Andrea Dworkin formulated this argument in 1987, yet back then everyone laughed at the bitch, but now only a moron would deny that the notion of sexual intercourse as violation isn't the unspoken presumption of the #Metoo movement. Male sexuality is increasingly cast as uniquely predatory, no matter whether they speak from a essentialist or constructionist point of view, and all women are now potential victims of rape; be it by force, coercion and now even deception.
RAPE BY FORCE:
For decades the anti-rape slogan "No means no" meant emphasize a woman's bodily integrity as well as her ability to consent. Women weren't children, they argued, nor they were anyone's property, and as such they were deserving of being treated as fully capable adults. In this universe a woman is not a powerless subjects, in it's most fundamental essence she always has the power to control her own bodily autonomy, set boundaries, and bare the responsibilities of her decisions.
RAPE BY COERCION:
What started as a mechanism that would protect women from sexual extortion with threats and intimidation, slowly descended into the murky realm of power relations, nagging needy boyfriends and regret sex. This is where the 'the lack of a enthusiastic Yes, means No" enters the picture -- But women are queens that should be chased, and if a man isn't actively doing the chasing, bidding, persuading... he really isn't worthwhile, the FDS mantra goes! You suggest sex to a woman you like and she denies it to you at the time. Should you give up? Or is she testing whether you'll stick around and prove yourself a truly HVM by not giving up? Decide to pursue her and ask her a second time, and if lucky, the third is when she gives it to you. Was this successful seduction on your part? Or was it pressured? A case of persuasion or rape by coercion?
RAPE BY DECEPTION:
The legal precedent for this is a true testament to the successes of intersectional feminism as it combines racism with female empowerment. What looks like a match made in hell actually came into being in God's Holy Land, Israel. A israeli woman agreed to sex within the first 10 minutes of meeting a man who lied to her about being jewish. Upon discovering she had sex with a subhuman, she took it to Israeli court and won. Back in 2010 when it happened, the overt racialist tone of this case still made some feminists cringe, now it's being hailed as good exemplar of what should be adapted into the judicial systems of Europe and US. Thanks jews for that one, I might ad.
tl;dr: the definition of rape in the next decade will be formulated along these lines: "People believe that in order to give consent then the parties must be of equal power making a mutual decision... But men and women definitely don't have equal power. Thus, how can women give consent? "
RAPE BY FORCE:
For decades the anti-rape slogan "No means no" meant emphasize a woman's bodily integrity as well as her ability to consent. Women weren't children, they argued, nor they were anyone's property, and as such they were deserving of being treated as fully capable adults. In this universe a woman is not a powerless subjects, in it's most fundamental essence she always has the power to control her own bodily autonomy, set boundaries, and bare the responsibilities of her decisions.
RAPE BY COERCION:
What started as a mechanism that would protect women from sexual extortion with threats and intimidation, slowly descended into the murky realm of power relations, nagging needy boyfriends and regret sex. This is where the 'the lack of a enthusiastic Yes, means No" enters the picture -- But women are queens that should be chased, and if a man isn't actively doing the chasing, bidding, persuading... he really isn't worthwhile, the FDS mantra goes! You suggest sex to a woman you like and she denies it to you at the time. Should you give up? Or is she testing whether you'll stick around and prove yourself a truly HVM by not giving up? Decide to pursue her and ask her a second time, and if lucky, the third is when she gives it to you. Was this successful seduction on your part? Or was it pressured? A case of persuasion or rape by coercion?
RAPE BY DECEPTION:
The legal precedent for this is a true testament to the successes of intersectional feminism as it combines racism with female empowerment. What looks like a match made in hell actually came into being in God's Holy Land, Israel. A israeli woman agreed to sex within the first 10 minutes of meeting a man who lied to her about being jewish. Upon discovering she had sex with a subhuman, she took it to Israeli court and won. Back in 2010 when it happened, the overt racialist tone of this case still made some feminists cringe, now it's being hailed as good exemplar of what should be adapted into the judicial systems of Europe and US. Thanks jews for that one, I might ad.
tl;dr: the definition of rape in the next decade will be formulated along these lines: "People believe that in order to give consent then the parties must be of equal power making a mutual decision... But men and women definitely don't have equal power. Thus, how can women give consent? "
