly false. Or that a man who believes women who dress scantily deserves to be raped didn’t actually rape someone.

And for the minuscule number of false rape accusations that do happen? It’s slime like the above mentioned people that make it happen. With their insane double standards of “sluttism” for women, with their insistence that women be submissive and reject all sex while men are the ones allowed to enjoy sex, it’s that culture that perpetuates the reason for this. I’ve heard such horrifying things as:

I’m not in the least bit troubled by your claim that men would be admired for having sex with five women while women would be scorned. Men have a much higher sex drive than women so if a man manages to pull this off it is most likely because he wants it and if a woman consents to it it is most likely because she is a pathetic spineless people pleaser. I don’t think either of them have anything to be proud of but It’s quite obvious why they aren’t thought of the same way.

So how can anyone who claims to campaign for fewer false rapes (yes, that comment was from a page talking about how horrifying false rape accusations are) simultaneously campaign for harsher judgement on women and a tighter box around women’s sexuality? How can those two thoughts be reconciled? Basically, women should be ashamed to have sex and should have to face horrible social ostracism for having sex, but at the same time no desperate attempts to not be labeled a whore will be tolerated. Meanwhile, men should be allowed to roam freely, dicks akimbo expressing their naturally rape-happy sexuality. It’s pretty obvious most of these idiots campaigning for fewer false rapes do so because they’re actually rapists. Don’t forget either, almost everyone says they didn’t do it when accused of a crime.

Rape Series Part 1: Rape is not Miscommunication

Rape is not a misunderstanding. It has nothing to do with miscommunication. Rape would not be avoided if women spoke more clearly. Popular books would have us believe men and women simply speak different languages, and that oppression and rape would go away if we could all just speak the same language. Correction: they say rape would go away if women would learn to speak like men, as it is the only politically correct way of speaking. This is not the case. I know this because men as a whole are not stupid. To say that men rape because of a misunderstanding is to say men are stupid or socially inept. They are not.

The argument made by rape-apologists and MRAs is frequently this: most supposed rapists do not rape, most women simply do not speak clearly enough. Men are unable to interpret women’s complicated signals, and presume that if she didn’t want to be raped, she would say so. The argument is also that women enjoy being pursued and frequently put up a fight in order to make men chase them. Thus, no does not mean no. One MRA had this to say:

[Men] will have to ignore … “no” signals in some situations. It’s impossible to tell if she means them, or if she enjoys the attention and just wants you to try harder!

This is completely insane. The argument is frequently that women simply need to speak clearer, and that if we did, rape wouldn’t occur. But here we are being told that even when we say no, it can be interpreted as yes. Furthermore, he’s saying that men are not in fact so stupid and thick as to be unable to read no signals. They hear them/see them, they just choose to ignore them because ignoring them gives them the greatest chance of getting laid.

Rape is not the removal of consent, but the absence of consent. Legally if a woman has to express that she does not consent in order for it to be rape, it allows any woman who is unable to speak (coma victims, unconscious women, mute women, etc…) to legally be raped at any time. This is not the case, so why is it different if the woman is conscious?

Take for instance, a case study from The Guardian where a woman in a man’s dorm room continuously said she was tired and wanted to sleep. When the man became more aggressive, she lay down and pretended to sleep. He interpreted this as consent for sex, and had sex with her. She became so frightened for her safety that she continued to pretend she was asleep so as not to aggravate him and be hurt more severely. When she reported this, it was chalked up to bad communication and more or less dismissed. Why didn’t she yell no? Why didn’t she scream and thrash and kick and bite? He obviously would have stopped, right?

It is illegal to “have sex” with someone while they sleep. They are not in a state to consent, legally. No one would consider falling asleep to be enthusiasm, enjoyment, or anything of the sort. How could lying there sleeping signal anything but “Get the fuck off me?” That was rhetorical since the only person who would have sex with a sleeping person is a rapist. As women we are taught not to confront people, and especially to not confront men. Women are even frequently taught not to be so confrontational as to make direct eye contact with men, let alone to forcefully “reject” an already aggressive man. The media reinforces this, with frequent stories warning women about ex-boyfriends who stalk, murder, etc… Warning women that if they don’t let men down gently enough, they may be hurt, even murdered. The odds of this are significantly higher when he’s already violent, it makes absolutely no sense to encourage women to further aggravate her attacker just to make prosecution easier. It’s completely insane.

And here’s where the real problem is. It’s all down to her lack of communication, not his. There is constant questioning of why she didn’t say no loud enough, or fight hard enough, or try harder to communicate. There is never, ever, ever, ever, ever, in a million years, in any rape trial ever on the face of the planet, questioning of why he didn’t try harder to get clearer communication. If there was any sort of ambiguity, which the MRAs and rape-apologists claim is justification to rape, then why isn’t the onus on him to clear away the ambiguity? Why is it her job to make sure rape doesn’t happen, rather than his job to ensure he doesn’t rape anyone? To claim it is her responsibility to make sure there is no ambiguity, that it is her responsibility to make sure he doesn’t interpret her no or lack of enthusiasm as a yes, is to treat men like incompetent children with no capacity to make their own decisions. It treats men as some kind of animal, incapable of interacting in any way with women.

