Ask a question
Here’s a thread for readers/lurkers to ask a question about some issue that just really confuses them. If you’re just not “getting” why some event, action or statement is riling feminists, and/or why is it that something which seems trivial to you seems to be a feminist big deal, ask here and I’ll do my best to give a short explanation and then direct you to detailed readings on that subject.
I sometimes might take a while to see comments and then respond. I invite other feminists lurking to respond to questions when I’m not around. Just everybody please keep in mind that this blog is a flamewar-free zone, and trust me to moderate any obnoxious/offensive comments strictly.
UPDATE: due to the arrival of disruptive commentors, I’m sad to be required to point out that asking a question without demonstrating that you’ve at least attempted to find (and read) an appropriate FAQ will not fill others here with goodwill towards such questioners. This site offers a smorgasboard, not spoonfeeding.
tigtog
tekanji
shakesville
No, I’m not.
* Any unwelcome physical contact is potentially assault.
* Only the person being touched can determine whether they find the touch unwelcome.
* If the person who made the contact immediately backs off when told that the touch is unwelcome, I submit that you wouldn’t find a jury anywhere who would find that person guilty at trial, unless the touch is blatant sexual groping, when even a single contact is considered grossly invasive and unacceptable to many community standards (and would likely be prosecuted as sexual assault rather than general assault).
Sure, what should make it unacceptable is that the touch is unwelcome. That should be enough, but we both know that for some folks it isn’t.
How about a simple apology for making them feel uncomfortable/threatened? Why do you need to tell them that you feel they are being unreasonable? Who are you or anyone to be the arbiter of what sort of touch another person should find acceptable?
Ok, attempting some quote-y mark-ups:
[quote]* If the person who made the contact immediately backs off when told that the touch is unwelcome, I submit that you wouldn’t find a jury anywhere who would find that person guilty at trial,[/quote]
Absolutely, there’s no way this is going to get prosecuted, but again this is a different standard — you can have assaulted someone but not have reasonably expected the contact to be unwelcome, and you might well not face criminal prosecution or conviction over it, but that’s not the same as not having assaulted the person.
[quote]Sure, what should make it unacceptable is that the touch is unwelcome.[/quote]
But also that it could reasonably have been expected to be welcome? Because otherwise we’re just saying “well you’ll know not to do that to that person next time”, but not really expect the shoulder-tapper to modify their behaviour in general — we don’t think they’ve actually done anything *wrong*?
[quote] Why do you need to tell them that you feel they are being unreasonable? Who are you or anyone to be the arbiter of what sort of touch another person should find acceptable? [/quote]
Sorry, I wasn’t very clear there, I meant ’say’ in a more vague nebulous sense. Of course people can find whatever they like unacceptable, but what might be considered unreasonable is their taking offence at other people (who don’t yet know this) making what they, and society generally, considers reasonable judgements of what is likely to cause offence. Isn’t that rather the judgement your hypothetical jury is making?
…is that at all readable? Let me know if it’s not and I’ll try to reword it a bit.
Hugh, this is how lots of laws work, not just the laws on assault. One doesn’t tend to complain to the police if a friend takes your pen to use, and maybe not even if a very close friend “borrows” something far more valuable (money from your wallet taken by your sibling?), but if a stranger does so one yells “Stop Thief!”. The friend and the stranger are doing exactly the same thing, yet one reacts differently. One might also react differently to a friend/sibling at one time of one’s life than one does further down the track (“tough love” for someone stealing from friends and family to support an addiction, for example). People, law enforcement and the courts apply exactly the same class of social filters to assault as they do to theft. What is the alternative?
As to the difference between personal reactions and the “reasonable judgement” of the jury – the jury has been tasked by the court with sober consideration of all the facts laid before them, and have sworn an oath (or affirmed their commitment) to do so. People with a strong emotional reaction to the facts of the case have been subject to challenge by the lawyers for both/either the defence and prosecution before the trial begins. The two situations are hardly comparable.
PS use basic XHTML for text markup
I believe the problem the poster was alluding to was to do specifically with the loaded nature of the word ‘penetrate.’ To the layman penetration implies that the wrong-doing is necessarily on the part of the penetrator rather than the penetrated. While this is true in general, your clarification above, “so unwanted penis-in-vagina (PIV) sex is rape even when the person who doesn’t want the sex is the person possessing the penis,” does indeed indicate that is not always the case.
I think the problem the OP had was that the language encountered in the first instance implied that as far as PIV was concerned only one party could be at fault. The flip-side would have been if the line had read something like, ‘unwanted envelopment of one sexual organ with another.’ Mechanically both things describe the same situation, but the inference as to which party is the aggressor is reversed.
I understand that PIV isn’t the only form of rape, but since it is what is generally thought of in the first instance, I believe that is why the OP found the language problematic.
I am trying to locate information on my rights in the work place and if I have a legal complaint about a boss that continually refers to me as a “girl”. For example “the girls can do it” or “have one of the girls blah blah”. I am 54 years old, I have mothered three children, earned a degree as an adult working full time and raising my children alone. I am not fluff. I am a woman. Does anyone know- do I have legal recourse???
Hi, I looked in the FAQs but I didn’t see anything that looked relevant… Is there an article here for a guy who has to be always right, who says “i love women” the way most people say “i love chocolate” or “i love kittens”, who absolutely cannot think of a woman as a person whose opinions need to be respected or even listened to? I’m sure there’s stuff on here about male privilege but I think even that is too advanced a theory for him to be starting out with and honestly I do not have the time or energy to waste on educating him. plus if it only comes from me then of course I’m making it all up and imagining things.