Dear Second and Third Wave Feminists With Publicly Recognizable Names
Dear Second and Third Wave Feminists With Publicly Recognizable Names,
Some of you, maybe only feminists know who you are, or those who care to crack a book or two. Lots of you have names that have penetrated the mainstream to such a degree that, when mentioned, most people are liable to know that you’ve got something to do with ladies, possibly even the f-word.
You don’t all agree on everything. Who does? Feminism has never been a monolith. We understand this, though the general public is still catching up. But, because your names are known, your words carry a lot of weight, become the assumed standpoint of all feminists. Almost all of you know that already. It’s why you do what you do — to speak for those who can’t speak, or won’t be heard if they do; to shake up the homogeneous, monochrome chamber of voices to which we’ve all become accustomed; to let others know that there are people out there fighting for them, that they, too, can fight.
You’re also human. You have flaws, and stubborn privileges, and blind spots. You have bad days. You may not have asked to become a mouthpiece for a movement, and cannot always bear up under the immense pressure to speak for more people than yourself — indeed, more people than you have likely ever seen with your own eyes. You may only allow yourself to be a mouthpiece because you know you are good at it while others aren’t, and from each according to their own ability, and all that. No one person is obligated to stand up for all the causes, take the right stance every time, and discuss only that which others have deemed important. Even those who are willing to try to do this sometimes cannot do it all the time.
I am asking you to do it this once.
I do not stand with Naomi Wolf.
I’d like to know if you do.
You are feminists who have fought a long, hard fight. We who are here today — young, in a changed world (though not changed enough), navigating the same old issues and ones you could never have imagined — came here on your shoulders, on your uplifted hands. We know you did the good work to awaken many of us. We know you continue in this. “Young” feminists and “old” feminists may not see eye to eye on many issues, but do believe there is never a moment that young feminists do not know that we are here because of you.
I am speaking as one of the young ones. I grew up calling myself a feminist, but I didn’t understand what that actually meant for a long time. I was lucky enough to go to college, and there, I was lucky enough to learn about the paths that had been beaten down before me. I learned the history of women’s rights, and of the women and men who demanded them, unequivocally. And, too, I learned that we are not monolith. I learned about the “waves”, splits across generations only recognized after-the-fact, created by an evolution in technology, terminology, and tactics. Much of this seemed only natural, and necessary; the world changes rapidly, and there is no movement that can hold doggedly steady as it spins. Some of this seemed shameful; the world changes rapidly, and there is no movement without members who are aggressively terrified of what they do not know and do not control. It was all educational. I could understand the path woven from then to now, why splits had occurred, why “waves” happened, and what they looked like from a distance, as a young person who considers these matters “history.”
That is a form of privilege itself — to view what has come before me as settled history, instead of an active struggle. It’s not a privilege I can shed solely through education, or listening; to end this privilege, I must be willing to wait for age and perspective. That’s not easy. I’m sure you remember.
I believe I have gained some age, and some perspective. I believe I have enough to say that the division between “old” feminists and “young” feminists, between the “third wave” and the fourth, or fifth, is not going to come about solely because of technology, or solely because of intersectionality, or solely because of any given divisive issue. I believe it is going to come because of a refusal to view our work — the work of those of my age and my perspective — as real work. A refusal to view our protests as real protests. A refusal to view our theory as real theory. All young feminists can acknowledge the work undertaken to bring us here today, despite our youth, despite our inexperience; it would hearten me to know that the old guard can acknowledge that we have taken up the torch, and continued forging ahead. It would hearten me to know that the age and perspective I will hopefully gain will include the ability to listen to the young, and take them seriously.
“No means no” took us a long way. To put it simply, but not inaccurately, it took us from a world where no meant yes. That is an incredible gain. But “no means no” has taken us as far as it can. Namely, it has taken us to “yes means yes.” It has taken us to a place where we can recognize, create theory, create terminology, and openly discuss the idea that sexual violence and sexual abuse can happen without a “no” as well as with one. We believe that requiring a “no” is not good enough, not a high enough standard. We require a “yes.”
“No means no” gave a voice to the abused, the raped, the victimized. It created a phrase to describe a phenomenon that men and women knew existed, but were unable to describe in a way that society as a whole took seriously. But it did not end the war on our bodies. It did not end the terrorism that makes us second-guess our clothing, map out our return home, walk with chaperones. It did not end the lifelong aftershocks of guilt and shame, wondering why we let them in, why we trusted them, why we kissed them. It did not lower the statistics that mock our hope that we have justice, or equality. The enemy adapted. The enemy always has. If no means no, why, then, ways will be found to keep us from speaking. Ways will be found to make it seem as if we have said “yes,” or not said “no” enough, or in the right tone of voice, or with the proper inflection, or at the right time. No means no, but only if you are not afraid to say it. No means no, but only if you keep saying it, for a lifetime, hoping it will work before the situation escalates. No means no, but only if you never give up saying it because you are tired, you are hungry, you are frightened, you are alone, you are intimidated, you are convinced that this will happen anyway, and will only get worse for you the longer you go on saying “no.”
