Belledame gives good rant:
[W]e women are inherently more peaceful and full of the sisterly love, particularly once we have begun the endless, gruelling work of purging ourselves of the patriarchal toxins, and oh my God, you’re not seriously wearing those shoes, are you? You like WHAT in bed? What the hell is wrong with you? I mean, besides the patriarchal contamination, which has clearly gotten to you even worse than the rest of us. Don’t you know that those spanking and bondage games you’re playing out with your girlfriend are all about abuse and hierarchy, which were invented by John the Patriarch in 703 B.C., and plays right into male rape fantasies, which I’m now going to describe in great unappetizing detail? By the way: I’m only telling you this for your own good
LOL!!1!1 Awesome.
I know this is another one of those kinda cop-out posts - just a big quote - but as per usual, I’m busy as all hell (which, if you didn’t know, stays hoppin’ 24/7). I’ll put up a real post eventually. I sort of want to write about rape fantasies, but I’m not sure if I should open that can of worms. What do you think?
READ ME: Disclaimer
18 Responses to "Ranty goodness"
I say, bring on the worms.
Until this moment it had never occurred to me that men would have rape fantasies, but of course they would. Duh. Sexism rears its ugly head.
I appreicate your sensitivity to the issue, M@ber, but I’m a little surprised. I mean, we’re all about confronting these kinds of issues. :-) Discussion, discussion, discussion. Or maybe we could just do it in email, so as not to piss off the world… :-)
I’d title it in an obvious way so that anyone who might find it difficult to read would know to avoid it, and blog away…
2 cents…
Rape fantasties are tricky to talk about. I think your audience can handle it, though.
You see, Jenny? This is, again, why you need a blog! When will you finally heed the advice of one of your oldest friends? What’s it going to take? You wench.
Anyway. I do need to email you and Niki, I’m painfully aware of that fact. Seems like I’m chronically behind on such things lately. But, as far as the rape fantasy discussion goes, I think I’ll do it here (whenever I get around to it) because it sure will be interesting to see what shit goes down in the comments. And then I’ll probably email you and Niki and be like, “Did you see all that shit that went down in the comments? Here’s what I think about THAT! Goddammit!”
As far as sexism rearing its ugly head, yeah, it tends to do that a lot, doesn’t it. But men and women both have rape fantasies, and both types make me equally uncomfortable, and aw hell, I better not get started because then I’ll write my whole future post in a comment.
Okay. I’ve now bored anyone other than you and Niki, and filled up all 4 recent comment slots on my own blog. (And deleted Sports Car Seats, FYI.)
I’m out, for now.
Rape fantasies are a tricky thing to talk about. My experience is that anyone who’s tried has mostly been accused of trolling either the site they’re on, the blogosphere, humanity as a whole, etc.
Well, fortunately I can’t be accused of trolling my own site (okay, I could be accused of it, but it would make no sense), so I guess that’s at least one less worm in the can, in this case.
No, but you could be accused of trolling your audience, which is what I’ve seen happen to some people that have brought the subject up quite legitimately on their blogs before.
First, M@ber, I believe you’re the only person who thinks I should have my own blog. :-)
And…if I start one then I’ll never get a damn thing done. I don’t have that much discipline. I’d just write all the time. And there’s a real limit to the number of people who actually want to have serious conversations about the political ramifications of NASCAR. Trust me.
For the record, I believe you are my oldest friend. :-) None of this “one of” bullshit. :-)
Blather, blather…where’s the real post about this? :-)
What can you say that Margaret Atwood hasn’t already said?
Note a whole hell of a lot. I’m actually currently re-reading The Handmaid’s Tale, and it’s really jarring to realize how realistic a lot of it is. Even moreso than when I first read it a few years ago. Scary…
I was actually thinking of her short story “Rape Fantasies,” the morale of which is that they are more about fantasy than rape.
Then again, Handmaid’s Tale has its ritualized gang-rape element too, albeit by a protective father-figure as the rapist, attended by the mother in waiting. Perhaps it is more realistic with HBO’s Big Love promoting polygamy as an alternative lifestyle.
Well, the scenario in The Handmaid’s Tale isn’t tehnically gang rape, since only the Commander is fucking her. -Although, on second thought, I guess you could argue that it’s gang rape, because the Wife is there - and she could be seen as both a facilitator and a victim herself, as neither of the women have a choice in the situation. And it’s all painted as being a return to Biblical conventions… the whole Rachel/Leah/etc. thing.
