Apparently if a woman visits a man’s hotel room, she’s consented to have sex. Or at least, that’s what National Review Online believes.
Pre-feminist common sense suggested that a woman who comes alone to a man’s hotel room late at night has already consented to sex with him, but on the all-or-nothing principle so dear to ideologues everywhere, feminist orthodoxy insists that the adoption of this rough-and-ready but extremely useful guide would be tantamount to saying that a woman who has slept with other men not her husband, or even who dresses provocatively has already consented to sex. And the feminist interpretation of the law is now almost uncontested in the courts. No means no — even though no one else hears it, even though everyone knows that it may mean yes — because feminists want to reserve to women the right and freedom to be indiscrete.
Darn those feminists! Thinking that women should have rights and freedoms!
Via Atrios.
UPDATE: Echidne of the Snakes weighs in on this. As does Will Baude..
Never in my lifetime has anybody but rapists expected a woman to allow herself to be sexually assaulted just because she visited a man’s hotel room, or invited him in for coffee, or whatever. You always hear this kind of crap after the fact but in real life women visit men’s hotel rooms all the time without getting raped. Truth is, we don’t expect men to behave like rapists because in most cases they don’t.
If a woman has no intention of having sex of any type with a certain man on particular evening in his hotel room then she can absolutely 100% without any doubt eliminate that possibility if she simply chooses to not go to the man’s hotel room.
Why is basic common sense no longer applicable in this situation?
If a person has no intention of getting shot on a certain street known for nightly shootings then that person, even if they have the right to walk down that street, can absolutely 100% without any doubt eliminate the possibility of being shot on that street if they simply choose to not walk on that street at night.
And why is basic common sense more applicable in this situation, as it always is?
Get a grip.
Rap, are you intending to defend the quoted passage? If so, I don’t think you’re succeeding.
Take your example of the street known for shootings. Does it follow that if someone walks down that street voluntarily, they are consenting to be shot? That’s what you’d have to say, if you want to defend the NRO’s belief that a woman going into a man’s hotel room has consented to sex.
It’s also interesting that your analogy conflates “men” (or maybe “men in hotel rooms”) with “a certain street known for nightly shootings.” Are you saying that men are as certain to commit rape as that street you describe is certain to be the scene of a shooting? That’s an awfully negative view of men you apparently have (one that I don’t share!).
I have some futher comments, but I’m going to put them in their own post.
I totally agree with you, Avedon. Rapists and men with a tendency of violence towards women like to think that everyone else is like them. . .they like to talk about avoiding contect with men as “common sense,” because to them, it is.
The man who lies to everyone expects everyone else to lie to him. The man who steals says “well, everybody does it.” It’s all an effort to paint all men (or people!) as just as sick/violent/mysogynistic/misanthropic as they are, so that they won’t be the odd man out . . . so that their crimes will just be “the way the world is.”
We’ve seen a lot of that here, whether it’s men talking about “hunting for their wives” or horrible generalizations about “how men are” and “how women are” which, thankfully, rarely apply to any men or women I know.
Well, it’s not “common sense” to expect everyone you come in contact with to try to fuck you over one way or another. It’s sad and wrong and inaccurate and dispairing. What a horrible, fearful world those who believe that must live in.
—JRC
“If your mother didn’t want me to ruin her car, she should have hid the keys better.” -Homer Simpson
“No means no ? even though no one else hears it, even though everyone knows that it may mean yes ?”
“Everyone knows that it may mean yes”??
I’ll be sure to keep that in mind when I ask my boss for his credit cards so that I can pay for a a trip to St. Bart’s. When he says “no” I’ll tell him that no means yes, bash him over the head, and take the card. He should have shown some common sense and not been alone with me. Doesn’t he know that by being alone with me he’s consented to whatever happens?
Besides, flaunting his title and authority in my face means he was provoking me. He *asked* for it.
Why do we coddle sociopaths when it comes to violence against women?
By this logic, the fact that I once shared a residence with two women and another man clearly indicates that the women were consenting to have sex with me.
(shakes head)
Assuming “no” sometimes means “yes,” wouldn’t it be comparatively simple to discover the true meaning by taking it literally? If “no” means “no,” you’ll stop, quite properly. If “no” means “yes,” I suspect whoever you’re with will let you know.
Naturally I’m reading everything ass-backwards today doing my catch-up, so forgive me as I’ve already commented on the follow-up to this post. As someone noted in the comment section to the later post, the problem with the NRO guy is that he conflates an assumption of sex with an assumption that the guy can do whatever he wants (the “no means no” part of the quote). I can absolutely see where, in many contexts, a woman going to a man’s room in a romantic situation carries with it the assumption that consensual sex will take place, but the rest of his quote utterly negates his point for me.
Having read the whole article I think everyone missed the whole point of the NRO article. He was saying that just as a woman who goes alone into Kobe’s hotel room is putting herself in a situation where she may or may not be raped, Micheal Jackson is putting the children in a situation where it’s not going to possible for the rest of the world to know how he’s touching them.
Some strange feeling seized me when I read your comment, Don.
Does Don’s post look strange here?
No. So Don, what is the point in your comment?
There always has to be some point.
Nothing personal tho.
regards,
Anderson
Pingback: Crescat Sententia