In what way is that similar to your wet willie/bruise on the butt/handshake example?
Let me put it this way. Getting assaulted to the point of being in fear of being killed is one of the most god awful, horribly traumatic things that can happen to you, but even then you retain one small part of your bodily integrity - the ability to give or refuse yourself sexually. The rapist takes that as well.
Exactly. Any assault is terrible.
I agree. By degrees though. Just as if a physical assault ruins your ability to walk due to knee problems. Treat it rationally. Each assault is different. Each is terrible.
Okay, but the problem with rape is that it’s always going to involve that extra bit of take, and is always going to involve that extra bit of psychological trauma. Perhaps in the handshake society it would be no worse, but we don’t live in that society where sex is devoid of emotional content, and never will.
What are the practical ramifications of this, though? That is, even if we accept your premise that it’s only society that makes us treat rape as different, when we’re actually faced with rape victims, what are we meant to do differently? Like, if someone says they’re OK physically but really freaked out and upset in the weeks following a rape or a sexual assault, should we tell them they should try to get over it? Even if it is “just” society that is responsible for their bad feelings, their feelings are still there. It’s not so easy to just reason them away.
I’m not a psychiatric professional and didn’t claim to be. I don’t have any special insight into the way people feel. That’s why I listen when they tell me.
I didn’t snipe anything. I asked a question. The question, again, was not “why do you keep saying there is no emotional trauma.” The question was why do you think that an effective way to answer the OP’s question is to dismiss the emotional trauma, when the emotional trauma is itself the answer to the OP’s question?
Why is it such a big deal when a father has sex with his daughter? It’s just one part of one body in another part, after all, and dentists put their fingers in people’s mouths all the time. Why is it such a big deal when a priest or a swimming coach grabs a kid’s crotch? Mothers put their hands down kid’s diapers all the time. Who cares if a boss grinds against his secretary while she’s sitting at her desk? Happens in clubs like whoa.
Those are stupid questions. Now, answer them without reference to what you’ve been calling societal irrationality – essentially taboo – and what nearly everyone else living a human experience would call self-evidently normal emotional reaction.
I’m not nitpicking what you’re saying to make you look bad. I’m asking you to explain why you think it’s a productive approach to set aside the fundamental aspect of humanity that makes rape traumatic, and then ask rhetorical questions that suggest that you’ve forgotten about the first step.
Welcome to my world, iamnotbatman…have a seat!
I’m glad you asked that. Really, I am, because I think it’s the heart of the manner. From my own experiences on both sides of the conversation, I’d say we should:
- Listen more than we talk.
- Don’t tell a rape victim what s/he’s feeling, even if you think they’re in denial and need to hear or speak the words. Listen, instead. Listen, listen, listen.
- If they say they’re okay, accept them at their word. Maybe keep an eye on them for changes in behavior, but try not to make it obvious.
- Is they say they’re not okay, accept them at their word. Ask them what they need to feel better and, as far as reasonable and safe, attempt to provide it.
- Remind them that they are, right now, physically and emotionally safe. They are not being hurt right now. (This gets unwittingly undermined by well-meaning people when they use words like “devastated” and “scared” in present tense after the event has passed. The experience WAS scary (or may have been), the survivor may not be scared right now unless you bring it up.)
- Don’t just do something, sit there.
Too often, we get caught up in our own fear and disgust and do and say things to fill the silence. Many times, all a survivor needs of you in the moment is your silent presence.
It’s not that we need to tell them rape is no big deal. It’s that we need to stop telling them what they should think about their experience, and focus on listening to them and believing them, whether they’re devastated or basically okay. *Either *reaction (and many in between) to the experience of being raped is valid.
In other words, doing too much can be just as damaging as doing nothing at all. Good treatment is finding the middle ground.
The same is true of all traumas, from death and injury to divorce or job loss or learning you have a chronic illness or even just having one episode of ED. Being supportive without making the person feel disabled is a huge challenge.
Perhaps some of the people on the “rape is over dramatized” side of this conversation don’t realize that all traumas are over dramatized if you’re on the receiving end of too much solicitous care.
I think I understand what you are trying to say here. In my case, though, I was 5 years old. A man snuck into our home while my mother and her boyfriend were at the nearby beach. I didn’t have much of a grasp of society’s taboos. I remember being scared while it was happening, and hiding in the bathroom for a long long time until I realized that he was probably gone. Can you understand that this was traumatic for me way way before my mother found out and started screaming/called the police?
To your point, because I was so little, I told my mother very matter-of-factly what had happened. I didn’t have any shame, since I was too young to understand the taboos surrounding sex.
