The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Unintentional Hilarity: Feminists Ask If Julian Assange Committed ‘Rape-Rape’

Posted on | December 6, 2010 | 135 Comments

Exactly why this showed up on Memeorandum, I don’t know, but with a headline like “Some thoughts on ‘sex by surprise,’” I had to click and it’s Jill Filipovic at Feministing:

There’s a lot going around in bloglandia and on the interwebs about WikiLeaks honcho Julian Assange’s sexual assault charge in Sweden; commentators are saying that Assange didn’t really rape anyone, and these are trumped-up charges of “sex by surprise,” which basically means that Assange didn’t wear a condom and so days later the women he slept with are claiming rape. . . .
It also sounds like in one case, condom use was negotiated for and Assange agreed to wear a condom but didn’t, and the woman didn’t realize it until after they had sex; in the second case, it sounds like the condom broke and the woman told Assange to stop, which he did not. . . .

Yadda, yadda, now the unadulterated nonsense:

It’s an obvious enough concept for feminist thinkers who have spent more than 10 minutes considering the realities of sex and sexual assault: If you consent to sex but then at some point during sex withdraw that consent by telling your partner to stop, your partner should stop, and if your partner doesn’t stop then that’s assault. . . .
Whether withdrawal of consent is what actually happened here is impossible to tell, so I’m not suggesting that Assange is a rapist or that these charges are 100% definitely on-point; I have no idea. But neither do the commentators who are saying that Assange did nothing more than have sex without a condom. And it’s important to counter the “haha sex by surprise those crazy Swedes” media narrative with the fact that actually, non-consensual sex is assault and should be recognized as such by law. Consenting to one kind of sexual act doesn’t mean that you consent to anything else your partner wants to do; if it’s agreed that the only kind of sex we’re having is with a condom, then it does remove an element of consent to have sex without a condom with only one partner’s knowledge. To use another example, if you and your partner agree that you can penetrate her, it doesn’t necessarily follow that she has the green light to penetrate you whenever and however. . . .

Go read the whole silly thing, but I warn you: That’s three minutes of your life you’ll never get back.

Having already said that the proper response to Julian Assange can be summarized in four words — Predator drone. Hellfire missile. — I certainly have no interest in defending that disgusting scumbag. But I think many people who look at life from a practical, common-sense perspective will react to Jill’s fine scruples about the process of ensuring mutual consent much like I did: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

Is this what all that ’60s “sexual liberation” rhetoric has wrought?

In an era when some 40% of U.S. births are to unmarried women, in a culture where “Girls Gone Wild” and “hook-ups” are normative, where threesomes, bisexual experimentation and amateur video-porn orgies have become a virtual rite of passage for many young Americans, where chlamydia and herpes are pandemic — in this era of rampant sexual decadence, I say, does Jill Filipovic (J.D., NYU) seriously expect horny strangers to negotiate consent calmly on an act-by-act basis while they’re knocking boots, making the beast with two backs, in flagrante delicto?

Listen up, sweetheart: You buy the ticket, you take the ride.

You made your choice when you picked the guy, who is going to run his standard modus operandi on you, just like he ran it on the last three-dozen hoes he played.

If you tumble into a random hook-up with no prior knowledge of the guy’s reputation and he turns out to be a selfish brute whose standard modus operandi is repulsive, dangerous or painful, in what sense are you a victim of anything except your own stupidity?

Not to get too far into the details of the “Assange Gone Wild” tale, but a brief summary is helpful to understanding the factual context for Filipovic’s theorizing about the proper feminist-approved protocols of sexual consent:

SUMMARY

Assange, a 39-year-old bachelor, flies into Stockholm to lecture at a seminar organized by a bunch of leftists. An attractive “fun-loving” 20-something woman employed by the leftist party sponsoring the seminar “offered to let [Assange] stay in her one-bedroom flat” that night.

He shoots, he scores.

Next day, at the seminar, Assange is basically stalked by a groupie, also 20-something but younger than the first woman. The groupie chick has seen Assange on TV and is clearly eager to get some of his world-famous manmeat inside her moist and willing self.

He shoots, he scores.

Assange moves on, presumably to other conquests. Meanwhile, the two women talk and realize that Assange did them both, within the span of three or four days. They go to the cops.

