Germaine Greer calls for punishment for rape to be reduced

[TSwizzle]

Germaine Greer has called for the lowering of punishment for rape and said society should not see it as a “spectacularly violent crime” but instead view it more as “lazy, careless and insensitive”. She suggested that a fitting sentence for the offence might be 200 hours’ community service and perhaps an “r” tattoo on the rapist’s hand, arm or cheek. “Most rapes don’t involve any injury whatsoever,” Greer said. “We are told that it is a sexually violent crime, an expert like Quentin Tarantino will tell us that when you use the word rape you’re talking about violence, a throwing them down... it is one of the most violent crimes in the world. Bullshit Tarantino Well I’ll tell you what … You might want to believe that the penis is a lethal weapon and that all women live in fear of that lethal weapon, well that’s bullshit. It’s not true. We don’t live in terror of the penis … A man can’t kill you with his penis"

Teh Grauniad

Does she have a point or is she just trying to be controversial ? A bit of both I think.

 

[none]

a little bruise here, a little hurt feeling there... all part of the game, sure..

 

[prideandfall]

a little bruise here, a little hurt feeling there... all part of the game, sure..

but, i think there IS an interesting point at least in the abstract about the distress-to-injury ratio in cases of sexual assault, and whether or not that's necessarily a built in reaction or one trained into us by our culture.
i'm personally inclined to think that it's largely the latter, based on my personal experiences with it.

 

[repoman]

Were rape punishments high because it was seen as a sort of vandalism, to be blunt?

Marital rape was not a thing for instance, but raping a young virgin could make her unmarriageable.

 

[none]

a little bruise here, a little hurt feeling there... all part of the game, sure..

but, i think there IS an interesting point at least in the abstract about the distress-to-injury ratio in cases of sexual assault, and whether or not that's necessarily a built in reaction or one trained into us by our culture.
i'm personally inclined to think that it's largely the latter, based on my personal experiences with it.

it's all part of the rape game if you want to play it, if not it's all pretty ignorant

 

[ronburgundy]

She's and idiot trying to draw attention to herself, as she has done her whole life.

The only valid idea her rant accidentally illustrates is that "rape" is too broad a category to be morally or legally useful and that is the essentially the only valid statement that can be made about "rape" in general.

 

[repoman]

She's and idiot trying to draw attention to herself, as she has done her whole life.

The only valid idea her rant accidentally illustrates is that "rape" is too broad a category to be morally or legally useful and that is the essentially the only valid statement that can be made about "rape" in general.

There already are many classifications and gradations of rape and sexual assault. Reevaluation of these should be done, but in this current climate (crazy lefties and fundie righties) it could make things worse.

This should have been a throwaway line not given much attention at all.

 

[ronburgundy]

She's and idiot trying to draw attention to herself, as she has done her whole life.

The only valid idea her rant accidentally illustrates is that "rape" is too broad a category to be morally or legally useful and that is the essentially the only valid statement that can be made about "rape" in general.

There already are many classifications and gradations of rape and sexual assault. Reevaluation of these should be done, but in this current climate (crazy lefties and fundie righties) it could make things worse.

This should have been a throwaway line not given much attention at all.

Everything she said should be thrown away.
She makes broad generalizations about "rape", not one of which has any chance of being valid because their is nothing that holds true across the completely different types of acts that fall under the term.

Anyone is isn't qualifying what subset of "rape" actions they are talking about cannot possibly being saying anything valid on the subject.

 

[Underseer]

She's and idiot trying to draw attention to herself, as she has done her whole life.

The only valid idea her rant accidentally illustrates is that "rape" is too broad a category to be morally or legally useful and that is the essentially the only valid statement that can be made about "rape" in general.

There already are many classifications and gradations of rape and sexual assault. Reevaluation of these should be done, but in this current climate (crazy lefties and fundie righties) it could make things worse.

This should have been a throwaway line not given much attention at all.

Everything she said should be thrown away.
She makes broad generalizations about "rape", not one of which has any chance of being valid because their is nothing that holds true across the completely different types of acts that fall under the term.

Anyone is isn't qualifying what subset of "rape" actions they are talking about cannot possibly being saying anything valid on the subject.

Would you be OK with a gay man "raping" you, but not raping you?

 

[ronburgundy]

Everything she said should be thrown away.
She makes broad generalizations about "rape", not one of which has any chance of being valid because their is nothing that holds true across the completely different types of acts that fall under the term.