If men want to stop being accused of raping women, then they need to stop raping them. If men are worried about going to jail over miscommunication, then they need to take responsibility for themselves and get their own clarification. If this supposed miscommunication has such terrible dire results for them, then they should take the lead for their own problems and just get the consent. It’s not that hard to just say, “Do you actually want to do this?” “Do you want to have sex?” “May I stick my penis inside you, please?” I guarantee you that if the law was that women would have to consent to sex in order for it not to be rape, the number of rapes would still stay the same. It’s not as though men are some unstoppable train of libido. It doesn’t really matter if they really, really, really want to get laid. That doesn’t excuse being deliberately oblivious to her lack of enthusiasm, it just further shows that he did in fact rape her.

Not only is miscommunication not a justification to rape, it is further proof that he in fact raped someone. It is not illegal to be mute or to remain quiet or to remain calm and not respond physically. It is, however, a crime to have sex with someone against their will. Claiming she did not communicate her intentions clearer simply shows how blatant his disregard for her well-being is that he couldn’t be bothered to ask her if she wanted sex. At the very least it proves he didn’t care about her wants and desires during the encounter, he only cared about fucking someone at all costs. If he wanted to have sex, her wants and desires would matter at least enough to ensure sex was acceptable if not enjoyable. If he wanted to rape, her wants or desires, especially whether or not she wanted sex not only wouldn’t matter, but would hinder his ability to fuck women without any sort of barrier. Again, it is not her job to ensure he does commit a crime. It is his job to worry about his wellbeing, rather than the wellbeing of his dick.

But men won’t change this, and they would never advocate for this. Men don’t want to have to ask for consent not because it’s difficult, not because it’s inconvenient, not because it’s too complicated, but because they know women would say no more (I use the term “say no” since anything but a clear yes would be considered equal to a clear no). It would hinder their access to “sex” with women, regardless of whether she wants it. So by forcing women to go against all other social conditioning and to risk that their rapist has a bad temper and will kill or otherwise hurt them for being blunt, they allow themselves further access to use women against their will. MRAs and rape apologists know the law is in their favor. They relish the fact that miscommunication is a well-accepted excuse. This is a sampling of how they feel about the issue of non-violent rape (anything in brackets [] is what is said in the rest of the response these were taken from, nothing was added for effect or exaggerated):

The true meaning of rape is to use physical force or threat to have sex. If a woman is persuaded to have sex by a man who’s playing mind games with her (which she herself should be good at), then it’s not rape.

If a guy is getting mixed signals and sex happens I don’t think he should be charged.  I mean, guys and gals both send mixed signals, and if sex occurs that’s not “forcing” someone, it’s mixed signals.

To say that “she hints, looks worried…” is equivilent to a single “No” is like saying that bondage is tying someone up with spiderwebs.  It’s just not strong enough.

If your in that situation [of "having sex" against your will], you must have done something to say/indicate “This is ok”.  … at some point you let him into your room(s), onto your couch. Communication is the first part of the problem.

Rape is not rape … if the female in question is in the postion to say “No” … and does not do so.

So the problem is not that the girl consents, she never consents —- she just somehow omits to say no. … if that’s all it is, it isn’t rape: it’s him scoring and her losing, that’s all.

Give out misleading “signals”, and never state your mind?  Be prepared to be misunderstood [raped].

It boils down to this. Claiming rape is a problem with communication, 100% on the woman’s end, allows men the legal ability to bully, badger, and coerce women into sex fully against her will. It takes all blame for the rape off the man, places it squarely on the woman, and in some instances even attempts to gather sympathy for the rapist, who’s being attacked by the mean, predatory, slut.

One would have to be a complete moron (or a rapist) completely inept at all social communication to honestly believe rape is a problem with communication. If it truly was simply miscommunication, men would be clearer in their intentions. It is never up to the victim to prevent men from raping them, it always up to the rapist to not rape someone. As I said before, just like with a robbery, no one would argue that the shopkeeper didn’t make it clear enough that he didn’t want his money stolen. No one would argue that the person who had his house broken into didn’t make it clear enough that he didn’t want his house broken into. If the would-be burglar honestly thought the shopkeeper wanted to give him his money, he would have asked. He knows that the shopkeeper doesn’t, so he steals. If the burglar honestly thought that the homeowner would let him into his house, he would ring the doorbell and ask first. He knows the homeowner will say no, so he breaks in. If the rapist thought the woman wanted sex, he would ask. But he deep down thinks or knows that she will deny him though, so he rapes. Only in this case, the law doesn’t challenge him since they support his need to “score.”

Do rape trials discriminate against rape victims?

