Have you ever heard the story of the "ruined man?" You know, the man who had sex before marriage and then had nothing to offer his wife on their wedding night? Yeah...I haven't heard that story either. Because it isn't being told. Why then is the story of the "ruined woman" being shoved down young women's throats? Why are they being told that if they have sex they will have nothing left? Especially when that is simply not true at all. It is a myth being told by society in order to maintain the sexual double standard in our society. I recently read The Purity Myth by Jessica Valenti, which covers this topic in great detail. Valenti suggests that the purity myth in our society is a major problem that is harmful to women.
The idea of virginity in our society is both illogical and dangerous for three major reasons in my mind. First, it perpetuates a very degrading double standard of sexuality among men and women. Second, it is perpetuated by abstinence only education groups that promote misinforming our youth. Third, virginity in it of itself is an idea which has no true meaning.
There is a horrible double standard on virginity among the genders. Men who are not virgins are not perceived as anything negative. Women, however, are either virgins or whores. The "purity myth" (Valenti's term, coined to describe the theory that women must maintain virginity or cannot be pure) harms women by making them believe that there is no place for responsible sexual expression in women, and that it is their job to keep sexual activity out of a relationship. I for one am fed up with the old girls-keep-your-legs-crossed-but-boys-will-be-boys idea. Women are every bit as sexual as men, and both are responsible for the choice to have sex or to abstain. And should women choose to engage in responsible, reasonable sexual expression, they should not have to suffer unfair and outdated stereotypes about their lifestyle. A woman is not "ruined" if she has sex. What about rape victims? The purity myth damages victims of forced sex. After all, do they have nothing to offer, even though they never had the choice about giving it away? And the "ruined woman" bit is cruel to women in general. That idea leads to the thought that a woman's only purpose on this earth is to give her virginity to her husband. Who cares if she has a wonderful, sparkling personality? If she is the most loyal woman on earth? If she would make the most perfect partner and mother? If she has had sex, all of that is invalid, because she clearly has nothing left to offer, according to the purity myth. It doesn't matter if she's had sex with one person or one hundred people, if she is not a virgin, she is somehow considered impure.
Abstinence-only education thrives off of this purity myth. Valenti tracked down several examples of the way they demonstrate the idea of sex making a girl impure. Among these were "Miss Tape," a piece of tape stuck on the arm of a boy, then ripped off (the break-up), leaving Miss Tape dirty and unable to stick to anything. So not only does sex make you dirty, but it also leave you unable to form another bond with a person. If you're a woman, of course; Mr. Tape doesn't exist. I was the unfortunate victim of an abstinence-only education group myself. The way they demonstrated it was showing a gift box with chocolate in it. They unwrapped the box and had all the boys stick their finger in and mash the chocolate. By the time it was around the room, that chocolate wasn't very appealing. Nobody would ever want that chocolate. So girls, better to not let the boys stick their fingers in your chocolate. You want your husband to be able to enjoy an untainted gift. It's sad that young women are being compared to tape and chocolate, and that they are being told that they are worthless if they choose to have sex. But that's not all that abstinence-only education groups do. They not only lie about something you can't prove--purity--but they also lie about facts. Though they are technically required to tell the truth, there is no system of checking on this, and Valenti found countless instances of such groups flat out lying about contraception. Some even told girls that birth control pills will kill them. I, personally, remember distinctly being told that condoms were only seventy percent effective against pregnancy (in actuality, they are 97 percent) and were more or less ineffective against STD's, particularly HIV (completely untrue). My school didn't even mention birth control pills or alternatives.
So abstinence only education is basically trying to frighten teenagers into not having sex with lies. But it doesn't work. Studies have shown that teenagers are no less likely to have sex (Though they state otherwise. And of course we should believe them, seeing how responsible they are with statistics about birth control). But of course, they are less likely to use protection. Why would you bother if you were taught that it doesn't work? I don't see why abstinence-only education is even realistically accepted at all. When the options are teach something about a topic or teach everything about a topic, why would you not want your children to learn more? Especially when it could protect them from STDs or unwanted pregnancy. But unfortunately, abstinence only education is thriving. And if it is going to thrive, fine, but we should at least implement a system to insure that our youth are not being lied to.
Lastly, the definition of virginity. What is it? There isn't one. Valenti struggled hard to find a medical professional who could provide her a real definition. She read articles, asked people....nothing. Because it means something different to everyone. The first time I went to the gynecologist, she asked me if I was sexually active. "No." I said. "You're a virgin?" She asked. "Um...yes..." I said. "Oh, like a full virgin?," She asked. "...what?" I answered. "Like a complete virgin?" Needless to say, that conversation went on for about ten minutes, because she wouldn't even tell me what she was asking. When does a person cease to be a virgin? Hymen? Well, obviously, the hymen is unrealistic as a basis, since it often gets stretched or even broken by itself over time and sometimes has to be surgically broken. Penetration? Penetration leaves out homosexuals, not to mention people who have engaged in oral sex. Any sexual activity? What does that even mean? Nobody can really pinpoint it. It's funny that we put so much emphasis on something which cannot even be defined.