We need more than “no means no.”
We have already begun creating the framework for this. There is a great conversation happening across the place the new guard has gathered to share, to organize, to strategize: the internet. We are creating theory. We are creating terminology. We are creating tactics. We are attempting to penetrate social consciousness, as you once did, until we can live in a world where we do not exist in a perpetual state of sexual availability, where we are not solely responsible as the gatekeepers of sex and rape. We are trying to create a world where all people are responsible for ensuring that sex is wanted, sex is safe, sex is sane. We are trying to create a world where the responsibility for stopping rape does not lie with the person who is being raped. And, too, we are trying to create a world where the responsibility for defining rape does not lie with the person being raped.
For many of us, that is what saying “no” during a frightening sexual encounter means; if our partner does not care if we want sex, if our partner does not care how we want sex, if our partner does not care if we are in pain or pleasure, if our partner does not care if we feel safe, if our partner does not care that we are moving away from them, if our partner does not care that we are trying to get to the door, then our partner will not care if we say “no,” and we will be raped. This is not difficult math for us to calculate. The only further calculation is how bad our rape is going to be, how long it will last, and how badly we will be injured. So as long as we keep our mouths shut, it will not be rape, and we will not be victims, and this will be over much sooner. If we say no, it will become rape, because “no” is what creates rape, “no” is what defines consent, not the lack of a “yes”. We are responsible for taking what could just be “bad sex,” over quickly and without too much pain, and turning it into “rape,” because we are responsible for saying “no” and our partners are not responsible for seeking an enthusiastic, mutual “yes.”
The people intent upon raping us know that “no means no” as much as we do. The people intent upon raping us do not want to think of this as a rape, do not want to think of themselves as rapists, do not want to allow the possibility of facing consequences for raping us. They will do everything within their power to make that “no” unbelievable or invisible. Perhaps they will try to make us eventually say “yes,” though we have said “no” twenty times. Perhaps they will threaten consequences that do not amount to force, but amount to our partner threatening consequences, and the implication that they are willing to threaten, to punish, to hurt us to acquire our defeat is not lost upon us. Perhaps they will yell, and cry, and scream. Perhaps they will pretend they did not hear us. Perhaps they will pretend they thought we only meant “no” to this and not that. Perhaps they will ask us to coffee later, or text us sweetly in the morning, or tuck us in afterward, and if we do not scream and cry and flee to the police in a shamble, this will be proof that our “no” could not have been such a “no,” because victims do not have coffee with their rapists, and rapists do not kiss their victims kindly. Or, perhaps, they will hurt us, escalate the rape into something that is now (thanks to your work) more commonly conceived as a rape. We do not wish to go through that. We do not wish to be beaten, threatened, choked, or made to bleed internally as the price for knowing it is not our fault. We will say “yes” rather than go through that. We will say “yes” when we know it is coming to that, and we will do that whether or not we have gained that knowledge through acts or words that are defined as rape in a court of law. We will do that because that is how human beings survive attacks. They do not wait for them to get worse. They do not wait until the legal threshold of allowable violence has been passed. We do this because we must adapt to survive, because we are smart and we are strong and we know that living through this with fewer scars is worth more than the bare glimmer of justice years of harassment from now; we do not do this because we are moral children who do not know better.
We are not trivializing rape by saying this is an attack upon us, anymore than it made rape trivial to believe, during your battle for this, that a “no” was all that was needed to create rape rather than a vicious, deadly beating by a stranger, or a loaded gun to the head. We believe there is no way that rape can be trivialized. We do not believe there is ever a time or a place or a situation in which rape is trivial. We want to live in a world where the wrongness of rape can never be called into question, never be made less, no matter what fool thing is said or done by others. We want to live in a world where “trivializing rape” is no longer a phrase bandied about so easily, because it will be an oxymoron. We want to live in a world where this phrase is recognized for what it is: a silencing tactic when victims become inconvenient.
Here is my fear.
I fear that, a generation from now, there will be a new history for the new generation. It will say that the fourth, fifth, sixth wave of feminism broke away because the second and third wave did not believe that a “yes” was necessary for sex. It will say that we broke away because one wave believed rape could be trivialized, and another did not.
I will be ashamed to be a part of the history of feminism, if that is to be our origin. I will have to question strongly if “feminism” is worthwhile as an organizing principle, if “feminism” can also mean that a “yes” after twenty “no”s is good enough, and that if zie didn’t want it, zie should have kept saying “no” until zhe accepted it (whenever that would be) or raped hir with an escalated degree of force (as that is the price zhe must pay if zhe wishes to be blameless).