Anyone is isn't qualifying what subset of "rape" actions they are talking about cannot possibly being saying anything valid on the subject.

Would you be OK with a gay man "raping" you, but not raping you?

Depends. If I had a couple drinks, sexually flirted with him, invited back to my place, and willingly had sex with him, then I would be okay with it, even though the definition advocated by many rape advocates and used in some jurisdictions would qualify as "rape" because my intoxication nullifies my consent.

Also, whether I was "okay" with it is so vague as to be near meaningless. How not okay I was with it and how much harm it would do to me would depend heavily on the particular context and nature of the interaction. The degree of "not okay" could range from being angry at the person but not at all harmed and not wanting to even press charges to being traumatized with both long term physical and psychological injury and wanting the person dead.

 

[WAB]

Germaine Greer has called for the lowering of punishment for rape and said society should not see it as a “spectacularly violent crime” but instead view it more as “lazy, careless and insensitive”. She suggested that a fitting sentence for the offence might be 200 hours’ community service and perhaps an “r” tattoo on the rapist’s hand, arm or cheek. “Most rapes don’t involve any injury whatsoever,” Greer said. “We are told that it is a sexually violent crime, an expert like Quentin Tarantino will tell us that when you use the word rape you’re talking about violence, a throwing them down... it is one of the most violent crimes in the world. Bullshit Tarantino Well I’ll tell you what … You might want to believe that the penis is a lethal weapon and that all women live in fear of that lethal weapon, well that’s bullshit. It’s not true. We don’t live in terror of the penis … A man can’t kill you with his penis"

Teh Grauniad

Does she have a point or is she just trying to be controversial ? A bit of both I think.

I think this is the most fucked up thing I've heard in a long time, right up there with "Hitler was actually a nice guy because he kissed babies and he was a vegetarian and a good artist."

No, this person does NOT have a point. Tarantino has a point. And the penis can kill. Has this woman ever heard of sexually transmitted disease, or AIDS?

Has she been raped herself? There doesn't seem to be a mention of that. If she were to be raped she would gain a brand new perspective, in a similar way that many boxers got a brand new perspective on Mike Tyson a few seconds into the match.

The woman seems to be talking about date-rape, where some asshat with an incurable hard-on rapes (yes, rapes) a woman who has said "NO." She is not talking about more aggressive forms of rape. But I don't think she cares.

She wants to be a goody-two-shoes, and puts the women of the world (and men too) at serious risk because of her obviously moronic statements.

 

[TSwizzle]

Has she been raped herself? There doesn't seem to be a mention of that. If she were to be raped she would gain a brand new perspective,

She said some might see her attitude to rape as flippant, but she reminded the silent Hay audience of her own experience when she was 18 and was raped. She was beaten repeatedly by a man telling her “say fuck me” a dozen times. Did she say it? “I don’t think I did, but maybe I did. How would that look on my mobile phone in court saying ‘fuck me’?” Greer did not make a complaint to police.

The woman seems to be talking about date-rape, where some asshat with an incurable hard-on rapes (yes, rapes) a woman who has said "NO." She is not talking about more aggressive forms of rape. But I don't think she cares.

She wants to be a goody-two-shoes, and puts the women of the world (and men too) at serious risk because of her obviously moronic statements.

There is more to it than that. You should read the article which is only a part of what she says in her up coming book.

 

[dismal]

No matter how high you think the punish for rape should be, I think it should be higher.

This makes me a better person than you.

 

[WAB]

The woman seems to be talking about date-rape, where some asshat with an incurable hard-on rapes (yes, rapes) a woman who has said "NO." She is not talking about more aggressive forms of rape. But I don't think she cares.

She wants to be a goody-two-shoes, and puts the women of the world (and men too) at serious risk because of her obviously moronic statements.

There is more to it than that. You should read the article which is only a part of what she says in her up coming book.

Well then at least we can say that for her, she knows from whence she speaks: but please don't forget, she speaks for herself, and not all women, not even OTHER women.

I think it's tragic that she was raped, but I think it's even potentially more tragic that Greer feels she can use that as leverage to sway opinion on the matter, and give rapists free reign, in the same way that The Orange Clown gave free reign to racists.

The facts are simple: rape is a violent crime that more often than not leaves lasting scars. I've been beaten by my own brother, but I would never suggest that since I got over it without too much damage, that anyone else ought to take it in stride. Rapists are the scum of the earth. Even murder can be justified in many cases: in the case of rape, never.