In conclusion, the purity myth is extremely harmful to women for a number of reasons. And at the end of the day, purity doesn't really exist. Virginity doesn't really exist. And they are certainly not the only thing a woman is good for. Women and men are both sexual and should be allowed to make realistic, sexual choices. And everyone should read The Purity Myth by Jessica Valenti.
Showing posts with label Women's rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Women's rights. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Blaming the Victim
It’s time to talk about rape. Nobody likes to talk about it, nobody likes to think about it. It’s sad, terrifying, and disgusting. But it happens. Every two minutes. It’s happening now, and by the time you finish reading this it will happen again. So I want to talk about it. And more importantly, I want to talk about rape victims. Victims. That’s right. They are not slutty women who evoked uncontrollable sexual urges in a man. They are not vengeful women who want to ruin a man’s life. They are not stupid women who threw themselves into dangerous situations. They are women who were raped—forced, against their will, to have sex.
I want to know when it is okay to blame the victim. It is a common practice in our society to do so. At the bottom of the page is a link to a BBC article written in February providing statistics of a survey that indicates frightening statistics about blaming the victim. A vast majority of people polled indicated that under some circumstances, the rape victim is partially to blame. So I want to know when it is okay to blame the victim.
How about when she’s dressed like a slut? This is something I hear a lot, that a woman was “asking for it” if she was “dressed like that.” This argument is damaging, obviously to rape victims, who have just gone through the potentially most traumatic event of their lives and are now being blamed for something they had no choose about, but also to all men and women. Women: How often have you stepped out of the house in something that showed a little bit of cleavage or leg? Or even something that hugged your form? Were you aware that by doing so you were inviting all men to rape you? And what exactly is the line for provocative clothing? For anyone who thinks that a woman is to blame because of how she dresses, can you please go through my closet and tell me which clothes say “Rape me please” and which ones don’t? A woman should have the right to dress how she wants and not worry about being raped. If we blame the victim for dressing in revealing clothing then we are saying that our bodies are made to be raped, and that if we show off too much of them it’s just going to happen. And this theory is just as harmful to men. It indicates that men are highly sexualized creatures who have no control over their actions when they see a woman’s body. That’s ridiculous. Plenty of men have seen a “provocatively” dressed woman and not raped her. That is because a woman’s body is not asking to be raped, and decent men are not waiting around to rape women if they see enough skin.
How about when she walks alone at night? This theory astounds me. I have often walked alone at night because I did not have a car, or I was close enough to home to do so. And I should be able to do so….I should be able to walk alone at night and not be raped. Yes, there are precautions I can take, but instead of focusing on that, we should be focusing on why men are raping women in the first place. Instead of thinking, “She shouldn’t have been walking alone” we should be thinking “He shouldn’t have thought that her walking alone gives him the right to rape her.”
Or what about when she flirts with a man at a bar who later rapes her? What if she goes home with him? This theory indicates that if a woman flirts with a man she has some sort of responsibility to follow through on that flirtation by sleeping with him. And if she doesn’t do so, she should expect to be raped. So I guess we should do one of two things: Either we should never go out, never look at men, never flirt, or we should have sex with every man we come across. Otherwise, we’re asking to be raped.
No matter what the circumstances are, a woman is never, ever asking to be raped. We need to quit blaming the victim and start focusing on the rapist. Remember him? The rapist. The one who decided he had the right to ruin a woman’s life by forcing her to have sex with him? He’s the predator, he’s the criminal. The woman doesn’t need to be put on trial. First of all, all these rape theories leave out the truth that everyone likes to forget: most of the time, the rapist is not a stranger. He’s not just someone lurking in the shadows that saw a woman and had to have her. He is a familiar entity in the woman’s life. Second of all, rape is not about sex, it’s about power. If we rely on these theories then we are saying that rape is caused by uncontrolled urges of men, and that they simply can’t help themselves if women are giving them the opportunity. Third of all, it’s ridiculous to expect that women must avoid being raped. Rapists need to avoid raping. The only way I could insure that I am never raped would be to stay at home, never go outside, and wear a chastity belt, just in case someone broke in the house. Perhaps that’s what all women should do. Then maybe, they wouldn’t be blamed if they were raped.
So why do we blame rape victims? It’s a defense mechanism to keep ourselves separated from the situation. If I say that a woman was raped because of a specific reason, then I can feel safe. Then I can say, I won’t be raped because I won’t do that. But the truth is we are all in danger of rape. And not because of our own actions, but because there are sick people in the world who think it’s okay for them to rape. The only way we can hope to lower the rape rates is to quit blaming the victim or avoid addressing rape. We have to acknowledge it and start placing the blame where it belongs. Then perhaps we can start taking rape seriously as a crime. Our only hope is to show rape as what it truly is and should be considered: a heinous, unacceptable crime for which a rapist should be severely punished.