I know there are those who do not call themselves “feminists,” not because they don’t understand feminism, but because they understand it too well. I know there are those who distrust me when I say I am a feminist, because to them, that means I may dismiss their experiences with race, with class, with disability, with gender ambiguity, with trans-ness, with a host of other issues that feminism has failed routinely. They distrust me because “feminism” means I may do more than actively dismiss, but shout them down, exclude them, call them the enemy, require they give up what they need to be safe, to be sane, to have dignity and basic human rights, so that they can fight my battle. They distrust me because “feminism” means I may shrug when a people who are not part of a feminist “cause” are being trampled and oppressed, because they are not convenient, or feminist enough, for my concerns, because their freedom gains me nothing. They distrust me because “feminism” means I may quit as soon as my own interests are met, as soon as my own comfort level is reached, as soon as I have toppled my own oppressor and taken their place. I struggle every day to hold on to my own label of feminism, because I do not think the people who distrust feminism are wrong. I think they are keeping me honest, if I am willing to let them.
I do not want, a generation from now, to find that the new wave has dropped the label “feminist” because it became synonymous with defiant rape apologism, because it damaged more people than it served. If I ever stop calling myself a feminist, I want it to be because I found something better, not because feminism got worse.
So here is what I am asking of you.
I ask that you denounce Naomi Wolf’s comments on Assange’s rape charges.
I ask that you denounce that “no means no” is all there is to rape.
I ask that you acknowledge that “yes means yes” is now a part of the feminist lexicon, wherever it might go, however it might evolve from here.
I ask that you acknowledge that “enthusiastic consent” is a theory highly worth pursuing.
I ask you to do this because you have names that people recognize as part of feminism. So does Naomi Wolf. And now we are all experiencing, en masse, the old phenomenon: “I know somebody who is a feminist, and they think this is fine.” A big-name feminist has said, publicly, that initiating sex with a partner who is asleep is not rape. That ripping a woman’s clothes off is not a force, is not a threat, is not violence, has no bearing upon the context of safety. That political targets are incapable of raping, because there can be no reason for them to be accused that is not politically motivated. This has given permission to all those who believe the same to tell us that we are wrong. The new guard, we know each other’s names, but the general public doesn’t know us very well yet. We do not have the weight of years of revolution behind us. When Naomi Wolf says that sleeping women can be raped legally, this becomes public knowledge. When we say, “yes means yes,” the general public does not hear, and the general public does not care. They can now point to Naomi Wolf and say, “You are wrong. You are not feminism. She is. And she says I can do this to you, and you can’t do anything about it.”
You have names. You have voices. Please give us somebody else to point to when we are told that we can be raped in the ways Naomi Wolf has decreed are acceptable. Please let us know that we are not on our own, that we have not already broken away, and did not hear the crack until Naomi Wolf “agreed to disagree” about our bodily autonomy, our safety. Please let us know that, with one arrogant statement, feminists cannot really erase the rapes that have been experienced by countless survivors. Please let us know that you hear us, that you believe we are feminism, too. Please do not let Naomi Wolf become the voice of what is rape, because rapists were listening when she spoke, and judges, and juries, and future victims who will spend their lives believing it was their fault, and they are always saying “yes” if they are not shouting “no.”
Ella Baker said, “You must believe in young people, because they have the courage where we fail.” I believed her when I first read that, at 21. I believed in those words, and I believed that it was worth delving deeper into feminism, believed it was worth dropping the naive belief that all our battles had been fought and solved, that the slogans then were all we needed now. I still believe that. I would like to think you believe it, believe that we have something of worth to add, that we are onto new paths and new battles, that we can be trusted to keep going when you cannot.
Ella Baker also said, “There is also the danger in our culture that because a person is called upon to give public statements and is acclaimed by the establishment, such a person gets to the point of believing that he is the movement.” Surely the public seems to believe this. Do not let Naomi Wolf be the face of our movement. Do not let her define what rape is, and what it isn’t, based on her belief in one man’s guilt or innocence. Do not let her statements on rape and consent go by without comment; I believe you know, through your own battles and sometimes demoralizing work, that silence signals agreement, that silence isolates, permeates, and eventually prevails, if uncontested by those with the power and the will. If you do not speak up now, I will have trouble believing you do not agree; certainly, so will those who are far less interested, far less dedicated, and far less informed about feminism than I am.
I would like to feel that I am part of an evolving movement of which I can be proud. It does not have to be perfect. But it has to be growing. It cannot be stagnant. I do not wish to grow older and point to a time at which I broke with feminism, because it was not interested in preserving my body from attack. Because it was not different enough from that which it opposed.
Please. Say something. We are talking as much as we can. We are pushing as hard as we can. We are doing our part. We would like to feel your hands holding us up, your shoulders beneath us once more.
Germaine Greer, please say something.
Gloria Steinem, please say something.
Susan Brownmiller, please say something.
Readers, please add to this list.
Discuss this post on the Fugitivus Discussion Board.
from → Uncategorized
Trackbacks and Pingbacks
- Signal boosting: rape culture hasn’t gone away and neither have we « Ideologically Impure
- join the call to denounce naomi wolf | thecommonillsbackup
- Iraq snapshot (C.I.) | thecommonillsbackup
- Rant about Assange and rape | Ego! Ego! Ego!