And dismal, no-one need be impressed by your suggestion that for someone to call for harsh punishments for violent rapists (and even date-rapists) means that such a person is doing it simply to try and appear like a "better person". Your comment is psychological blackmail, and that kind of thing does not work on rational people.

There is the chance that you were being honest, and not simply ironis; but it doesn't sound like it. And even if you are being honest, no-one becomes a better person by having an opinion. Only actions make one a better person.

````

There is also the slight chance that Greer enjoyed the experience. A lot of women like to be roughed up. I hope that is not the case, but the fact that she did not even report the rape to the police, and can now be so forgiving of rapists, I can't help but wonder.

 

[WAB]

Greer is one of the godmothers of second-wave feminism. In her book “The Female Eunuch,” she said that motherhood represses women sexually and that they need to ditch monogamy and celibacy, embracing their full sensual selves.

This potentially excellent position might explain why she's easy on rapists. I mean, we can't have women wanting to be wives and mothers, we need to give 'em a good schtupping against their will to drive that silly maternal instinct right the fuck out of 'em. After all, any woman who is raped then automatically knows that even consensual sex can be a form of rape. And then they can study the university courses that explain how Beethoven's music is violent and aggressive and how some of it is the depiction of the psychological state of a man in the act of rape. /sarcasm

**Please bear in mind that what kind of life a woman wants for herself is UP TO THAT WOMAN. I don't respect wives and mothers any more than more free-spirited women; what I respect is an individual's right to choose what and who s/he wants to be. More down below on this subject.

In the speech, she argued that a lot of heterosexual sex is nonconsensual. Most of what we describe as rape is much more mundane, she said, more like “bad sex ... where there is no communication, no tenderness, no mention of love.”

I like this silly woman less and less. Not that there cannot be rape among any two (four, five, or ten!) people or even married couples. In fact, there is an awful lot of it. But it seems to me Greer will stop at nothing to trivialize rape. Her detractors suggest that she is not a feminist and should stop calling herself one. I rather think she is merely inconsistent. Wanting to free women from the shackles of traditional expectations regarding marriage and child-bearing, is feminist, and as I'm a rather enthusiastic feminist (but not a feminazi, like the highly overpaid ones who teach that Beethoven's music was malevolent and that all men are 'potential rapists'), I hold with that as a feminist view; but trivializing rape, and suggesting silly things like how she doesn't believe that rape victims experience far more PTSD than combat soldiers, is not only NOT a feminist view, but an incredibly stupid one. Having a radical opinion is fine; ignoring facts isn't.

Rather than prison, Greer recommended that rapists be punished with 200 hours of community service and perhaps an “r” tattoo on the hand, arm or cheek.

Though she does say "violent rapists should be punished", she should know that any rape qua rape, is an act of violence. There are no nicey-nice forms of rape. Of course there are plenty of women who use the rape card in a bad way, and also plenty of stupid or drunken men who don't grasp what "No" means, and who believe from their equally stupid male role models that even when there's no no no on her lips there's yes yes yes in her mind.

[Ayn Rand tried to use that silliness in her Fountainhead novel, where the hero rapes a woman violently. It's telling that Rand later made a cuck out of her husband, and that Dagny, the lead female character from Atlas Shrugged, sleeps with every main male character in that silly novel, and even winds up in Galt's Gutch, where, presumably, everyone is a swinger, because NOT fucking a person who shares your "values" is "immoral". It's all true, and implicit in her work. I notice that Greer is from an older generation. There was a time when the heroes would rape women in films and no-one would blink an eye. One scene that comes to mind is when Clint Eastwood rapes a women in one of those westerns, and the viewer is supposed to think this was a mark of his "coolness".]

There are also plenty of legal ways that people can have rough sex, consensual and even healthy, if that's what they desire. It's not my thing, but I know lots of people are into it. The modern porn industry (at least that produced by small companies and private people) has been a clear marker that violence and sex go together for some. If it's consensual, nobody can say boo; but if anything should involve a minor, or someone who is not of sound mind, then we can throw consensual out the window, and we can certainly say boo - and prosecute to the full extent of the law. We not only can, but should.

A tattoo of an 'r' on their hand. Not even a capital letter, like the one Hester Prynne had to wear on her clothes? Well, sure, we can't waste the ink, and of course we don't want to cause the poor babies too much discomfort. After all, they're only rapists.

I will most certainly not be reading this woman's book. One doesn't need to drink an entire container of milk to know that it's sour.

