Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: gpriores@oracle.com (gordon prioreschi)
Subject: Re: The Iconography of RAPE.
Organization: Oracle Corp., Belmont CA
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 23:41:19 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Oct11.083255.2706@nwnexus.WA.COM> elf@halcyon.com writes:
>[In ancient Greece] The rapist was often treated as a fool,
>a drunkard, or a weakling, losing control of his own manliness like
>that and raping a woman.
>    In Modern Day America, however, the rapist is treated as a monster.
>An uncontrollable force that assaults and attacks from nowhere, without
>reason.
>[...]
> Rapist-as-weakling might actually deter more rape than the
>rapist-as-monster; the second seems to encourage a power-oriented
>self-opinion in the rapist.
>[...]
>    And does this popular cultural icon of rapist-as-monster help the
>victim?  Well, let me ask this question: Would you rather have an
>encounter with a fool and a weakling, something you could pick yourself
>up from and brush yourself off afterwards... or would you rather have
>an encounter with a _monster_, that-which-destroys... and if you are
>the victim of the rapist, you may view yourself as that-which-is-
>destroyed.

Well stated, and very perceptive. I don't think it's a nonexistent
feeling today that anyone who has to do something like rape to prove
his manhood is a sorry excuse for a man. I didn't know that about
ancient Greece, but I don't think one has to look as far back as that
to find a similarly applicable attitude.  Think about what some people
call the mythos of American culture, the Old West (tm). Before anybody
gets on my case, I am talking about the mythical Clint Eastwood /
Bonanza West, not the reality. Consider the "archetypal" Western
villain: a drunkard, a bully who enjoys dominating those weaker than
he. Contrast with the hero: a man who almost radiates an aura of
confidence, who is afraid of nothing; yet he is always courteous, is
chivalrous toward those weaker than he (particularly the ladies), is
clearly ten times the man the villain is and has no need to prove it
to anyone. If there is anyone going to be dragging the lady kicking
and screaming into the back room of the saloon, it is the villain; the
hero, on the other hand, will treat her kindly and respectfully (after
shooting the villain dead and rescuing her, of course).

On a similar note, last week two of my housemates and I (all guys)
were sitting around watching one of those predictable "woman gets gun
and hunts down the guys who raped her but got off on a technicality"
flicks. Rather early on, we were treated to a (non-obscene, but rather
disturbing) flashback of the rape; a couple of comments of the nature
of "I need to see this.  NOT!" on two of our parts and the channel was
changed; I could just see wheels turning and attitudes adjusting in
the third guy. Not, you understand, that he was a rapist or anything
remotely like that, but it looked like some of our "rape is
contemptible and distasteful, even to watch" attitudes rubbed off on
him.

I agree that rape should be looked on as distasteful and contemptible
rather than distasteful and monstrous; monstrosity glorifies in a way
that contemptibility doesn't. I also believe that attitudes can be
changed, certainly not as radically or easily as some of the
psychologists who give those dubiously effective rape awareness
seminars at universities seem to believe, but a well-timed comment can
be effective. It also doesn't hurt in my case that there isn't a whole
lot out there that I object to (hell, I think bikini-filled beer
commercials are God's gift to America :> ), so I actually have some
credibility when I do object to something.


                                    Cordially,

                                          -g