Click here to be linked to the BBC article:
"Women say Rape Victims Should Take the Blame"
**As a side note, I do realize this blog is limited because it refers to the victim as a woman. Men are also raped, and I will blog about that as well. I focused on women because they are the primary victims of the crime, but anyone can be raped, and no one is ever responsible for being raped.
I want to know when it is okay to blame the victim. It is a common practice in our society to do so. At the bottom of the page is a link to a BBC article written in February providing statistics of a survey that indicates frightening statistics about blaming the victim. A vast majority of people polled indicated that under some circumstances, the rape victim is partially to blame. So I want to know when it is okay to blame the victim.
How about when she’s dressed like a slut? This is something I hear a lot, that a woman was “asking for it” if she was “dressed like that.” This argument is damaging, obviously to rape victims, who have just gone through the potentially most traumatic event of their lives and are now being blamed for something they had no choose about, but also to all men and women. Women: How often have you stepped out of the house in something that showed a little bit of cleavage or leg? Or even something that hugged your form? Were you aware that by doing so you were inviting all men to rape you? And what exactly is the line for provocative clothing? For anyone who thinks that a woman is to blame because of how she dresses, can you please go through my closet and tell me which clothes say “Rape me please” and which ones don’t? A woman should have the right to dress how she wants and not worry about being raped. If we blame the victim for dressing in revealing clothing then we are saying that our bodies are made to be raped, and that if we show off too much of them it’s just going to happen. And this theory is just as harmful to men. It indicates that men are highly sexualized creatures who have no control over their actions when they see a woman’s body. That’s ridiculous. Plenty of men have seen a “provocatively” dressed woman and not raped her. That is because a woman’s body is not asking to be raped, and decent men are not waiting around to rape women if they see enough skin.
How about when she walks alone at night? This theory astounds me. I have often walked alone at night because I did not have a car, or I was close enough to home to do so. And I should be able to do so….I should be able to walk alone at night and not be raped. Yes, there are precautions I can take, but instead of focusing on that, we should be focusing on why men are raping women in the first place. Instead of thinking, “She shouldn’t have been walking alone” we should be thinking “He shouldn’t have thought that her walking alone gives him the right to rape her.”
Or what about when she flirts with a man at a bar who later rapes her? What if she goes home with him? This theory indicates that if a woman flirts with a man she has some sort of responsibility to follow through on that flirtation by sleeping with him. And if she doesn’t do so, she should expect to be raped. So I guess we should do one of two things: Either we should never go out, never look at men, never flirt, or we should have sex with every man we come across. Otherwise, we’re asking to be raped.
No matter what the circumstances are, a woman is never, ever asking to be raped. We need to quit blaming the victim and start focusing on the rapist. Remember him? The rapist. The one who decided he had the right to ruin a woman’s life by forcing her to have sex with him? He’s the predator, he’s the criminal. The woman doesn’t need to be put on trial. First of all, all these rape theories leave out the truth that everyone likes to forget: most of the time, the rapist is not a stranger. He’s not just someone lurking in the shadows that saw a woman and had to have her. He is a familiar entity in the woman’s life. Second of all, rape is not about sex, it’s about power. If we rely on these theories then we are saying that rape is caused by uncontrolled urges of men, and that they simply can’t help themselves if women are giving them the opportunity. Third of all, it’s ridiculous to expect that women must avoid being raped. Rapists need to avoid raping. The only way I could insure that I am never raped would be to stay at home, never go outside, and wear a chastity belt, just in case someone broke in the house. Perhaps that’s what all women should do. Then maybe, they wouldn’t be blamed if they were raped.
So why do we blame rape victims? It’s a defense mechanism to keep ourselves separated from the situation. If I say that a woman was raped because of a specific reason, then I can feel safe. Then I can say, I won’t be raped because I won’t do that. But the truth is we are all in danger of rape. And not because of our own actions, but because there are sick people in the world who think it’s okay for them to rape. The only way we can hope to lower the rape rates is to quit blaming the victim or avoid addressing rape. We have to acknowledge it and start placing the blame where it belongs. Then perhaps we can start taking rape seriously as a crime. Our only hope is to show rape as what it truly is and should be considered: a heinous, unacceptable crime for which a rapist should be severely punished.
Click here to be linked to the BBC article:
"Women say Rape Victims Should Take the Blame"
**As a side note, I do realize this blog is limited because it refers to the victim as a woman. Men are also raped, and I will blog about that as well. I focused on women because they are the primary victims of the crime, but anyone can be raped, and no one is ever responsible for being raped.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)