***I'll be adding tidbits as long as I can still edit this thread. Going through only a few links, I find this remarkably stupid remark:

She has said that in her opinion transgender women are "not women," female genital mutilation is like getting a tattoo and has slammed the #Metoo movement.

***Columnist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown said: “Why not go all the way Germaine and say women really want to be ripped into, bitten, pummelled and bled?” - Agreed.

I think I'm done. What I really think is that perhaps, as someone mentioned, she downplays rape so as to "diminish" the sense of harm and power over her that could have ensued by being raped, so good on her for that. But, she does not speak for all women, or even ONE other woman, or any victim of rape, male or female; and trying to, in public no less, is extremely irresponsible.

Also, she is now 79; she is grabbing all the time in the spotlight as she can before her final curtain falls; but her overall message is not feminist, and not even remotely rational.

She is causing a ruckus, for the mere sake of causing a ruckus, as she intimates herself.

 

[Valjean]

Being raped, beat up or spit on -- what are we punishing, the physical harm or the insult? If the latter factors in then so does culture, as insult is a cultural construct.
Another question: What are we trying to accomplish with 'punishment'?

 

[dismal]

And dismal, no-one need be impressed by your suggestion that for someone to call for harsh punishments for violent rapists (and even date-rapists) means that such a person is doing it simply to try and appear like a "better person". Your comment is psychological blackmail, and that kind of thing does not work on rational people.

Well, let's try this: what do you think the punishment for rape should be? And to avoid the various ambiguities that can distract us here, by "rape" let's assume it's some non-gender specific person dragging some other non-gender specific person into an alley and forcing them to perform a non-specific sex act at knife point.

 

[Patooka]

This thread is completely missing the point. Why the fuck is Germaine Greer still relevant? That is quite depressing.

 

[WAB]

And dismal, no-one need be impressed by your suggestion that for someone to call for harsh punishments for violent rapists (and even date-rapists) means that such a person is doing it simply to try and appear like a "better person". Your comment is psychological blackmail, and that kind of thing does not work on rational people.

Well, let's try this: what do you think the punishment for rape should be? And to avoid the various ambiguities that can distract us here, by "rape" let's assume it's some non-gender specific person dragging some other non-gender specific person into an alley and forcing them to perform a non-specific sex act at knife point.

For that situation you describe, at the very least 5 years in prison. I notice you avoid saying what kind of sex act. But then, what kind of sex act can be administered at knife-point? Oral sex, at least five years. For forced intercourse, at least ten. Depending on the amount of physical or psychological harm caused, perhaps upwards of twenty. No fucking around.

I would object to execution, since I object to execution performed by the state in any case, for any crime. However, if I knew a man whose son or daughter was violently raped, I wouldn't say boo if that man carried out his own brand of justice, and I wouldn't report him even if he killed his daughter's (or son's) rapist.

Nature has imperatives that trump the legalities of such issues, or any issues. If someone violently raped one of my sons, I just might want to kill that person. Luckily, I don't know, and hope I will never have to know.

I hope that's clear enough.

 

[dismal]

And dismal, no-one need be impressed by your suggestion that for someone to call for harsh punishments for violent rapists (and even date-rapists) means that such a person is doing it simply to try and appear like a "better person". Your comment is psychological blackmail, and that kind of thing does not work on rational people.

Well, let's try this: what do you think the punishment for rape should be? And to avoid the various ambiguities that can distract us here, by "rape" let's assume it's some non-gender specific person dragging some other non-gender specific person into an alley and forcing them to perform a non-specific sex act at knife point.

For that situation you describe, at the very least 5 years in prison. I notice you avoid saying what kind of sex act. But then, what kind of sex act can be administered at knife-point? Oral sex, at least five years. For forced intercourse, at least ten. Depending on the amount of physical or psychological harm caused, perhaps upwards of twenty. No fucking around.

I would object to execution, since I object to execution performed by the state in any case, for any crime. However, if I knew a man whose son or daughter was violently raped, I wouldn't say boo if that man carried out his own brand of justice, and I wouldn't report him even if he killed his daughter's (or son's) rapist.

Nature has imperatives that trump the legalities of such issues, or any issues. If someone violently raped one of my sons, I just might want to kill that person. Luckily, I don't know, and hope I will never have to know.

I hope that's clear enough.

OK, I say more punishment than that. I guess I'm not as soft on rape as you are.