Get the picture here? Both of these leftist chicks were only too happy to give up the nookie for Julian Assange, International Hero of World Peace. It wasn’t like he was stalking them in the hallways, or dosing their drinks with ruhypnol then inviting his frat brothers to help themselves to sloppy seconds after the women passed out.

No. Rather the case seems to be that Julian Assange, International Hero of World Peace, doesn’t like to wear a raincoat in the shower. He’s a habitual hetero barebacker and, if women try to talk him into using a condom, he’ll play the old “oops, the condom broke” trick and keep on strokin’.

As the denizens of Roissy might say, Assange has got game.

Or rather, he had game until his game became the subject of headlines around the world.

Jill Filipovic imagines a fine-tuned legalistic framework of consent, wherein women who are stupid enough to be shamelessly played by the player can then summon the police powers of the state to remedy their morning-after buyer’s remorse and avenge their exploited nookie.

Neither of these women, it is worth noting, thought of filing charges against Julian Assange, International Hero of World Peace, until they realized they’d been played.

The problem here is not some theoretical abstraction about the nature of consent. No, the much larger problem apparent in this situation is that Swedish leftist women are atrocious sluts.

As for Julian Assange: Predator drone. Hellfire missile.

Because I’m a feminist, too.

ADDENDUM: I forgot to explain the headline, for readers who may not keep track of Whoopi Goldberg’s routine idiocies. On ‘The View,’ Whoopi was discussing the case against Roman Polanski, who plied a 13-year-old girl with wine and quaaludes before having anal intercourse with her. Whoopi infamously proclaimed, “I know it wasn’t rape rape.”

ADDENDUM II: Just so you know where Jill Filipovic is coming from, she was one of several contributors to a feminist essay collection entitled Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and A World Without Rape, edited by Jaclyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti. From that book:

“While right-wing groups certainly don’t come out in support of rape, they do promote an extremist ideology that enables rape and promotes a culture where sexual assault is tacitly accepted. The supposedly ‘pro-family’ marital structure, in which sex is exchanged for support and the woman’s identity is absorbed into her husband’s, reinforces the idea of women as property and as simple accoutrements to a man’s more fully realized existence.”

Got that? Marriage is part of an “extremist ideology that enables rape.” Here we have Swedish socialist women being used and discarded by Julian Assange, International Hero of World Peace, and yet Filipovic and her feminist sisters insist that the real problem is those scary right-wingers, whom they accuse of promoting “a culture where sexual assault is tacitly accepted.”

Project much, Jill?

UPDATE: A couple of commenters have raised objections, to which I have responded below, the key points of my responses being:

What Jill Filipovic is trying to do is to Make the World Safe for Promiscuity, to absolve one class of willful participants in fornication — the women — of any responsibility for the consequences of their choices, so that when the other class of participants — the men — act as it might easily be predicted many of them will act under such circumstances, the police powers of the state are invoked: Surprise! You’re a criminal!  . . .
The International Society for Running Around With Sharp Sticks cannot also command respect as the International Society for Eye Safety. And the so-called “pro-sex feminists” cannot command respect as advocates for women’s best interests.

And:

I am not endorsing, advocating or defending Julian Assange’s behavior. He is a bad person, what he did was clearly wrong, and whatever harm befalls him, he most certainly deserves. But Assange’s wrongs were perpetrated in an environment of casual promiscuity. It is in just such an environment that lowlifes like Assange thrive and flourish, and if we refuse to criticize promiscuity — if we never point out to women that, in sleeping around, they are playing a game in which they are vulnerable to exploitation — then we are not-so-innocent bystanders.

Bookmark and Share
Category: Crime, Feminism, Sex, WikiLeaks

Comments

← Older Comments
  • http://escapingmediocrity.wordpress.com Natassia

    ACG, the sexual assault of women by men is something that has been going on for…well, I have no idea how long. Lord knows our distant relations the bonobos don’t have a problem with juvenile rape and incest.

    Once upon a time, the way humans dealt with it was by protecting women especially through close-knit family and marriage, and young women would instinctually avoid situations where they were outnumbered and amidst many young, virile, single men. Once upon a time people actually listened to common sense.

    Considering military enlistment is not a basic human right, I really don’t see how barring women from the ranks of soldiers is denying them their freedom. They still have the freedom to exercise, buy and shoot guns, wear camo-gear, protect their families and go where they want. They just wouldn’t be permitted in the military where they are much more likely to be raped–and thus bring down overall troop morale and unit cohesion. Geez, who would have a problem with that? I’m pro-woman, and that’s why I’m against women in the armed forces.