- On Michael Moore, #wikirape and denouncing Naomi Wolf « The Sin City Siren
- naomi wolf gets called out | thecommonillsbackup
- Dear Harriet J; I Do Not Stand With Naomi Wolf
- Christian A. Young's Dimlight Archive |
- The Rape Nazis | The Sin City Siren
- Smith and Boehner: The Rape Nazis « THE TIRED FEMINIST
- Moving Beyond “No Means No” to “Yes Means Yes” | My Sex Professor: Sexuality Education
Comments are closed.
If none of them do, Sady may be the name that’ll be remembered, that’ll be looked to next time.
This comment is the best!
31 
1
Naomi Wolf does NOT speak for me. I sincerely hope she realizes how damaging her words have been. I remember reading the HuffPo article, freshly posted, before I had the chance to read feminists’ response. I felt my heart sink.
I am so relieved that there are more people who know better. I am so relieved that there are more people who saw through her B.S. I am so relieved that there are allies.
This comment is the best!
28 
3
If the world were logical, this essay would be the “Goodbye to All That” of the 21st century.
This comment is the best!
11 
1
Harriet, I definitely want to be in your wave of feminism, where compliance is seen as the survival tactic it is, not as consent.
I’m glad you’re coming back to the internet, even if I wish this whole internet storm weren’t necessary.
This comment is the best!
26 
1
This is a brilliant article and I am glad to have seen it. As a 24 year old feminist, the child of a feminist and a staunch ally, Naomi Wolfe does not speak for me.
Her statements about rape and consent actively harm me and people like me.
I hope that prominent feminists of all ages speak out against her. She does not represent feminism.
This comment is the best!
24 
2
Yes means yes. Absence of no is not the same as yes. Preach on, rock on, amen amen.
This comment is the best!
23 
2
Thank you for coming back. When I saw the headline, I was worried that it would be a warning to those of us who put ourselves out there, a reminder that it’s not always safe to attach your name to your words.
But I really hope those women you called out will do just that, and that those words will be the right ones.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
HOLY FUCKING FUCK! I just read your letter to second and third wave feminists. I love you!!!!!!!! I heard you saying things that I felt crazy for writing back in 1996. I honestly envisioned being put in a straightjacket, but I wrote my book anyhow. It’s called CONSEQUENCE: Beyond Resisting Rape. It’s not on my new website yet, but here’s my archive where you can read about it. http://loolwa.com/archive2/consequence.html Thanks for your awesome post. I have felt that feminism has been dead for about a decade, and I”ve felt like the last surviving crazy lone wolf of the radical pack. Feels like home reading your post. Loolwa
Like or Dislike:
8 
0
Susan Faludi, to add a name.
Like or Dislike:
8 
0
What the fuck.
I may not be a big name, but I’m certainly going to denounce Naomi Wolf on my own blog.
I can’t believe anyone calling herself a feminist could fuck up so royally on the topic of RAPE.
Fucking hell, Naomi Wolf.
This comment is the best!
13 
0
You give me chills (good ones, in case that wasn’t obvious!). This essay is the voice of my feminism. If the old guard won’t stand up, then at least we’ll know where they stand.
This comment is the best!
12 
0
I denounce Naomi Wolf.
This comment is the best!
28 
0
I’m glad to see your recent posts, Harriet; even if what prompted you to post is so fucking infuriating.
Thank you for your passionate advocacy. Naomi Wolf does not speak for me, either.
This comment is the best!
10 
0
I’ve already whittled some pointy words regarding Micheal Moore, and I’m working on a few for Naomi Wolf, who is most certainly a product of my generation, and who most certainly doesn’t speak for me. I don’t count like she does – my voice is just one more yelling into the dark ether. But I for one will continue to yell, because this matters. Thank you for such an amazing article.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Also, if I hadn’t already taken him off my facebook friends list, I would have linked this post to the acquaintance who posted the radio interview with Naomi Wolf and Jaclyn Friedman, saying that this was why he had “absolutely no respect” for extremely left-wing feminists. Given the comment he made to his post, apparently what he heard Friedman saying was that any sex initiated by the guy is rape. THAT IS NOT WHAT WE ARE SAYING. If that’s what you hear, I don’t particularly want to keep being internet friends with you. If we’d been actual IRL friends, I might have tried to engage, but in this case it just wasn’t worth it.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Nobody likes this comment.