To be honest, I don’t know. I do see the point you are making, so I’ve been sitting here kind of backtracking, trying to remember the incident in a context like you describe above. I think you’ll run into resistance to the idea just because at this point, it’s water under the bridge: the taboos are firmly in place, and we as society look at rape from that perspective.
My visceral response is that being raped as a child is much much different, and far more invasive, than a rough handshake, even without that understanding of society’s taboos. But I do understand what you are trying to say here.
I do, but by its nature, rape is never going to be considered like that. There are not going to be societies where rape is like a rough handshake, until there are societies where rape is disassociated from sex and sex is disassociated from reproduction and emotional ties and trust.
Taboos about sex are not arbitrary, and not subject (except in hypotheticals) to reassignment to suit the parameters of an argument.
That’s where the trauma of rape derives - not from society making a bigger deal over it than they need to. Society needs to make a bigger deal over rape.
Regards,
Shodan
I don’t think we should do anything differently in direct interaction with the victim. If someone is traumatized, they should be treated with respect and care. But there are things that are not at an individual level that could change: 1) the news media’s voyeuristic focus on it; 2) the taboo inherent in the discussion (as evidenced in this thread); 3) the sexual offender registry being applied without nuance (17 yr old sleeps with 18 yr old), etc. etc…
Let me stop you right there: I did not say that.
Thanks for the insight. I can get behind this kind of discussion. It’s possible it is always far more invasive that a rough handshake, but I have a hard time understanding why it is that much more invasive when you subtract out the deeply-rooted societal drama. Unfortunately, as you point out, we can’t subtract that out. But for God’s sake we can at least have a rational discussion about it!
Part of my problem here is my own experience with society not making a big deal about other offenses. My point it that it is out of balance. For example it is easy to get beaten up pretty bad and have life-long emotional scarring from it, but never have adequate recourse because it is not rape. Anything with the word rape attached to it gets special treatment, even though, on a case by case basis, it is not clear to me that it is always worse for the victim. It is even possible for rape to have negligible physical scarring, and it is possible for the rape to mean much more or less to the victim, depending on their mind set. I know this sounds crude, but I think it is obviously true.
Well done. Your bold font emphasized that point so well that I actually understood it days before you posted it.
Then why did you post it…
ETA: Honest mistake. I hadn’t seen your use of the word “not,” so I thought you said the opposite of what you intended to say. I will read your post again and respond to you.
Well, I have to keep repeating myself with you, so I don’t think my previous use of bold font was unwarranted: I am not dismissing the emotional trauma. I have repeated this over and over again. Using bold font would be an under-reaction given the amount of frustration on this end…
The OP’s question is: “Why does rape get special status?”
The answer requires a wee bit of nuance. It’s a chicken-or-the-egg problem. Just saying “emotional trauma” without any caveats is misleading. Why is there so much emotional trauma? My arguments is that there would be less emotional trauma if there wasn’t an irrational double standard. Again, when I say “double standard”, I mean “all else being equal.” If someone forces a phallus into my armpit or ear with the same level of resultant physical trauma as a rape under consideration, I don’t think it is a giant leap to conclude that on a rational basis, the levels of emotional trauma should be the same in an ideal world. We don’t live in an ideal world, but nonetheless we could strive toward one…
I agree those are big deals. They are big deals for lots of reasons. But if you distill all those reasons and consider those alone when dealing with criminal acts rather than appealing to the emotionally biasing term “rape”, I think a lot of people (18 year olds having sex with 17 year olds) would be dealing with less extreme responses, while others (someone shooting you in the leg) would be dealing with more extreme responses. I think the responses would be more balanced and fair and rational.
[QUOTE=iamnotbatman;13217552
The answer requires a wee bit of nuance. It’s a chicken-or-the-egg problem. Just saying “emotional trauma” without any caveats is misleading. Why is there so much emotional trauma? My arguments is that there would be less emotional trauma if there wasn’t an irrational double standard.[/QUOTE]
A double standard for rape or a double standard for sex? I do agree that we could work towards making rape less traumatic (at least recovery) if we worked towards reducing the double standard towards men’s and women’s sexuality. If women weren’t blamed for ‘leading men on’ and ‘forcing’ them to commit rape, or for wanting to have sex at all (then changing their mind) they wouldn’t be affected by the oh-so-common guilt of bringing something traumatic upon themselves. If rape victims could accept that they had something awful happen to them and it wasn’t their fault (as a victim of a mugging might do – though they usually have the benefit of the perp being a stranger and not a trusted love one), perhaps you are right and their recovery wouldn’t be quite so tied up in taboos and shame, which I think is where you’re hoping society can head.
