I began my series of posts on meta-issues associate with discussions of rape culture here. I assume that discussion in what I write here.
As a quick summary: in that post I suggested that there are two ways to understand rape: either as an individual crime committed by “rotten apples,” or as a systemic crime that is akin to terrorism or hate crimes where rape has effects on both the direct target (victim) and an indirect target (other members of the group) beyond the direct targets of the crime. ETA: On the systemic view, rape is akin to terrorism, but it is not the same as terrorism. One important difference between rape and terrorism is that terrorists usually have an explicit message, demand, or political point. In the case of rape, there need not be an explicit message, and though there is a demand made of the direct target (the victim) there might not be an explicit demand made of the primary target (women as a group). In that post I argued that rape culture cannot be perceived if rape is viewed as an individual crime. It is only when rape is considered a systemic crime that rape culture can be perceived.
In order to perceive rape culture, one has to first believe that rape is facilitated or made more effective by a number of our cultural institutions. If one accepts that view, then rape culture involves any aspect of a culture that a) makes it easier to get away with raping women, b) makes women more vulnerable to rape or denies the effects rape has on all women not only those who are actually raped, c) makes rape more effective at curtailing the freedom of rape victims, or d) makes rape more effective by curtailing the freedom of all women.
1. Rape Culture and Attributions of Responsibility
These two differing interpretations of rape lead to very different possibilities for responding to accusations that one has contributed to rape culture.
One reason this issue has been on my mind recently is the result of the Penny Arcade (PA) Dickwolves debacle. I won’t get into an entire discussion of what transgressed, if you don’t know there is a timeline of the discussion here and following the links will get you up to speed. To sum up altogether too briefly: PA published a comic where the joke was premised on the indifference of video game heroes to the suffering of rape victims (probably intended to question their heroism), some actual-real-life rape victims complained that they found the comic triggered their PTSD and suggested more sensitivity was required, PA then supplied a response that demonstrated they understood rape only as an individual act, committed by individual men with no further repercussions or opportunities for responsibility: and the nerd-comic-video game-areas of the internet erupted in debate that consisted mostly of taking past one another.
The PA response is characteristic of a person who understands rape as an individual crime. Those who understand rape as an individual crime think that ‘rape culture’ refers to cultural items (comics, TV shows, movies, books, etc.) that depict or mention rape. They believe that the only way that these cultural products could contribute to rape is if these products caused an individual to rape another individual. The only way a producer of some cultural product that references rape could be responsible for contributing to “rape culture” (as misunderstood) is by directly causing one individual to rape another individual. The solution, then, is simple: just say don’t rape. If anyone keeps raping after you have said not to do it, that is their individual failing, not your responsibility.
Those who understand rape as systemic, or akin to terrorism take a different perspective on the kinds of responsibilities that producers of cultural products might bear in relation to rape. They see cultural products as contributing to rape culture if they:
- a) make it easier to get away with raping women: for example, by failing to process evidence from rape kits, or by accepting low conviction rates for rapes compared other crimes, by doubting the testimonies of rape victims in ways that are not present for other crime victims, by thinking “only monsters” rape and refusing to believe a nice guy could do it etc.,
- b) make women more vulnerable to rape or deny the effects rape has on all women not only those who are actually raped: for example, by thinking rape is inevitable when cultural aspects can make rape unacceptable, or thinking only women can prevent rape and there is little men could do to prevent it,
- c) make rape more effective at curtailing the freedom of rape victims: for example by making many spaces ones in which victims feel vulnerable, or by failing to create safe spaces, or
- d) make rape more effective by curtailing the freedom of all women: for example, by offering rape prevention advice to women that requires curtailing our freedom or by thinking that the only way men could prevent rape is by “protecting” women rather than challenging men’s behaviour.
In each of the above examples the person contributing to rape culture might not directly cause someone to rape. Moreover, they might have deep moral objections to rape thinking that rape is always wrong and morally abhorrent. Furthermore, they might not increase the rates at which rapes are committed; but they do make the individual rapes more effective if the rape is believed to be sending a message or curtailing the freedom of one group (women). Thus, they could be said to bear responsibility for contributing to rape culture even if they do not bear responsibility for the individual, or particular rapes that occur within that culture.
