Why Aren’t You Angry?

Second blog post of the night, while I distract myself from looming surgery. 

I came across this blog: Feminist Female Comedians Agree There Are Different Kinds of Rape


At first I was speechless. 

Then I was depressed. 

Then I was angry. 

(Short aside: The previous emotions don’t get replaced they get added to).

There are so many things to criticise, point out or rant against that I’m almost not sure where to start. I see from the comments that a reassuring number of people have known where to start and have written their own blog posts and made their own observations. I’ll add one or two of my own. There is a sentiment almost expressed at the beginning that I agree with: “Why can’t we just be people?”  Unfortunately she immediately undermines this sentiment with everything she says next. She treats women like idiots and men as rapey animals who can’t help themselves. 

Here’s a comment from Laura: “…there’s some dude that’s gonna want to fuck you.”

A key word for me in that sentence is ‘want’. A guy can want to fuck someone all he likes, and that is a very different thing to actually doing it without consent. That then turns from ‘fucking’ into ‘raping’. 

Here’s another comment from Laura: “You gotta be careful and it’s up to you to own that responsibility and keep yourself in safe situations.”

Arguably it is also up to the man to own the responsibility not to do any raping. 

And here’s the question, there are many, many people who agree with every word these ‘feminist’ comedians said; why aren’t men more angry about this? Why aren’t men appalled at being portrayed as animals (literally in this example) who cannot use reason, emotion, intellect, decency when confronted with the female form? 

There is a quote that went round twitter this week, from a mum whose son had had some sex education at college. It was this: ‘Consent is too low a bar. Hold out for enthusiasm’. 

What a fantastic sentiment. Hold out for enthusiasm. 



3 responses to “Why Aren’t You Angry?

  1. The point they were making is that the women they describe ARE giving consent all evening long …… and all the way back to his or her place and into each others underwear. More than giving consent these women are actively leading the men on.

    Then they start regretting it or having second thoughts when it’s too late – either right before or during sex, or maybe the next day.

    Men and women ARE animals. And sex is very animalistic. The whole point of sex is that it has to be a little bit out of control in order to drive us to do it, and thus ensure the survival of the species – even at our expense. Sex (ie procreation) is not entirely rational. Often it goes against our better judgement. Survoval of the individual and survival of the species are not always the same hing – often they are at odds. The sex drive is there to ensure we are driven to have sex anyway. Without a strong sex drive no species would survive when conditions are tough, because it makes no sense to procreate when you can barely fend for yourself.

    That doesn’t mean sex can’t also be a spiritual experience or that we are not responsible for controlling our urges. Of course we are. But leading a man on in such an extreme way and then claiming rape because you changed your mind at the last nanosecond (or perhaps even after the event) is also totally irresponsible.

    It’s like having the right to shoot an intruder who has entered your house. And so one evening you invite a stranger back to your house. You have signs in your garden saying “Party here tonight – come on in!!!” …… you lead him up to the front door. You’re both drunk. Just as you’re entering the house you change your mind and say “Don’t come in, this is my house and you have no right to enter!” He says “Eh.. what are you talking about?” and steps into the hallway and you shoot him in the leg and call the police to have him arrested.

    Now, as a stranger he had no right to be in your house, and you told him not to come in but he came in anyway. So he was technically an intruder and you had the right to defend yourself. But seriously, would you say it was fair to give out such mixed messages?

  2. I was the victim of Rohipnol when I was travelling alone in Australia.

    I went out for a night with a guy from the hostel in which I was staying for a beers, had a right old laugh in the bar, and then don’t remember anything until I and woke up the next morning naked, with semen all over my pants. I then faced the humiliation of reporting it and enduring swabs and pills and blood tests, and being told by the police that ‘Rohipnoling was ‘rife’ at the moment’ in that particular city.

    Arguably I was flirting, dressed-up and clearly having a good time prior to my attack. So did I in some way contribute to my fate?

    The ‘responsibility and rape’ debate will always rage, but I agree that the discussion you feature is disappointing and pretty crass, and does no favours to either sex.

  3. Saying no to sleeping with someone and shooting someone in the leg are quite different. For an act as intimate at sex both parties should be able to say no at any point and not feel any pressure to go through with something they don’t want to, likewise inviting someone into your house. We are allowed to change our minds. Often I imagine communication is unclear and drunkeness compounds the problem, but a no is a no and should be respected whenever it is given. It’s like saying, we’re in a relationship, you’ve expressed that you like/love me and want to have sex with me in the past and therefore I can have sex with you whenever I like. That simply isn’t the case, yes, they may have liked or still like you but if they don’t want to have sex at the moment in time it shouldn’t happen.

    Saying that you’ve been raped the following morning is a different story, if at no stage before or during proceedings do you say no or stop or that you dont want to do it, then you’ve made a mistake, but not been raped. And I think to call it such is unfair. But if anyone changes their mind half way through, you should still be able to say no.

    This analogy of walking though a kennel with steaks rubber on your leg and expecting not to get bitten just doesn’t hold for me. Yes, we are animals, but we are animals with sensibilities and the ability to reason. We have a moral and social code of conduct that we follow and can use to override our base instincts. For example, you don’t see a dead badger by the side of the road and jump out of the car and start eating it because you’re really hungry, you wait until you get to a restaurant or home and eat something that’s more socially acceptable. To take a less ridiculous tack, if you see someone’s food and it looks delicious, you don’t grab the food out of their hand and shove it down your throat, then say, “oh it’s the foods fault, it looked so good!” If you dont eat you die. If you don’t fuck the human race will eventually die out. Both pretty strong base urges. Why are we expected to keep one under control and not the other? Wearing a short skirt is not consent! Yes, it is good to be aware of the effect you have on those around you, and unfortunately we live in a world where people don’t have enough respect or control to keep their dick in their pants. But the fact that someone wants to look good (not necessarily even for you) is not a justification to rape them by any stretch of the imagination.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s