Rape is a Feminist Issue

So here we are on day three of Polanskigate on my blog.  Have to say that the amount of comments I've gotten on the site over the last couple of days has been incredible, however I wish as many people would comment on an interview with a woman director (like the one I just did with Sally Potter) or other issues that I write about regularly.

But no, this has been the big kahuna.  It seems that now that I have spoken up and levied deserved criticism on Hollywood and feminist organizations for not speaking up, the perception is that I have instantaneously abandoned my feminist roots and have joined the dark side.

That couldn't be farther from the truth.

Because you know what?  Rape is a feminist issue.  If it wasn't for feminists rape would still be know as "life" for so many women across the country and the world.

So just to clarify.  I am a feminist.  I don't buy into the bullshit that I have to vote for a woman because she is a woman.  I would never, ever vote for Sarah Palin.  Because you see --  I am a feminist.  I believe in equal rights for all.  I believe in a woman's right to determine what happens to her body.  I believe that we need to see more women's visions in film because it will expose us to a vast amount of important stories that are missing and will improve the cultural dialgoue.

I know that my fellow feminists are out there with my back because I have heard from them on Facebook and twitter.  Feminists everywhere are aghast about the fact that we have lost sight that this man raped a 13-year-old girl.  Feminist everywhere stand up against rape because it is endemic in our society.

So to just remind people why we are all livid about this:

• 1 in 6 women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime.
• In 2007, there were 248,300 victims of sexual assault.
• Every 2 minutes, someone in the U.S. is sexually assaulted.
• Approximately 73% of rape victims know their assailants.
• Only 6% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail.
• 44% of victims are under age 18.

Statistics from RAINN

So even though this has been a disturbing topic to focus on for the last couple of days, and who knows if I will suffer for speaking out as I did in the LA Times this morning, at least it has afforded us an important conversation about how pervasive rape is in our culture and that it can happen to anybody at anytime.

Originally posted on Women & Hollywood

See earlier pieces: Does Being an Artists Trump Being a Rapist?

The Silence is Deafening

 

Follow Melissa Silverstein on Twitter: www.twitter.com/melsil

Comments

[Catherine1234]

I am a liberal. I am a feminist. I find Hollywood’s defense of Polanski disgusting.

[Jeff Norman - Huffpost Blogger]

Melissa, you claim: "I believe in equal rights for all."

Then why are you publicly asserting, as if it were an undisputed fact, that a man who's neither confessed to nor been convicted of rape, is a rapist?

[kjacobsmeyer]

The girl in question is thirteen years old. That trumps whatever reduced charge Polanski was convicted of. Sex between an adult and a minor is statutory rape. Have some respect for the law and stop being an apologist.

[jajenkins]

You are misinformed.

Polanski confessed to sex with a 13 year-old.

That is rape. Even if the victim in question wasn't credible on a question of consent (and she is, in my opinion) it wouldn't matter. Little girls in grade 7 aren't given the option of consenting to oral, anal or vaginal sex - even when they haven't been plied with drugs and alcohol.

[rzan1]

Who disputes it? Certainly not Polanski. He admitted to drugging and raping a child of 13 whose age he was well aware of at the time he committed the crime.

[mydwyf]

Mr. Norman does not believe that Samantha's grand jury testimony is credible.

Naturally, when the word of a 13 year old girl is put against that of a 40 + year old alpha male,
credibility is an issue. Mr. Norman cites the inconclusive results of the rape exam. Back then,
rape exams were not as sophisticated as they are now and it is very possible that Samantha
had bathed and douched before being examined. Bathing is definitely the first thing that I would have done in that situation. I read that her panties were examined and found to be stained with semen. That is evidence enough for me.

The problem with discounting Samantha's testimony is, where do you start not believing it ? The part where he climbs into the swimming pool naked ? The part where (shades of a hostage situation), he has her call her mother and then he talks to the mother himself ? The part where he
asks her when she last had her period, "Come on, you've got to remember !" ?

Most females totally grok how credible Samantha's testimony is. Many of us are having flashbacks to our own encounters with older, authoritarian males when we were a similar age. And please realize that the 'psychological evaluation' which declared him 'sexually normal' was based on a branch of medicine founded by a very sexually disturbed authoritarian male. What would an evaluation from a female point of view have found ?

[Jeff Norman - Huffpost Blogger]

Use of the word “rape” here is hyperbolic, inflammatory and misleading. There is no crime called “statutory rape” in the California Penal Code. So it seems Melissa and others have altered the name of an obsolete crime to convey the egregiousness of Polanski’s behavior. The problem is that most people associate rape with force and violence, and Polanski neither confessed to nor was convicted of forcing the girl to have sex. Why do you need to refer to the crime by anything other than its actual name – unlawful sexual intercourse? Polanski pled guilty to only that crime, a crime which doesn’t necessarily involve force. Being clear about that issue wouldn’t at all prevent you from condemning his behavior. However you feel about the matter, and despite the theory that minors are incapable of giving consent, the California Penal Code indicates that our legislators see a significant difference between rape and unlawful sexual intercourse.

