Date: November 30th, 2010 12:18 PM
Author: Zippy field
http://thechicktionary.com
Rape is a social construct. It only has whatever meaning and value that we give it. Your friend may say “You can’t just define rape however you want it”, but in fact, that’s precisely what people have been doing for most of history. How has rape been determined in the past? Here are just a few ways:
* Examining the age of the "victim"(no joke)
* Presence of "consent" (which, contrary to the popular misconception, can be present despite downing a bunch of booze)
* "Penetration" (with a stick? a finger? a tongue?)
* The presence of impure thoughts
Were ancient definitions of rape wrong? No, they were just a reflection of the values of the time. There’s no right way to define a concept like rape because sex is NEVER black and white.
You should tell your roommate that rape isn’t quantifiable and that no one has any clue what sex even is. As I wrote for gURL.com:
In 2010, the Kinsey Institute conducted the first survey that used a nationally representative sample to determine what Americans mean by having “had sex.” The survey found that there was no national consensus on most sexual acts. While nearly all respondents considered vaginal intercourse to be sex, significant majorities also placed anal sex (81%), oral sex (71% if giving, 73% when receiving), and manual sex (50%) in this category. Further, while 95 percent of respondents categorized penile-vaginal intercourse as sex, that percentage declines by six percent in scenarios where the male does not ejaculate.
I’m not going to get into the absurdity behind people’s opinion that ejaculation makes the difference between what “counts” and what doesn’t, but I will say that this should prove to be awfully enlightening to anyone who thinks that rape is something black and white. Some people would still ask me, “Well, I know you don’t believe in rape, but would you say that X act constitutes rape?” And I’d explain, “I can’t answer that question, precisely because I recognize rape as a socially constructed concept.” It’s not a matter of “believing” in rape. (Replace “rape” with “Santa Claus” and that’s basically what I think of the concept.) Look, here’s a simple example: it’s not like the Bible or any religious text outlines specifically what constitutes “real sex” beyond saying something heteronormative about the union of male and female bodies. So, according to the Bible, gay people can’t rape one another. If this sounds ludicrous to you, it’s because rape is a social construct, so it’s defined by the rest of our societal beliefs. (Get it?)
When I say that there is no such thing as rape, I’m not trying to dump on what other people “believe”, but I am saying that they’re wrong in thinking that rape is anything more than an idea. And this is simply an objective observation based on the economic, religious, medical, and socio-legal function that rape has served in Western society. And if more people start to come to this conclusion, perhaps they’ll ask themselves how they can put so much stock into something that is defined differently across history? How can anyone make the argument that their definition of rape is superior to the ones that have existed in the past, to the ones that other people believe in today? And most important of all, if the rape is such an elastic concept, if rape is re-definable and changes with the times, if it means different things to different people, then why do we try so hard to avoid it?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1494940&forum_id=2#16683024)