23 
48
Thank you so much for this post. I am sharing it in the hopes that others will read it and speak out. Although I don’t know anyone with name-recognition, the more voices shouting that rape is rape and there is no such thing as “grey-rape”, the harder it becomes for people to ignore.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
This is the new wave of feminism. This is the turning point. You can count me among those who do not trust the current waves of feminism for the reasons you mentioned. Posts like this change that. You have given a man hope for a better future for men and women. More like you, please. If the previous generations do not answer with their voices, then I hope your allies will make yours louder.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
I am of the same generation as Naomi Wolf, and she sure as hell doesn’t speak for me. And Lily, regardless of how kindly one reads her article on the lack of justice for most victims of rape (and to me that still sounds like ‘if there isn’t justice for everyone, no one can have it’) she also said
“I see that Julian Assange is accused of having consensual sex with two women, in one case using a condom that broke. I understand, from the alleged victims’ complaints to the media, that Assange is also accused of texting and tweeting in the taxi on the way to one of the women’s apartments while on a date, and, disgustingly enough, ‘reading stories about himself online’ in the cab” and goes on to compare the two women accusing him of women whose boyfriends don’t notice they’ve changed their hairdos. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/interpol-the-worlds-datin_b_793033.html
This is straight-out desinformation, taken from the Daily Mail. Better information was online, even in English, and don’t tell me Naomi Wolf couldn’t find anyone who could translate a Sedish newspaper for her, if need be. She belittled the accusers, made fun of them, trivialised the nature of the assault they accused him of, and did so in a patronising and condescending manner. If I’m ever raped, I hope I’m not in need of Naomi Wolf’s support.
This comment is the best!
34 
2
I grew up hearing “no means no.” I always assumed that it continued with “silence means no, yes means yes.”
I’m sorry that I didn’t tell more people; maybe if I’d spread my understanding a little more, things would be visibly better now.
This comment is the best!
12 
0
:
Try here for another take on that point: http://kateharding.info/2010/12/16/some-shit-im-sick-of-hearing-regarding-rape-and-assange/
I am not giving her the benefit of the doubt you have; I don’t think she deserves it. I am looking at her articles, and her debate with Jaclyn Friedman. I am hearing nothing but a stream of victim-blaming and rape stereotypes. While I agree that there is nothing helpful or good about those in power exploiting rape accusers for their own gain, I do not trust that Naomi Wolf points this out because of a genuine concern for rape victims. This point appears in a screed that illustrates her deep contempt and disregard for rape accusers, and she then followed it up with a television appearance that endorsed certain kinds of rape. This is not somebody making reasonable points for reasonable reasons. This is a rape apologist grasping at any possible straws, much the way Polanski rape apologists trotted out, “But didn’t she forgive him? So shouldn’t he get away with rape?” Wolf has not trotted out this particular point during a discussion of the ways in which people in power exploit rape accusers; she trotted it out in a discussion of the ways in which she thinks rape should be allowable, important, or trivial, and the ways in which we should attack rape accusers when we don’t like them. This was not an argument made in good faith, by somebody who believes in justice for rape victims; this was a point used to bolster an argument on why these particular rape accusers do not deserve justice, and why some rape accusers ought to just shut the fuck up. Naomi Wolf doesn’t give a damn about justice, or rape victims, or she would have written an article about justice, or what is fair for rape victims. Instead, she wrote an article about how she gets to now define what rape is and who is allowed justice, and how anybody who steps outside that bound will get a public pummeling from her. I’m not going to give her credit for concern trolling rape victims as if she really cares, when her reaction to somebody who calls themselves a victim is to tell them they haven’t been raped. This is like somebody who has just issued an hours-long diatribe of abuse at you slipping in, “I only do this because I care so much about you.” Bullshit. Naomi Wolf does not stand for me. And I do not stand for her.
No. We put the blame where it lies here. The people who have attacked these women, published their names, published their pictures, make wild accusations — these are the people responsible for the abuse they have endured. It is cold comfort to say, “If only these rape charges had been kept quiet or not pursued, the rape accusers wouldn’t have been abused, harassed, and threatened.” We all already know that. That is the status quo. That is exactly what we’re fighting against. No matter how public a rape accusation is, this kind of treatment should never happen. It is no solution to say that we must keep rape a quiet matter, to appease those who would abuse rape accusers. It is no solution to tell those who would take rape seriously, who would pursue it diligently, that they will be responsible for the abuse accusers endure. The accusers have a right to make their case. The law has a right to pursue it diligently. Nobody has a right to disrupt this process through terrorism. Nobody is at fault for that except the terrorists themselves.
Back to the slap in the face bullshit.
While it may be reasonable to speculate that the pursuit of this case is political, it’s far from established fact — this case was moving, and Assange’s legal team was aware of it, long before the recent spate of leaks. The leaks mainly hurt the U.S., and Sweden and the U.S. are not such love buddies that Sweden would jump at their bidding. The cases are being heard in Sweden, which takes rape a lot more seriously than most other developed nations — consider, perhaps, if Assange is guilty of this, that most rapists are repeat rapists. He could be doing this all over, but only Sweden has a legal system that takes rape seriously enough to pursue a prosecution. Certainly, if the charges were true, and if Assange had done the same thing in the U.S., his accusers would have been laughed out of the police station for trying to call rape while sleeping a crime.