As for Big Love, I don’t know that it’s promoting anything… but my opinion of it is basically “it’s dumb,” based on what others have said, and that’s about as much thought as I’ve given it. Anyway, I don’t have HBO.
Oh, and as for rape fantasies, I’m more interested in writing about male rape fantasies. Why is everyone assuming female rape fantasies? I think those are in inherently oxymoronic - much like Margaret Atwood does, I guess.
I haven’t read it in a few years, but in addition to the Wife, weren’t there also other observers present during the act? Certainly, there was a Biblical pretext for it, but the spectacle of the Act seemed more in keeping with our modern voyerism than with the Victorian outlook one would expect if the fundamentalists gained power.
Anyhow, Atwood’s short story had several women discussing their fantasies about being raped; however, they always conditioned the means by which the rape occured to be such that it became safe and was about mutual sexual desire rather than exploitation. You should take a look at it.
What kind of male rape fantasies are you considering discussing?
I’ve read Atwood’s “Rape Fantasies” (many years ago), so I do know the premise of the story.
As for The Handmaid’s Tale, no, there weren’t other observers present during “the act.” There was a ceremony beforehand with everyone present, where the Commander reads from the Bible; but as for the act itself, it was just the Commander, the Handmaid, and the Wife.
And, “our modern voyeurism”? Please expand. I don’t know what you mean by that rather ambiguous phrase. Besides, “the act” (god I’m quotation mark happy tonight) is hardly about sex at all. Sure, the mechanics are involved because they have to be, but the entire purpose is reproduction. There’s no notion of attraction, sensuality, eroticism, arousal, or consent figured into it whatsoever.
My concept of the “our modern voyeurism” has to do with placing sex as an act at the center of our collective consciousness. There is an inordinate attention placed on sexuality wherein we spend more time than needed commenting or viewing or attempting to determine the underlying sexual impetus for behavior be it through psychoanalysis or in watching a television sitcom or in answering questions about which relationship to enter into.
The Act of sex in the Tale was about more than mere reproduction. Overtly, the observers before the Act were there to see that the societal obligations were fulfilled. What we have is a society that while attempting to push sexuality back into the closet on one hand is turning that into a public ritual on the other. This was a ritual to enforce the patriarchal order. On the other side, covertly, there was haphazard, perhaps unavoidable, intrusion of emotion and feeling into the relationship between the parties.
Thanks for the shout. And, belatedly, sorry to hear about your dad’s troubles.
>Sure, the mechanics are involved because they have to be, but the entire purpose is reproduction. There’s no notion of attraction, sensuality, eroticism, arousal, or consent figured into it whatsoever.
Well, that’s just it. And ironically, this is also reflected in a lot of the “porn culture” or whatever it is both right and left wing sexual conservatives complain about: a mechanistic, utilitarian approach to not just sexuality, but everything. It is a very strong thread in our zeitgeist. And it’s doubly ironic because for all the bitching about “objectification,” unless you’re willing to make space for *subjectivity* (i.e. interior reality–so, desire, attraction, sensuality, and so on) you end up with a form of objectification one way or the other, regardless of what kind of ideology you wrap it in.
that is to say: it’s reflected both in a lot of mainstream porn and in the approach people take to try to stamp it out.
The only thing I know about rape fantasies, especially male ones, is that I had been happily been going on my merry way never giving them much thought, as they played no part in my kinky l’il sex life, interior or exterior; until a particularly *dim* self-styled Dworkinite poster on one of the Big Feminist Boards, along with a number of his more fervid enablers, started explaining/ranting about how BDSM was alll about this, which he knew because…well, he knew everything, essentially. In the course of which, um, hello to the imagery, and say, did I consent to having those rather *graphic* and hostile images you insist on using to illustrate–hell, highlight in screaming yellow zonker day-glo–planted in my brain? Why no, in fact, I did not. Gee.
(verbal images, I should clarify. still, it struck me as not entirely unlike the anti-abortion forces thrusting giant photos of bloody fetuses in one’s face. or actually more accurately, the homophobic religious right going on and on about the *disgusssssting* practices that THOSE people engage in, right down to the last hair on the gerbil)