Janelle's entry connecting the Michael Vick scandal with rape in general somehow made me think of the news stories about teenage boys and the hot teachers that have sex with them. Could we please stop calling this rape? It devalues the victims of violent rape, IMHO.
"Willing Participant" is the default value for most teenage boys (including myself, moot as it was). Women who are violently raped often don't report it out of shame (whether misplaced or not), whereas banging the 24 year old hottie teacher is bragging rights material. When we hear about the elderly English teacher with the horn-rimmed glasses having sex with teenage boys, then maybe "rape" would be a more appropriate term.
I know when he referred to "victims of violent rape," he was referring to those who walk away from the situation physically bloody and battered and bruised. But I think it still somewhat indicates the general idea a lot of people have that rape usually happens when some crazy man jumps out of the pushes, shoves a gun in your face, and pummels you while he rapes you.
Does it happen? Sure. Are most reported cases of rape that kind of rape? Nope.
I consider all rape violent. Any time a person takes away another person’s power and control over his / her own life, I consider that an act of violence. Power-reassurance rapists tend to consider themselves to be "lovers" of their victims and will often talk to the victim while it’s happening and won’t use an awful lot of physical violence. But to me, if someone shoves himself into me without my having asked for it…I don’t care how "nice" he treats me or that he’s not punching me while he’s doing it, he’s still being violent and I’ve been a victim of violence.
I’m also seeing two paragraphs full of words here but all I’m reading is "teenage boys are unrapeable."
Which I think is an entirely crazy and dangerous mentality. I think believing any group of people is "unrapeable" is dangerous. Hell, until the 1970s, most states believed wives were unrapeable. In some states, there are still specific requirements that need to be met within spousal situations in order for it to be considered a crime and in quite a few instances, the wife needs to have reported the rape within a certain amount of time. Because as we all know, rape victims usually run directly to the police station immediately after being raped so that they can get down to business re-living it and fighting the good and easy fight of punishing a rapist. How quickly do you think a woman in an abusive marriage is going to run to the police after her husband rapes her? Yeah. Not too quickly. Some people still believe men in general aren’t rapeable. If there’s no vagina, how can a person be raped? It’s simply amazing to me. It’s similar to the "but he was hard" or "she was wet" argument. How do you think sex works? Certain physiological things happen when two people are going at it…that’s partly what makes fucking so fun. A biogical reaction doesn’t equate to consent.
Teenage boys. Teenage girls. I don’t care who they are. And I don’t care how attractive the teacher is. If one takes advantage of the teacher / student relationship, breaking whatever laws the state may have regarding it, it’s a crime. It’s not something to be overlooked because of the "eh, boys will be boys!" mentality.
Bottom line: the "men have a penis and are therefore up for sex at any time" theory is completely retarded.