It’s not that I’ve concluded the girl was dishonest; it’s that the accuser’s side of the story is never enough in any criminal matter. That’s why we have trials. Furthermore, those of you who’ve embraced the totality of the girl’s grand jury testimony, are reacting to mere text. Your basis for judging that testimony is scant.

[Omegaomni]

If rape is a feminist thing why are they not protesting prison rape? If this is about bodies and ownership then why are they allowing doctors to mutilate their sons at birth?

[Gelfling]

I didn't allow my sons to be mutilated. I am leaving it up to them to decide when they become adults. But I also consider myself a humanist above all else.

[Ventoi]

As long as feminism is separated from wiccanism.­..

for individuality of body and soul.

I won't be raped at another person's body, then.,,

by a chauvinist OR a feminist.

[GayIthacan]

A shame you can't weed out deserving cases which should be the focus of attention - as opposed to this non-case in which the prosecution and the judge were guilty of far more serious and justice-threatening actions than Polanski (who, BTW, was neither convicted of nor plead guilty to 'rape').

The actual villains in this little drama - the judge, D.A., and the victim's sleazy Mother - are the ones who should be doing time.

[DreamerWeaver]

Leave the mother out of your argument. Nothing the mother or the girl did was a crime. Stop making crass and cruel insinuations.

I am a feminist.

I am with you when you say the D.A. is the villain. He wasn't there in 1977, but he is a vindictive D.A. today and he released the transcript that resulted in psycological abuse of Samantha and her family, including her mother. I think it was his revenge after the Polanski's documentary made the D.A.s office back in 1977 look bad. The D.A. committed psychological rape completing destroying Samantha's privacy. This cannot be denied!

[Catothemuchyounger]

Even if the judge and the prosecutor are as compromised as Polanski's defenders say, it does not take him out of the class of "actual" villains.

But what, exactly, do you mean that the girl's mother was the villain? I have no idea if she served her daughter up to Polanski or not, as many on here have alleged. But if she did, how would that excuse him in any way? If this girl was, in fact, trafficked, Polanski remains the one who had the sex with her. If the mother is at fault (and again, I don't know that) , it was because she let Polanski do illegal and immoral things to her daughter. He still bears ultimate responsibility for what HE did.

[jackbutler5555]

Polanski does bear the legall and moral responsibility for what he did. But what do you think he did?

[MarieNat]

I get the blogger's point, but I think labeling rape a feminist issue unintentionally limits it to being an area of concern for those who self-identify as feminists. I welcome the day we recognize rape as primarily a "human rights" issue.

Though the statistics are certainly more daunting for women, let's not forget, women are not the exclusive victims of sexual violence.

[averygard]

It's sad to me that people are afraid to self-identify as feminists. What do you think it means? Do you want equal pay for equal jobs? You're a feminist. Do you want reproductive rights over your own body? You're a feminist. Congratulations! It doesn't mean (necessarily) that you're gay; it doesn't mean you hate men; it doesn't even mean necessarily that you're a woman. People like Flush Limbaugh have taken that word and imbued it with so much negativity that people say things like "I'm not a feminist BUT...I think I have the right not to be called 'honey' in front of my peers at the office" or "I'm not a feminist BUT...I don't think it's fair that I've worked here for 20 years and can't get promoted, but John over there came in last week--without a degree--and already has his own office." Again, what do y'all think it means?

[MarieNat]

Wow. Not sure why you would read my post as having evinced fear on my part, or alluded to fear on the part of others to self-identify as feminists. Some people just aren't feminists and it has nothing to do with fear. My point is that those people should also stake out their opposition to rape. This might include people who are socially conservative and don't share the feminist values you enumerated. Should they not play a role in fighting sexual violence as well?

[Catothemuchyounger]

Feminism means a lot of different things to different people. You may say it means equal pay for equal work. Somebody else may say it means that women who consent to sex with men under the "conditions of late patriarchy" are victims of a "false consciousn­ess."

Whatever. I do NOT self identify as a man who is a feminist. But I certainly do self identify as a man who thinks that people who rape other people belong in prison for a long time. And that people who take advantage of their position to sexually abuse a child deserve to be in prison also, regardless of whether what occurred fits somebody's definition of "rape-rape­."

[don quixote12]

I get what you're saying and you've made a valid point in my opinion... but let's not forget that Feminism is really about human rights -- not "just" women's rights.

[MarieNat]

Fair point.

[micgrafx]

We got your back!

[PWM]

If Polanski is allowed to get away without serving some time, it is a message that rape is allowed if you are rich and famous.

[jackbutler5555]

So you would be satisfied with his punishment being equal to others in the same circumstances? No more, no less, right?

[Jeff Norman - Huffpost Blogger]

If Polanski committed rape, he already got away with it, because the state allowed him to plead guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse in exchange for dropping the other charges. The plea agreement was made not because Polanski is rich and famous, but because the girl didn't want there to be a trial. Therefore, only an idiot would conclude that Polanski "got away with it" because he's rich and famous.

Why are you even talking about rape? It's now an irrelevant accusation which none of us are well-positioned to judge.