Food for thought

[dreamer_easy]

I said: Discussing the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival recently, which has long excluded transwomen who don't "share the experience of growing up under patriarchy", I wondered if I'd qualify as a woman by that definition, lacking so many female experiences: never been raped, never experienced intimate violence, never been pregnant. For that matter, I've only worn makeup a handful of times.

Multiple commenters remarked that rape was not "part of being female" and one disputed that "most women have been raped". Now the confusion is partly my fault for being unclear, so I've clarified what I meant in the comments - that rape is an experience of a large proportion of women "under patriarchy". But think about this: why were the only objections to the mention of rape? Why didn't anyone argue pregnancy is not an automatic part of being female, or dispute that "most women have been bashed by a boyfriend or husband"?

Comments

[antikythera.livejournal.com]

I dunno, I thought I objected to the motherhood bit, but maybe not as strenuously. Or maybe I edited it out. Then again, motherhood is something that women can choose; rape is by definition something that nobody chooses.

For what it's worth, transwomen do get a lot of that shit. They may not have grown up under it, having the outward appearance of boys, but then again they might have been constantly bashed for being sissy boys. When they start putting on the outward appearance of women, with or without surgery, they have to put up with the same crap that the rest of us do -- sexual harassment, discrimination in the workplace, pressure to conform to female beauty standards.

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

Preaching to the choir there. IMHO, the Festival's policy, far from benefitting women in some way, is amusingly fanboyish - squabbling over definitions, like arguing that Paul McGann doesn't count.

(Man, I really need an Inanna/Ishtar icon for these gender discussions.)

[vindaloo-vixen.livejournal.com]

It's really just kind of patronising and insulting to everyone involved, trans or otherwise, as I see it.

[vindaloo-vixen.livejournal.com]

As for commenting or not on pregnancy or rape, I would guess some reactions were because while rape is a negative experience, pregnancy is something that many people see as positive.

(Also, most people are more aware of men being raped than becoming pregnant, possibly leading to a reading of childbearing not as 'female-necessity' as 'female-exclusive'. A guess, anyway.)

[lordshiva.livejournal.com]

Having experienced all of those, I still can't count any of them as being part of being female. They are possible experiences if one is female, and pregnancy/childbirth is (so far) only possible for a female (the man who gave birth did so with an actual womb and working vagina. he can call himself a man, but he couldn't give birth as one.) Anyway, those experiences aren't part of my sense of myself as a woman. Neither is shaving my legs, wearing lingerie, and putting on make-up, which I sometimes like to do but don't feel obligated to do. My transgendered friend likes all the frou frou stuff best of all.

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

It's interesting to ask why it is I've always had a settled sense of myself as female, while having no interest in so many "feminine" things. It does lend credence to the idea that we're born with a gender identity which is unrelated to our cultural conditioning.

[jvowles.livejournal.com]

Having the *option* of pregnancy is part of being female, I'd argue. However, while *being* pregnant clearly is limited to people who have wombs, being *part* of a pregnancy is something that *everyone* experiences -- though of course we have no conscious memory of it.

But I think the objection (at least on my part) comes from the repulsive nature of rape. I certainly *hope* it's not part of most womens' experience, and in my own experience, I've known few women who've had that experience. (At least, few that admitted to it. At least two or three have had unpleasant dating experiences that might be considered rape under the broadest definition of the term.)

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

There's a Zero Punctuation which refers to some video game or other's "hot, spicy racism". Rape is, of course, an equally provocative issue. Heck, it's a provocative word - if I'd said "sexual assault" instead, fewer hackles might've been raised.

[jvowles.livejournal.com]

To me, rape means someone violently assaulted someone sexually, forcing them to participate despite their clear unwillingness.

To me, sexual assault connotes the attempt, regardless of success.

Having said that, I have encountered definitions of rape that I don't agree with. I don't agree with the entire concept of "date rape" -- if someone drugs you without your knowledge or against your will, that's rape. If you both get drunk and your date takes advantage of you, that's reprehensible, but *not* the same thing -- because rape is an inherent act of violence, whereas the other may well be people acting on their lusts without inhibitions. Rape needs deliberate coercion or violence or threat. "Date rape" needs only poor judgement. And while it's always wrong to take advantage of someone that way, it's not the same thing, just as stealing a video from Wal-mart is not the same as stealing money from your dying gran. It's a degree thing, i guess. Neither is right; one is clearly much worse.

It seems far more likely to me that a lot of women (and men) have had regrettable sex or been groped than have actually been raped, but to some folks there is no difference between them.

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

I've never actually seen anyone claim that drunken-but- consenting sex is rape. I mean, it's a big planet, there must be someone who thinks that; but I think you'll find that it's 99.999% an anti-feminist furphy, like the fib that feminists claim that all sex is rape.

[arjuna-lj.livejournal.com]

If you both get drunk and your date takes advantage of you, that's reprehensible, but *not* the same thing -- because rape is an inherent act of violence, whereas the other may well be people acting on their lusts without inhibitions.

Hmmmm. Surely the key concept there is "may"...? A drunk person is certainly capable of withholding consent (or indeed giving in to a demand for sex from fear of reprisal, violent or otherwise...)

I can't say I've ever seen anyone equate "drunken consent" (emphasis "consent") to "rape", although technically it's an interesting point - compare to, for example, the way society views drunken consent to buy highly expensive goods or services one doesn't need... (thinking about the consumer law concept of "unconscionable conduct" here; specifically actions against those who sell to vulnerable persons known to be drunk, drugged or medicated at the time they signed up to whatever... )

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

It's kind of the opposite, in fact - women have been raped while unconscious from drink or drugs, and their attackers have been cleared of wrongdoing.