Is it a slap in the face to know that there is a country that considers having sex with a sleeping woman rape? That considers intimidating, harassing, and coercing a woman into sex she has denied over and over to be a crime? That considers sabotage of birth control to be an assault worth pursuing? I am not offended that, of the haystack of rape accusations that will never see justice, one needle got pulled out. I am offended that there is a haystack. That is, I am not offended that this one time, things are being done right; I am offended that this doesn’t happen more often.
And, too, if we accept the speculation that this is politically motivated, that these women would never have gotten even this cursory attempt at justice if Assange wasn’t a celebrity, that is actually a reversal from the way it usually goes. Usually, those who accuse celebrities of rape receive less credibility, less attempts at justice. Indeed, just because Sweden is taking this seriously, the rest of us are still jumping to attack these women with the same old celebrity accusations. These women are experiencing what all rape accusers experience; the only difference, in their case, is that the law is actually giving them a fair shake despite all that. There is nothing offensive about that. It doesn’t bother me, a survivor who chose not to seek justice precisely to avoid exposing myself to this kind of circus, that there are women out there receiving a shot at justice. That is, in fact, the only thing that is going right here. For Naomi Wolf to find a way to label a justice system taking rape seriously as a slap in the face to rape victims shows me where her loyalties lie, and shows me that feminism translates for her as “convenient to me.” It is no different from those who say equal rights for women will somehow demean them, or hurt them, or be bad for them, or ruin their chances at success and happiness. Justice in rape cases does not somehow magically equal badness for rape victims. It takes a mean feat of twisted logic to arrive there.
If I had decided to pursue my rape through the justice system, and if the only reason I got a fair shake was because of something arbitrary — say, the prosecutor had had a raped daughter and was willing to put their neck out to pursue this — I would not be angry. I would be grateful. Because I would know that I live in a world where it takes something extra for a rape accuser to get a fair shake at a trial, and without that something extra, I wouldn’t have a shot. That is not the way it should be. I actively work for a world where that is not the way it should be (can Naomi Wolf, or you, say the same here?). But until we live in a world where rape accusations are treated as all other criminal allegations, I do not accept the argument that we should disallow the women who do have a shot from pursuing justice because it would somehow be unfair to those who don’t have a shot. Every accusation that gets taken seriously is a victory. Every accusation that gets scuttled due to terrorism or rape apologism is a loss, for all of us, and it demoralizes and frightens and terrorizes all of us, as it is meant to do. We do not gain anything by holding back on rape trials that have a chance, but we lose a lot when victims see example after example of charges dropped or dismissed out of hand.
It’s fucked-up if these charges are only being taken seriously due to political pressure. That has nothing to do with whether or not these women deserve the right to pursue justice; they do. All rape cases should be treated this way, but until we live in that world, calling the cases that are taken seriously somehow offensive to all other rape accusers does nothing but give those who would abuse these women ammunition. These women are being terrorized precisely because people with a voice feel it’s appropriate to smear their case in public based on vicious, vile stereotypes and unfounded accusations. A government pursuing rape charges diligently within their own stated law is not responsible for the terrorism these women face. People like Naomi Wolf are. When a well-known feminist calls rape charges a slap in the face to real rape victims, rape apologists repeat that, and feel justified in their rape apology, because don’t you know this shit is a slap in the face to the real victims who we are apparently so concerned about now? (I’m not feeling the concern — I’m feeling the attack on my right to justice if a celebrity rapes me.) When a well-known feminist says it’s okay to have sex with a woman when she’s asleep, rape apologists repeat that. And rapists hear it. When a well-known feminist declares herself the arbiter of what is and is not rape, rape apologists hear it, and rapists hear it. And they repeat it, over and over again. Whenever somebody stands up and says, “These women deserve justice,” a rape apologist now pops up and says, “Even your own precious Feminism has decreed that justice in this case hurts the real victims, who I guess I care about more than you.” That is something Naomi Wolf did, and that is why I do not stand with her, and I do not stand with those who do.
Might I suggest that you don’t start off comments with, “I haven’t bothered to listen to you, but I’m going to tell you what’s what anyway?” If you care about my arguments, you will read them. If you don’t care about my arguments, then you aren’t entitled to an opinion on them.
You may argue, in this space, that the system of justice is part and parcel of the master’s tools, and this is an example of how it cannot be used to dismantle the master’s house. You can argue the longview of giving power to a criminal justice system to define our justice for us, which rarely ever becomes justice, but is always a political negotiation of swapping justice for status quo punishments. Flip Flopping Joy has already made most of this argument for you. That is a welcome argument here, because it aligns with feminist ideals to discuss what equality and justice means for all people, and whether or not the state is a viable means of achieving such.