    Human beings are inherently flawed. All of them. Does that mean we need to avoid them? Nope. I’m a big proponent of heterosexual marriage. :) But, women shouldn’t whine about “equality” while knowingly putting themselves into highly dangerous situations, unless they have a VERY good reason to–like saving a drowning child in an icy lake. Because men and women are so inherently DIFFERENT, there will always be that disparity when it comes to sexual assault. Let’s have some common sense here.

    You wrote: “But the onus is on THOSE MEN to not commit crimes. And the onus is on society to make sure we create a culture where personal agency is respected, violations are taken seriously and punished seriously, and violators are held accountable.”

    I noticed you didn’t say one word about self-preservation. Feminists will seek “equality” at the expense of their own well-being. It’d be hilarious if not so insane.

    I have never gotten this message: “Women, don’t go out, wear X outfit, engage in Y activity, because you’ll get raped.”

    I have always understood that I have the RIGHT to walk around naked and not be accosted. But I don’t live in a vacuum. I live in the real world. And I know that my philosophical rights are not going to guarantee my actual physical safety.

  • http://escapingmediocrity.wordpress.com Natassia

    Common sense tells me that if I go alone, dressed in a miniskirt, to a bar full of drunken jerks, my risk of being sexually assaulted is greatly heightened.

    Excuse me, but I’ll forego my philosophical feel-good ideas of “equality” for my common sense belief that I shouldn’t do certain things that would likely turn out bad for me. Nevermind the reasons about WHY things would turn out bad… The fact remains, my risks would be exponentially raised. I like my hide too much to sacrifice it on the altar of my female pride.

  • Pingback: Rape By Any Other Name…: Why We Need to Stop Slandering Assange’s Rape Accusers « The Opinioness of the World

  • Rahrah14

    I read both the Feministe blog and this one…can I have the three minutes of my life reading this blog back?

  • http://twitter.com/BeccaGo Rebecca Godan

    I live in New York City. Crossing busy streets in New York City can be dangerous. The building I work in is located on a busy street. The office I work in wasn’t always located in that building; the company relocated from a building on a less busy street after I had already been working there for a year. So, by your logic, since crossing a busy street might be dangerous, I should avoid crossing busy streets in the first place. And if I do choose to cross the street and then get hit by a car, it’s my own fault for putting myself in harm’s way, because I should have recognized that there was a possibility of my company relocating to a busy street when I first started working there, a year before they moved, and not put myself in such a possibly dangerous situation by taking the job.

    You are a sanctimonious moron and a disgrace.

  • Guest

    I was ever so happy to wander over here and read Mr. McCain’s words immediately after reading Jill Filipovic’s diatribe — and the huge number of fawning commenters who apparently agreed with her every word. Seriously, I was kinda freaked out, wondering “my ghod, is this really what everyone things?”.

    But Mr. McCain reassured me that there is indeed some common sense left in the world.

    I mean, the entire notion that “withdrawing consent after consensual penetration” is rape is like, OMG, that’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard of. A gentlemen will, of course, withdraw upon such a request. Not withdrawing makes you a jerk. But jerk != rapist.

    And WRT Julian Assange — this whole business of him having sex with a couple of groupies who decided it was rape only when they met up and realized they were both notches on Mr. Assange’s bedpost — am I the only person who was immediately reminded of the old saw about the prostitute who discovered she was paid in counterfeit money and said “I’ve been raped!”?

  • Anonymous

    I’m all for the idea that people should accept the consequences for their own risky/stupid behavior. In a discussion about criminality, however, what’s at issue are the consequences for the behavior of the perpetrator, not the victim. “Assumption of risk ” is neither a defense to nor a justification for a criminal act. If I decide to venture into a dangerous neighborhood alone at 3:00 AM, I am unquestionably behaving in a foolish and dangerous manner, and increasing exponentially the likelihood that I may be attacked. That, however, does not give license to every thug in this city to assault me, and anyone who does so is still guilty of a crime. And the same holds true for a woman who is less than judicious in her choice of male companionship.

    And there’s no “entitlement mindset” at work here, because if indeed these women were raped, then they surely have already suffered the consequences for the poor choices that they made. I don’t see why we should demand any less for the person who allegedly assaulted them, or how such a demand is anything but socially and politically conservative.