Do we discriminate against rape victims? You don’t think so? Really? Let’s see how it sounds if you treat a victim of a breaking and entering the same way.

“So Mr. Johnson, someone broke into your house last night, is that right?”
“Yes, while we were sleeping.”
“Mr. Johnson, do you usually lock your door?”
“Yes usually.”
“Was your door locked last night?”
“Yes.”
“Have you ever let anyone into your house before?”
“Yes… How is that relevant?”
“Well you clearly were inviting a break in with that. Not to mention the welcome mat in front of your door.”
“Excuse me? I don’t see how this is relevant since a crime was committed.”
“Well you were clearly asking to be robbed. What were you thinking with this welcome mat? Also, do you have a burglar alarm?”
“No, we don’t have an alarm.”
“Well you clearly didn’t mind being robbed then.”

How about a mugging?
“So Mr. Johnson, you were mugged last night?”
“Yes, he threatened to kill me if I didn’t give him my money.”
“But did you actually see the weapon? Did he actually hurt you?”
“No, but I didn’t want to risk it.”
“So you just handed him the money.”
“Well I thought he would kill me.”
“And you were wearing a suit. Is that right?”
“Yes.”
“Well obviously you were advertising that you were available to hand out money.”
“What, that’s ridiculous…”
“And what time was this?”
“Midnight or so. I was coming home from a late dinner.”
“What were you thinking walking around that late?”
“It’s a free country isn’t it?”
“Have you ever given anyone money before?”
“Of course I have. How is that relevant?”
“Would you say you have a reputation then, for giving people money?”
“No, not really. What about the guy who did this, does he have a record of mugging people?”
“I can’t discuss that, it’s not relevant anyways. Look there’s nothing we can do. You wore an expensive suit, late at night, and have a record of handing out money. In fact I think you should apologize for putting this innocent man through this.”

This is clearly ridiculous. But no one bats an eyelid when rapists go free based on the rape victim’s sexual history, her outfit, whether she was out late, whether she’d been friendly before, etc… Some people who have been through rape trials say it was more traumatizing than actually being raped because they were told so many times that they were lying, overreacting, wrong, etc… Studies also show that when presented with two similar rape trials, people were not only more likely to believe a woman who was a virgin, but in cases where the woman had multiple previous partners they frequently sympathized with the rapist! Rape trials are a joke. They are an excuse to parade women out in front of men and humiliate them, they aren’t seriously attempting to get justice. Rape laws in pretty much all countries disgust me.

Matriarchy Versus Patriarchy

I was reading an article written by Jane Alpert called Mother Right and found it to be fascinating. It examines many things, among them the idea that we would have a shot at a caring peace-filled world free of almost all oppression of anyone if only we lived in a matriarchy rather than a patriarchy. The idea is that in a patriarchy, the traits most desired are traits associated with masculinity and the traits most loathed are those associated with femininity. Stereotypically of course. This means the MOST masculine run the world, the most feminine remain at the bottom.

So let’s examine this. Our world is filled with murder, war, poverty, greed, rape, and just basically hate. What are stereotypically masculine versus feminine traits?

Masculinity	Femininity
Aggressive	Amicable
Competitive	Cooperative
Emotionally stunted	Emotionally available
Selfish	Selfless
Cruelty	Compassion

The point I’m trying to make is that masculinity encourages a cut-throat world where the basic goal is to dominate and overtake EVERYONE else in order to do what’s best for yourself, while femininity encourages teamwork, cooperation, friendship, empathy, etc… If the world were more oriented towards feminine traits, there would be no top and bottom. There wouldn’t be the capitalistic idea that in order to be “on top” you need to oppress and kill and enslave everyone else. As Jane Alpert says beautifully about matriarchy and femininity (pretty much the whole point of this article was to post this quote since it is spectacular):

But feminist culture is based on what is best and strongest in women, and as we begin to define ourselves as women, the qualities coming to the fore are the same ones a mother projects in the best kind of nurturing relationship, to a child: empathy, intuitiveness, adaptability, awareness of growth as a process rather than as goal-ended, inventiveness, protective feelings toward others, and a capacity to respond emotionally as well as rationally. If matriarchy means a society in which these are qualities all human beings admire and strive to embody, a society in which the paradigm for all social relationships is the relationship of a healthy and secure mother to her child, then matriarchy means nothing less than the end of oppression.

Which world would you want to live in? The one where no one is trustworthy, where winning is valued above all else even if it means destroying the entire human race, where everyone is encouraged to be selfish and aggressive, or the kind where people are actually, gasp, nice to each other and encouraging? If we lived in a matriarchy world peace (clichéd as that may sound) might actually be achieved.

Of course the real catch-22 is that masculinity and femininity were invented by patriarchy. Both masculinity and femininity are social constructs of the patriarchy, so the idea of feminine traits being so cooperative, kind, and peaceful might disappear were we not oppressed. But it would really be worth a shot wouldn’t it?