PA probably did not encourage any men to go out and rape directly. But it might have made the effects of rape more “successful” if success is measured in terms of reminding women of their subordinate status and keeping women from participating in “masculine” or male-defined spaces. For example, after some pressure, and after several invited speakers withdrew from Penny Arcade Expo (PAX) East on account of the Dickwolves debacle, and several journalists or fans said they were not going to attend PAX East , PA decided to remove their “Dickwolves” T-shirts and banners. That was a good move and if PA had actually apologized that probably would have been the end of the discussion (for example, when Michael Moore apologized on Rachel Maddow, after making comments disbelieving the women accusing Asange of rape, the controversy involving him died down, and some even thanked him for the apology). In fact, when they did withdraw the T-shirt, Kirbybits did thank them.
But that is not where it ended. Instead, Gabe/Mike tweeted that he would be wearing his Dickwolves T-shirt to PAX, and so by implication he invited others to wear their shirts. This declaration might never cause anyone to commit rape. Nevertheless, if rape is understood as systemic (or intended to send a message in ways akin to terrorism, as discussed in the previous post), then it might make rapes that have already occurred more effective in curtailing women’ freedom or reminding women of their “proper” place. Rape victims might then think that PAX East was not a safe space for them and might “voluntarily” decide not to attend the conference. This makes rape more “effective” because then women have fewer safe, accessible spaces in which they can participate. The effectiveness of this strategy is further bolstered by the fact that women-rape-victims are making this decision “voluntarily” no one is banning them from attending the conference (so there is no legal case under non-discrimination laws, for example); nevertheless the effect is the same: fewer spaces in which women can participate in the creation or critique of cultural products.
One thing that is important to note is that perpetuating rape culture does not require a “social conspiracy” (as Tycho/Jerry put it here). Conspiracies are organized efforts in which the conspirators communicate with each other to achieve some end. But no one (as far as I know) has claimed that rape culture is perpetuated through a concerted effort, like a conspiracy. Also, Jerry writes there, “The only people who are pro-rape are rapists. The idea that you would have to specifically enunciate an idea like that is almost overwhelming. It’s self-evident. Hence, the comic.” But, again, perpetuating rape culture does not require that the person doing so is pro-rape. All that is required is that what is done makes women less safe in public spaces or at conventions. Jerry thinks that there are “hundreds of tacit assumptions” that under gird an understanding of rape culture, but there is really only one: specifically, the assumption that rape is akin to terrorism because it has an effect on all women, not just the direct victims of the crime. Jerry positions his own view as neutral or “self-evident,” but in fact, his view is also under girded by “tacit assumptions:” specifically, he assumes that rape is an individual crime and there is no way to contribute to rape unless you actually rape someone.
Gabe’s decision to encourage wearing Dickwolves t-shirts makes “rape messages” (understood as preventing women from being full participants in cultural/political events) more effective because it means that those who have already raped, and have created rape-victims vulnerable to rape triggers will be more successful at sending the message to rape victims and potential rape victims that they are not safe in this space. It has the effect of limiting the freedom of mobility, association and participation of those who are rape victims or who see themselves as likely/potential rape victims. This act does not contribute to rape culture in the senses of a) or b) described above; but, it does contribute to rape culture in senses of c) and d). Encouraging wearing Dickwolves t-shirts makes rape victims less welcome at PAX East, and it makes women in general less welcome.
2. In Sum
There are different ways to understand the crime of rape. On individual understandings the very idea of rape culture is nearly absurd. Unless a direct causal influence between the cultural product and some instance of rape can be established, there is no responsibility for rape or its effects. On another view that sees rape as systemic, or as a means of reminding women of our subordinate and vulnerable status and enforcing our subordinate status, there are a number of ways of being responsible for rape, though the majority of these responsibilities are probably non-criminal-culpability ways of being responsible. They are not “you’re guilty” ways of being responsible; instead they are “please don’t contribute in these ways,” or “please understand how this excludes me” ways of being responsible.
[…] « Bill C-389 Passes the House Rape Culture 5105: Responsibility and Rape Culture […]
The existence of rape culture is disputed on wikipedia, along with the validity of most of the studies feminists cite in an attempt to elevate rape above every other kind of crime.
It’s not recognized in the world of science or peer review, which seeks to find answers for questions, while rape culture is a politically convenient answer in search of a question.
Until it’s proven that “rape culture” isn’t just a narrow minded view of a small part of a larger phenomenon of human behavior relating to tragedies they have no personal connection with, you can’t expect the world to bend over backwards to cater to a single vocal minority.