  • Anonymous

    Really? So if I understand you correctly, once given, consent may never be withdrawn once penetration has taken place? Suppose, seconds after entering the woman, the guy whispers in her ear, “Oh, by the way, I forgot to mention before that I’m HIV positive?” She screams for him to stop, but he ignores her and proceeds to consummate the act. Is such behavior criminal in your world, or merely “ungentlemanly”? Are you seriously suggesting that, by virtue of her having previously consented to intercourse with this man without knowledge of his condition, this man now has a legal right to infect her with a deadly virus? If indeed consent can not be withdrawn after a certain point, then

    Common sense tells me that the man in this situation is more than just another inconsiderate jerk, and that an assault has indeed taken place. What does it tell you?

  • http://escapingmediocrity.wordpress.com Natassia

    Seems to me like many people here have been trying to make arguments using hypotheticals.

    This is all very silly. Obviously any time a woman claims she has been raped, she needs to be taken seriously and the charges seriously investigated.

    But I really don’t understand why women are going to be sleeping with a man in the first place whose HIV status is something she is simply taking his word for…especially if she’s only just met him.

    This all seems very dangerous to me–like playing with fire.

    And really, how often do you think your odd little scenerio actually plays out in the real world?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    Whereas you, Rebecca, are just an idiot. An apt comparison, as opposed to your ridiculous scenario, would be…Crossing a busy street WITHOUT REGARD FOR TRAFFIC IS DANGEROUS! So, if you want to cross the street, you’re certainly free to do so blindfolded, it’s absolutely your ‘equal right’ to do it. And when you get hit, it’s equally, absolutely, positively YOUR OWN STUPID FAULT!

    You ignorant twit.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    Feministe should be called Femfisting…which is more apt.

    It is home to exactly the sort of feminists that have caused such a backlash against womens’ rights in general. They are why today’s generation of young women want nothing to do with the feminazis.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    I don’t care if you ever read it again either…

    Just sayin’…:-)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    “We started to do stuff, but THEN I realized what I was doing…”

    Are you a retard?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    Now you’re just projecting…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    But it wasn’t mid-coitus, was it? There’s that pesky inconvenient Truth again, drat…

    It was AFTER the fact (DAYS after, in fact), and the FIRST attempt at classifying it as rape was refused due to lack of evidence.

    Maybe this one needs a wholly new classification…something like ‘rape by politics’…which sounds about right.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    They were done having sex. DAYS AGO. Then, after confering, they DECIDED TO CALL IT RAPE.

    Cases like this make feminists like you look every bit as ridiculous as you are.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    This is more reminiscent of the old Churchill story.

    “We’ve already established WHAT you are madam, now we’re merely dickering over PRICE.”

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    But not nearly as disgusting as your hatred for all things male…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    Typical of you to ignore the fact that prostitution is illegal in MOST areas…and one of the reasons is because it’s dangerous. Thanks so much for sticking your foot in your mouth.

    And what contradiction? Or would you rather only the pros get blamed, and their johns remain blameless? Care to explain THAT contradiction?

    But a more apt comparison would be…Ho #1 WANTS sex with him…No problem.

    Ho #2 wants sex with him…again no problem.

    Ho #1 gets chatting with Ho #2, they find out they’ve both been snoggin’ the same bloke, ALL OF A SUDDEN IT’S RAPE…

    Sorta like a whore complaining 3 days later when she finds out the check bounced.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    Pretty naive, actually. The media is calling this Swedish version of rape “sex by surprise” for a reason. There was no force involved. There was no violence. These charges were brought DAYS AFTER THE FACT, upon the two women discovering the other had also had sex with Assange.

    Again, no forcible rape. In Sweden they have ‘withdrawing consent’ laws, qualified as a ‘lower form of rape’ (much like a feminist is a lower form of female…less evolved, obviously).

    Yeah, I’d say you’re VERY naive…and not too bright.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GNTRQBKOFVG4G4H6JIMNU4WUCY Franken Furter

    It falls outside the purview of ‘withdrawing consent’ when it is based on activity the perpetrator had with a THIRD party. If they let it go at the time they were aware, that’s it. They don’t get to ‘cross-examine’ his motives, compare notes, etc… That’s ridiculous, yet that is the ‘hanging chad’ in this whole matter.

    And that’s the surest sign that Assange is the victim, not the perp, of a POLITICAL RAPE.