But vaginas and anuses will still never be elbows or noses. It’s just not going to happen. Unless more people start orgasming from elbow friction or giving birth from their noses.
OK, but let’s treat it rationally.
What is the density of pain receptors in the vagina/anus/nose/elbow/eyeball? (answer: all different)
Is whether the victim got impregnated or not relevant? (answer: yes)
Is the relationship between the victim and the perp relevant? (answer: yes)
Is it possible for some victims to be emotionally/physically traumatized to far different degrees than others? (answer: yes)
Is the degree of shame/worry/stigma surrounding both sexuality itself and also the word rape due to deep-rooted societal drama-reinforcement relevant to how much emotional trauma is experienced? (answer: yes)
etc.
ETA: And incidentally, while elbow-rape might seem silly to you, I think you would feel very differently if you were indoctrinated from an early age to repress even natural curiosity about your elbow. To not touch your elbow in public (by some to not touch it at all). To not let others touch it. Etc. The degree to which societal stigma can effect the experience of something is not to be overlooked.
See, this is where you are going wrong.
Even if I accept that a large part of the trauma is based on society’s standards, you have not shown that society deciding to make sex “special” would be irrational or bad.
It might very well be the rational choice.
Perhaps we want sex to be special because it makes life better. Would we be happier if we reduced sex to a handshake? I doubt it.
And there could be a different type of trauma associated with rape in a handshake sex society. Maybe you get rid of the “stigma” factor, but create something worse. Maybe now complaining about rape becomes a stigma, because sex isn’t supposed to be a big deal. Maybe rapists aren’t seen as such scumbags, making it worse for their victims.
Finally, I don’t actually accept your premise. I think sex is inherently more intimate and potentially traumatic than elbow bumping, and it would take a very bizarre society to counter that. A society which, honestly, I would rather not live in.
I have already agreed that there are some special aspects to sex. So just to be precise, I’m talking about how special we treat it. Do you think the stigma surrounding masturbation is rational? That’s one absolutely unequivocal exemplification, IMO, where something sexual is treated too “special”, causing more trauma than is necessitated by reality.
Ever read Brave New World (I realize it was a dystopia, but just for a common frame of reference)? I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree. I wouldn’t use the term “reduced” either. A handshake I’ll admit is a somewhat extreme analogy; perhaps ideally sex would rather be more akin to a potent embrace, or two people friendlily giving each other foot rubs, or a big slobbery kiss from a dog (another example of something that in a bizarro world might be considered criminal).
What you are describing basically already exists, in the form of other assaults. Complaining about being bullied can be a stigma. And bullies, in schools, are often ignored. The point is things are out of balance.
Fair enough. I have previously outlined the places where I agree with you about where sex is in actuality different (pregnancy, orgasm, for example). I would rather live in a society that treated those things for what they are. Try this example on for size:
Suppose in the near future, scientists figure out how to activate cells in the palm of your hand, so that contact with other hands can render you pregnant or give you an orgasm. Well, perhaps the first thing that would happen is that people would start wearing gloves! Now, suppose a stranger rips off one of your gloves, and without your permission (with his gloved hand, so you can’t get pregnant) gives you a handshake. What happens? You are angry – you did not give this person permission to do this. You accept that you experienced some pleasure at the same time, similarly to how one must accept being tickled against their will – they may laugh as a physical reaction, but they also are being tickled against their will. In any case they shrug the matter off as another dickish thing a stranger can do. No long term trauma associated with shame, guilt, repression, PTSD due to the drama of the event built up through countless societal mental reenactments and enforcements. Just another shitty thing a stranger can do to you.
I think the stigma surrounding masturbation is decreasing.
I think our view of sex is actually getting healthier. We have room to improve, but making sex less special is not the direction I think we need to go.
I think (if I accepted your premise) it would be rational to make sex special even it was not inherently so, even if it created a possibility for a certain type of trauma (while reducing other types), and also rational to take away the stigma of masturbation as we are gradually doing.
Ideally to who? I don’t share those ideals, and would not want to live in the world of Brave New World.
You seem to be contradicting your previous points here. You are now talking about the disadvantages of the way we treat other assaults, but these disadvantages could apply to rape as well if we treat it the same.
They are only out of balance if you assume your conclusion, which is:
-
There is no inherent reason for sex to be special in general
-
There is no rational reason to make it special
What do you mean by “treated those things for what they are”?
Isn’t that exactly what we do, by definition? You just don’t agree with the way we treat them for what they are.