Thank you for your comment. I would like to point out that my previous entry does cite the Wikipedia entry on Rape Culture. That entry does not exactly disprove “the existence” of rape culture (unless you have another entry in mind, in which case please provide a link). To quote their entire section on “Criticisms of the Paradigm”:
Sommers does question the existence of rape culture based on criticisms of the studies that report the incidence of rape, but if you follow the link to that article, her citations are from the 1980s and early 1990s. A lot of work has been done on the incidence of rape since that time. Much of it has taken her criticisms into account. If her objection is that the collection of statistics on rape incidence have been poorly done, we might want to consider whether that is still the case twenty years later.
hooks is not questioning the existence of rape culture. Instead, she suggests it is better to understand rape culture as part of an overarching culture of violence.
Rape culture is indeed recognized in the world of peer review, in fact, the article by Card that I also cite in the previous entry comes from a peer reviewed journal (The Journal of Ethics), which is not a feminist journal.
Thanks again for your comment. I have been considering whether I should write a third post in the series about theoretical adequacy, and the questions you raise inspire me to do so. I am not sure whether it would provide the proof you seek, but it might be a step in that direction.
Bakka,
Thanks for this very thorough post; this is the kind of rational discussion of Rape Culture that I’ve been looking for.
The problem, I believe, is not with the concept of rape culture, but with the term, and with the way it is used; it fosters misunderstanding.
I’ve written up my own piece, outlining the weaknesses of the term, here: http://socialclarity.tumblr.com/post/3204327644/deconstructing-the-idea-of-rape-culture
In terms of the PA response comic, though, it boils down to this:
On the shakesville blog and others, two statements are made simultaneously:
A) Any reference to Rape in humor strengthens rape culture
B) Anything that strengthens rape culture leads to increased incidence of Rape
This is not an idea that Mike and Jerry pulled out of their noses. It’s right there in shakesville’s Rape Culture 101 post.
In short, I’m getting really tired of people saying that Mike and Jerry were just same-old-white-male-ignorant. They were, at worst, misinformed. At best, well, let me put it this way:
Does it seem unreasonable that Jerry, who loves words more than life itself, who revels in their meanings more than anyone else I’ve ever read, comprehended the contradictions inherent in shakesvilles Rape Culture 101 post, and rejected them? That he said “dress it up however you like, you’re drawing a clear line between making jokes involving rape, and higher incidence of rape?”
Maybe, maybe not, but I am certain of one thing: MANY people who read the shakesville page in an effort to educate themselves came away more confused than when they arrived, and it wasn’t their fault.
Hi Andy,
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I agree with you that many of the definitions on the internet are inadequate. That is why I wanted to add my own.
I read your post, too. I will respond in detail to it over there.
It is late now, though. So I will leave that for another day.
Hi Andy,
I don’t know whether Shakesville makes claim B) above. It certainly is not part of the definition they provide at the beginning of the post (If you can point out where you are getting that from, then I would appreciate a link; they seem to specifically disavow this view in this post). Whether they do or not, it is a claim I would certainly resist making.
I think the claim “Anything that strengthens rape culture leads to increased incidence of Rape” is false. Here is why:
Some things that strengthen rape culture lead to a decreased incidence or rape. Further, some things that weaken rape culture will increase the incidence of rape.
For example, one way to affect the incidence of anything is by changing the definition of what counts as that thing.
Feminists advocated to have non-consensual, forced or coerced sex within marriage count as rape. This kind of change would increase the incidence of rape, but would weaken rape culture because it makes consent more important.
(The decision to count marital rape also led to the most hilariously heinous quote by Wayne Ross: “If a guy can’t rape his wife, who’s he gonna rape?” see here.)
One could also decrease the incidence of rape by changing the definition. For example, the H.R.3 bill proposed that only “forcible” rape should count. If this view had been adopted, then sexual assault by drugging, statutory sexual assault (etc.) would not count as rape. That would decrease the incidence of rape, but it would strengthen rape culture.
The 1 in 4 stat that Sommers complains about were fixed by a 2004 study as the linked Wikipedia article acknowledges.
Fixing the stats drops the incidence of rape from 1 in 4 women to 1 in 6 women. This is still a terrible incidence rate.
If Sommers’ complaint is based on the incidence, as she claims, we should not be happier now that stats take her concerns into account.
For more discussion see here and for Sommers-approved raw data see here.
[…] Culture 101 is an excellent place to start if you want to delve deeper into this examination. And Rape Culture 5105 picks up the discussion and expands it even […]