From: elf@halcyon.com
Subject: The Iconography of RAPE.
Originator: elf@halcyon.com
Reply-To: elf@halcyon.com
Organization: Pendor, UnLtd.
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 08:32:55 GMT

   [ During the discussion on whether or not literature, specifically
     pornography, but in general, all literature, can inspire men to
     commit rape. ]

     Chuck.Lavazzi@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi) writes:

>   Otherwise, we might have to ban Shakespeare entirely, lest the
>subject matter inspire criminal behavior.  Heck, aren't you willing to
>give up a little classic drama to save women from a Fate Worse Than
>Death?

   Let's talk about rape being "a fate worse than death."  Let's
compare and contrast two wonderful systems of dealing with women, and
rape: Ours, and that of Ancient Greece.

   Now, in Ancient Greece, women were pretty valueless, treated as
property or chattel at times.  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.

   Now, the Greek system isn't workable today, because women are not
viewed as valueless; men and women are (supposedly) encouraged to treat
one another as equals.  But does it have it's good points?

   A _monster_ is something that destroys.  Until Godzilla _destroyed_
Tokyo, he wasn't a monster, he was just a big lizard.  A fool is
something you encounter, then brush off.

   Now, maybe it's just me, and maybe it's the fact that my own
encounter as rape victim is many years in my past, but I think there's
something wrong with our cultural iconography.  Sure, it makes our
outside hatred of the rapist more extreme, but does that view inhibit
the rapist?  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.  He might believe himself _more_ powerful
than a normal man, because he is a monster.  The first, at least,
questions his manhood _because_ he contemplates rape, rather than
encourages rape because it he sees it as twisted confirmation of
his manhood.

   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.

   This is just something I've been thinking about for the past couple
of days while I've been reading Greek Classics, where Gods were
constantly coming down, finding a lonely shepherdess and ravishing her
on a hillside.  Why were these women so resilient, especially if they
were suppedly viewing themselves as valuless?

   I am not arguing that rape isn't a violation of another person, or
that the rapists shouldn't be punished.  Surely he should be, for
violating the person of another human being, and for forgoing his moral
responsibility as a member of society to respect fellow members.

   But I _am_ saying that the cultural icon of rapist-as-monster
may _encourage_ rape and _discourage_ the recovery of the rape victim.
And maybe it's time we reconsidered how we look at the _rapist_.

   Just something to think about...

            Elf !!!
-- 
Elf Sternberg    __   |     I have looked into the abyss, and the abyss
elf@halcyon.com  \/   | has looked into me.  Neither liked what we saw.
elf@polari.online.com |                              - Brother Theodore


-- 
Elf Sternberg    __   |     I have looked into the abyss, and the abyss
elf@halcyon.com  \/   | has looked into me.  Neither liked what we saw.
elf@polari.online.com |                              - Brother Theodore
Newsgroups: talk.rape