  • http://twitter.com/tuibguy Mike Haubrich

    “Consider an analogy: If you are dealing dope and somebody rips off your stash, you can’t go to the cops and demand that they go get your dope back for you.”

    Sex isn’t illegal, moran.

  • Pingback: International Hero of World Peace Julian Assange Free to Rape Again? Not Yet : The Other McCain

  • Reubenmccallum

    Perhaps, it helps if you think of it like this – it was a breach of contract. Maybe reducing things to commercial terms might help. The other alternative might be to think about it shortly before drinking a bleach cocktail, thus sparing the world a waste of oxygen.
    I hope you don’t have daughters.

  • http://practicallyharmless.blogspot.com ACG

    Considering that right now, the American military needs all the warm bodies it can get, it seems to me that the smart plan would be not to keep qualified women from serving but to KEEP MEN FROM RAPING THEM.

  • phyre

    NMRN S, I’m so sorry that happened to you.

    No, of course it wasn’t your fault. It was HIS fault. You may have made a mistake (and you may not have even done that, depending on the circumstances,) but he’s the one who is to blame.

    If my neighbor leaves a window open while he’s out and I use it to invade his home and rob him, is that his fault? Does he deserve to be called names?

    On the topic of withdrawing consent, what if he invites me in and offers me a beer? Does that mean he has no right to kick me out if I get drunk and obnoxious or even destructive? By letting me through the door, did he give me irrevocable permission to stay as long as I want and do anything I like in his home? No? Then how the HELL can anyone claim a woman doesn’t have the same right with regard to her BODY?

  • Amanda

    You are using the word “rape” to conjure up visions of a man using violence, physical coercion or the threat there of to have sex.

    That’s where you’re confused. The majority media tends to portray rape as always violent, physically coercive, and threatening.

    The working definition of rape, even as it appears in Wikipedia, is simply involving someone in sexual intercourse (vaginal, oral, anal, whatever) without his/her consent.

    It is problematic that you and many, many others continue to be confused about what rape is. It allows you to view cases like this nonchalantly because there wasn’t obvious violence involved, as if there is some kind of threshold that needs to be met before a victim has the right to feel violated after non-consensual intercourse.

  • Amanda

    This is kind of sad. You don’t have to “forego” your feel-good ideas of quality when you engage your common sense belief that you need to navigate this world in a way that is as safe to you as possible.

    In other words, you can understand that it may not be the best idea to wear your miniskirt to the bar, while concurrently advocating that in a better world, you’d be able to wear it if you wanted to without worrying about being assaulted.

  • Across the Pond

    I was going to write something that was filled with anger and disgust but the reason in me decided I knew better. So;
    AHAHAHAHAHAHA! If I had an internet finger I would point it right at you and your right wing friends faces.

    All American women, move. Right now, come over here to England, you’ll be treated much better, I promise. Although rape here is still poorly dealt with, the majority of men themselves are far better at relating to women. You can bring any nice men you know to save them from being infected by Misogyny.

    When is America going to grow up and join the rest of the world in trying to make it better, instead of grinning stupidly, stroking an AK and getting confused by big words like…secularism? Oh yeah, when people like you fuck off and leave the work to the more intelligent ‘Mericans.

    Here in England, we laugh our arses off at you fundies. Loud and raucous laughter is your kryptonite.

    Death threats!! LOL!! ROFL!! You pack the same punch as a doberman behind bullet glass on teh internets. Use the greatest weapons of all, Intelligence and humour. Far more effective.

  • noyb

    I don’t know who you are, never heard of you I just stumbled upon this article.. You are a disgusting human being. I hope you are not married and I hope to god you don’t have daughters.

  • noyb

    Your daughter would never tell you a story like that because she knows you and she knows how you’d react. Your daughter, depending on how old she is, is allowed to have sex. It’s none of your business.

  • Pingback: pandagon.net - it's the eye of the panda, it's the thrill of the bite

  • Anonymous

    Most commercial codes are pretty clear on what happens to people who change their minds in the middle of contract fulfillment, just as criminal codes in most places are pretty clear about what happens to people who swap cash for nookie. You might want to reconsider that analogy, Rube.

  • Anonymous

    Actually, fornication is still part of the criminal code in a lot of places. Moron.

  • Anonymous

    Your comment has been approved for possible abusiveness. Man, I love Disqus. :V

← Older Comments
Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE