SRD wrote:Another way to look at this whole question is to think of "rape" as a metaphor for all forms of violation and betrayal, emotional, psychological, and spiritual as well as physical. And in those terms, I don't know anyone who isn't guilty of "rape."
jwaneeta wrote:I've found the thread so far really intriguing, but now my head hurts. What does that even mean? Is he saying that every person -- every single person -- has done something so rotten to another person that it's the moral equivalent of rape? Ow, my brain.
I agree that some people can be pretty vile. I'd even admit that on bad days, most people seem pretty vile. But everyone? Does he really think that?
It's called 'moral equivalency', and yes, he really does think that . . . on the days when he wants a moralizing stick to beat someone with. 'You're just as bad as a rapist' (murderer, serial killer, etc.) is a pretty lethal rhetorical bomb, much used by persons who are making a weak argument and needs must resort to a scorched-earth defence.
The most obvious form of this defence is comparing your opponent to a Nazi, a sub-case famous enough to be the subject of Godwin's Law. But oddly enough, this specific version — accusing everyone in sight of rape or its moral equivalent — was much used by organizations like NOW and the Canadian NACSW in the 1980s and 90s. The reasoning went like this: Domestic violence is just as bad as rape; verbal violence is just as bad as physical violence; almost every married man has shouted at his wife; therefore, all men are rapists. (The logical corollary, that all women who shout are also rapists, is something they were careful not to pursue.) Utter nonsense when phrased that baldly, but that was in fact the argument, when divested of its inflammatory rhetoric. Of course the argument was not intended to
convince anybody. It was used instead to terrorize, to create an emotional climate in which everyone would be afraid to oppose anything NOW or NACSW wanted, for fear of being called a defender of rapists. It succeeded very well at this until it finally became laughable from overuse.
The fact is, very few of us have had the power to utterly ruin the lives of a whole family in a moment the way TC did. Even rapists can seldom manage that. You may say that the difference between that and any of our own 'violations and betrayals' was merely one of degree. But sometimes a difference of degree is so great that it becomes a difference of kind; and the rape of Lena is an excellent example.
Abraham Lincoln said: 'How many legs has a dog, if you count the tail for a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one.'
And calling any form of 'violation or betrayal' a rape doesn't make it one, either.
Without the Quest, our lives will be wasted.