If you truly believe it is somehow detrimental (not unfair, because it is, and not fucked-up, because it is, but detrimental) to other rape victims that this rape case in particular is being pursued with all due diligence of the law, you are not welcome here. In this space, we welcome every chance for a rape accuser to seek justice as any other alleged victim of a crime might do. You can argue that the system is imperfect, that this justice is not real justice, but if you are prepared to go with that argument, you better have something to replace the system with. It’s not enough to say, “this is unfair, so these women shouldn’t get this shot.” If it’s unfair, if it’s that broken, what should the women get instead? If you have a concern for rape victims, demonstrate it; telling other rape victims what should and shouldn’t offend them is not the kind of concern I need, and neither is blaming people actually pursuing rape charges for those who attempt their hardest to shut them down through fear-based tactics. Whatever you’re concerned with here, I don’t believe you yet that it’s justice for rape victims.
This comment is the best!
63 
0
This made me more sad than angry, because I remember being so in love with Naomi wolf’s work when I was in high school. Her books were about 3/4 of the reason I decided to delve into feminist literature and theory, and later to start calling myself a feminist (I have other reasons, now). What she did here kind of ruined all of that for me, and probably for a lot of others. Naomi Wolf no longer speaks for me.
Like or Dislike:
7 
1
J
Ok, a lot here, and a lot I agree with.
Let me just start by saying I didn’t mean to offend you by my opening statement – you asked for discussion and I was interested in getting involved with that. I read everything that you write, and have done so for a long time, it’s certainly not a lack of interest in your arguments.
“I’m not going to give her credit for concern trolling rape victims as if she really cares, when her reaction to somebody who calls themselves a victim is to tell them they haven’t been raped. ”
That is a very fair point, and one I totally take on board. I hadn’t read her debate with Jaclyn Friedman, and that’s my bad for not being fully researched – I have already read the article you linked to (it’s actually what got me thinking about this) as well as a few others, and I’d only seen the article referred to.
I guess I can absolutely see that her intentions are questionable here – personally I draw a line between her intentions and the point she’s trying to get across, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to merge those two together on such a topic. Particularly when not being aware of privilege and personal feelings on the issue can make us speak in such a way in the first place.
So, if we may, lets drop the Wolf inclusion here and assume everything from this point on is my own opinion.
I don’t agree that we can call the political intent fuzzy here – I think given that these accusations would fall on deaf ears both here and America (both legally – for some points – and in attitude), it’s illogical for them to considering extraditing. I think that’s totally wrong, I absolutely bow down to Sweden for having such fantastic and modern laws – but they don’t reflect ours. And let me clarify, I think what the Swedish government is doing is absolutely right (not being specific on that is me being UK-centric). I think it’s the British and American clambering, and the talk of extradition to America, that is out of character for both countries and flames the fire these women are having to live through.
I also agree that it is absolutely the fault of the people who published their names, and perpetrated lies that these women find themselves revealed to the world – but it sickens me to think that in the American government some politician has said “Hey everyone, great news – Assange has raped some girls!” with a great big smug smile on his face. To use something they usually wouldn’t have given a fuck about to their own ends – it just feels like a further abuse.
The idea that in the current state of play the only way such abuses get punished is via another abuse saddens me. I’m in the same position as you – this story hits home to me in specific ways because of my personal experience, and I didn’t choose to follow it up or prosecute (because I’ve tried reporting sexual abuse to the police before, and they pretty blankly told me they couldn’t do anything about it).
“In this space, we welcome every chance for a rape accuser to seek justice as any other alleged victim of a crime might do. ”
I think I was pretty clear in my comment that I absolutely think these women getting or seeking justice is a good thing, and I certainly didn’t intend to imply that victims of rape or abuse shouldn’t follow their own path to justice if that’s what they choose to do. I made it clear I thought we /should/ be following down this path, although I think I should clarify that to /Sweden/ should be following down this path – but unless America and England turn around in the next six months and say “we’re going to amend the sexual abuse laws in a way that will give victims recourse for justice” then all they’ve seen in this situation is their opportunity, not the awful lacking in the system.
The last proposed revision to the British sexual abuse law was to regulate that men accused of rape couldn’t have any of their details published – a law that would blatently make it easier for men to rape multiple women and never get prosecuted. Thankfully it didn’t pass – but when you’re proposing laws like that in one breath, and suddenly bending over backwards to extradite a man accused of rape in another – you aren’t concerned for the victims.
It is total bullshit that any of us should have to fight so hard to get justice, but I want to be taken seriously because I’ve been the fucking victim of abuse so have 90% of my female friends and that /matters/ – it matters that someone invaded our space, our bodies, our privacy – not because a rich white guy decided it might be helpful to his career. And that’s different to a judge with a daughter who has been the victim of abuse – that’s someone with personal experience understanding why it’s important to put these people away, someone who will repeat that decision to charge over and over again. Not a one off.
“All rape cases should be treated this way, but until we live in that world, calling the cases that are taken seriously somehow offensive to all other rape accusers does nothing but give those who would abuse these women ammunition.”
I think we fundamentally disagree on what taking this accusation seriously means – for my eyes, I don’t think being taken seriously (except for by Sweden, who already have an understanding of how important these issues are), I don’t think America or the UK give a toss about what was done or who to. I don’t think the people writing the articles, making up the lies, publishing names give a toss about what happened. I think they’re treating Assange seriously, I think they are treating Wikileaks seriously – but the idea that a man raped someone and must be punished for that? I think that falls on deaf ears.
