Dimension of consent and non-consent

[S-Des]

Something I've never really heard discussed much, but which is one of my weird little preoccupations, is the idea of a man forced against his will to commit a rape. In such a case, neither person physically engaged in the act is consenting. It's conceivable that the penetrator, in such a case, would have the harder psychological/emotional burden, since in addition to emotional responses normal for a rape victim, he'd likely experience the guilt of having perpetrated the rape (this article gives one example of cases like this, where Liberian soldiers forced men to have sex with their daughters and sisters as a form of terror during the civil war there).

That's been the subject of a number of stories here. It seems especially popular in Incest (where incest happens, but it's not anyone's "fault"). There are also stories where someone takes advantage of the appearance of force to finally have sex with someone they desired. I've read a handful of NC stories about a man being tied up and forced to watch the assault of a coworker or friend, then is told he must participate. He acts mortified, although he's secretly delighted. I'm not a psychologist, but I'm guessing this is a pretty big fantasy with someone who feels it's wrong to have an outright rape fantasy.

 

[scriptordelecto]

the idea of a man forced against his will to commit a rape.

i have no problem with that; a 'man' (person) may be forced to rob, murder, etc. but those men don't become *Victims* of robbery or murder; they don't *undergo* being robbed or murdered.

the man forced to rape is not a 'rape victim,' for he has not undergone being raped

But rape isn't just the physical violation. The psychological effects are the true damage done. That being the case, I would argue that he is very much a 'rape victim'.

 

[SimonBrooke]

I think that may be the point...

But rape isn't just the physical violation. The psychological effects are the true damage done. That being the case, I would argue that he is very much a 'rape victim'.

And earlier, Varian had written:

As a preliminary digression, I notice that I have a very different, much cooler emotional reaction to the phrase "sexual assault" than I do to the word "rape." It's interesting (to me, at least) to ponder what the discursive shift from "rape" to "sexual assault" does to the perception of the act committed.

We think of 'assault' as being physical, and physical in its effects. Yes, we do talk about 'psychological assaults' but these are somehow different from 'real' assaults. What makes rape rape, what makes it distinct from other assaults, seem to me as much that it involves violation of someone's identity, their sense of self, as that it involves penetration of their body.

Yes? No?

 

[scriptordelecto]

And earlier, Varian had written:



We think of 'assault' as being physical, and physical in its effects. Yes, we do talk about 'psychological assaults' but these are somehow different from 'real' assaults. What makes rape rape, what makes it distinct from other assaults, seem to me as much that it involves violation of someone's identity, their sense of self, as that it involves penetration of their body.

Yes? No?

Exactly. If it were only about the physical damage, then the trauma would cease to be an issue as soon as the body healed. If that were the case, why would the victims need so much counseling and support? The damage is almost ENTIRELY psychological.


Edited to add: It is also the intention of the person or persons perpetrating the rape to cause such damage. The need to have that sort of control or power over someone else is the reason for doing it. It has absolutely nothing to do with sex.

 

[Varian P]

more thoughts on forced perpetration of rape

the idea of a man forced against his will to commit a rape.

i have no problem with that; a 'man' (person) may be forced to rob, murder, etc. but those men don't become *Victims* of robbery or murder; they don't *undergo* being robbed or murdered.

the man forced to rape is not a 'rape victim,' for he has not undergone being raped.

But rape isn't just the physical violation. The psychological effects are the true damage done. That being the case, I would argue that he is very much a 'rape victim'.

We think of 'assault' as being physical, and physical in its effects. Yes, we do talk about 'psychological assaults' but these are somehow different from 'real' assaults. What makes rape rape, what makes it distinct from other assaults, seem to me as much that it involves violation of someone's identity, their sense of self, as that it involves penetration of their body.

Yes? No?

Exactly. If it were only about the physical damage, then the trauma would cease to be an issue as soon as the body healed. If that were the case, why would the victims need so much counseling and support? The damage is almost ENTIRELY psychological.

Edited to add: It is also the intention of the person or persons perpetrating the rape to cause such damage. The need to have that sort of control or power over someone else is the reason for doing it. It has absolutely nothing to do with sex.

I would argue that rape (or sexual assault) isn't analogous to acts like murder or theft, largely for the reasons Simon and scriptordelecto are discussing. Whether or not s/he murdered willingly, the killer is not dead after the trigger has been pulled; whether or not s/he stole willingly, the thief's property has not been taken following a theft.

But if one is forced to engage in a sexual act, that person has been raped (again, I'm speaking emotionally/psychologically, not legally, and without concern about legal definitions as to penetration). That is equally true whether the person forced to take a more active role is male or female.

If someone holds a gun to a woman's head and forces her to have intercourse, even with a third party who's not a willing participant, that's rape.

If someone holds a gun to a man's head and forces him to have intercourse with a third party, even if the third party is an unwilling woman, the man forced to commit that act is being raped.

 

[Varian P]

John Doe and his sister Jane Doe are beset by the likes of Idi Amin. He orders John to rape his sister. Sister Jane whispers to John, "we'll just pretend; i'll pretend to fight you off." In short she, after a fashion, consents (so as to make it easier on them both). Now; has John being raped? Has Jane?

I'm not sure, but you might be amused to know that your puzzle (minus the incest) is essentially at the core of the novel I'm supposedly currenly writing.

 

[SimonBrooke]

I'm not sure, but you might be amused to know that your puzzle (minus the incest) is essentially at the core of the novel I'm supposedly currenly writing.

Ah, well, the incest is at the core of the novel I'm supposedly writing, so that accounts for that....

 

[Varian P]

...which brings up the following puzzle: John Doe and his sister Jane Doe are beset by the likes of Idi Amin. He orders John to rape his sister. Sister Jane whispers to John, "we'll just pretend; i'll pretend to fight you off." In short she, after a fashion, consents (so as to make it easier on them both). Now; has John being raped? Has Jane?

I'm not sure, but you might be amused to know that your puzzle (minus the incest) is essentially at the core of the novel I'm supposedly currenly writing.

Ah, well, the incest is at the core of the novel I'm supposedly writing, so that accounts for that....

Now we just need someone to cover the Idi Amin angle. Pure?