This can be two things at once – I believe that it is. It is both upsetting for someone who has tried to get justice, and good for the women involved in the case. It is both politically fucked up, and something that shines a light on the amazing system that Sweden has. It is great that someone somewhere is getting justice, and it is also sad that this it what it takes for someone to get justice.
So I’m not trying to say that this is detrimental, what I’m saying I believe this is an abuse of already fucked system to even more fucked ends – and I don’t think that can ever be fully good. Particularly when it would be so easy for America and the UK to get their political agendas out the way for once and actually let these women see justice, for what Assange has done to them and maybe to others, not for what he’s done with wikileaks.
This comment is the best!
23 
2
: Okay, good response. I think I overreacted on you. Apologies.
Everything about this is one big complicated fuck-up and difficult to parse out. You did a good job there, and I didn’t. I think I was reacting to what I expect to be hearing from people, and what I’ve been hearing already, which is a bunch of “If Naomi Wolf said it, it must be reasonable,” both from people who have never heard of Naomi Wolf or ever gave a flying fuck about her, and people who have heard of her and are in a state of befuddled hero-worship defense. It’s just this whole layered cake of shitty, populated primarily by people who all have really good qualities or significant and important abilities in some arenas (Assange, Moore, Olbermann, Wolf), and it’s so frustrating and maddening to have to preface each sentence with, “I think X is good, but Y is THE WORST FUCKING THING EVER JESUS CHRIST, but X is still pretty good, but it doesn’t matter because Y WILL DESTROY US ALL ARGHCHDALKSCJHL.” And since this whole thing is playing out on the public stage, it’s even harder to deal with, because most people don’t have the background, attention span, or giving-a-shit to really sort through the nuances of everything.
So! I think I responded to the kind of person who doesn’t understand the nuances. I mean, yes, I am on board with how fucked-up it is that rape is about exploitation of the system here (although I am maintaining a healthy skepticism that this is completely obviously a political gambit, since Britain and the US can warble all they want about wanting to get at Assange, but Sweden — the only place where legal action can be taken upon Assange at this point — hasn’t seemed to listen to them or give a shit yet, but yes, the US and Britain are setting up as much of a raving mob in their own quarters as they possibly can). But I think I reached this overload point where Wolf and Moore and Olbermann have already dominated so much of the real estate here, and have already done so much damage, and saturated the public consciousness with such a debilitating set of lies, that I am not willing to give them any credibility. I feel like the moment I say, “Yes, that is a valid point,” it will turn into, “SO WOLF ISN’T A POD PERSON AFTER ALL HUH MAYBE SHE’S RIGHT I MEAN SHE IS A REAL FEMINIST AND ALL,” and my follow-up of, “A valid point from a concern troll who doesn’t actually believe what the fuck she’s saying and is only saying it to further damage rape victims she doesn’t like,” will get lost in the minor victory. It’s probably not a productive way for me to be working, but I find it impossible to assign Wolf any legitimacy right now. That’s why I linked to the FFJ article, because while it’s stating the same thing in some ways, it’s coming from somebody who is genuine and consistent and demonstrably concerned with equality and justice.
This is a bit of a ramble. My main points are:
1. I agree with the argument that these charges — and the women who made them — are being exploited for political gain
2. I agree that this is a bunch of horrible goddamn bullshit and shouldn’t be happening, and the exploitation part is no good for anybody (though a rape cases actually going to court is good for everybody)
3. I am not willing to say that this is the argument Naomi Wolf made, since she made it in a spate of pod person ramblings meant to do as much damage as possible to rape victims and this case in particular — I think the argument she actually made is, “Everything about this rape case should be dismissed based on my personal agenda — let me dig up some superficial logic and slap it on top of this so it doesn’t look so self-aggrandizing.”
4. I’m sorry I jumped all over you and argued with somebody who wasn’t here (the assholes I have been seeing and dealing with in other places) instead of actually engaging with you
5. Trying to talk about any of this just reminds me of this.
This comment is the best!
12 
0
J
Hahaha, yes, that is a perfect example.
Thank for you the apology, it’s no problem, I do get it.
The proposed law amend I mentioned in my comment gave me a similar reaction, mostly because a lot of the people (read: men) reacting to it were so woefully under educated about the realities of rape and sexual abuse for women they were all just continually “BUT WHAT IF GOT ACCUSED MY LIFE WOULD BE, LIKE, RUINED”. Which made me want to punch them.
I’ve had a whole load of unexpected people send me links to “good” articles on the Assange subject, “revealing the truth” (read: rape denying) about the whole situation – and you do get to a point where you feel like everyone around you have their heads so far up the patriarchy that you couldn’t possibly speak to them again. It’s tiring.
I take your point about Wolf, and I think she has dug her own grave when it comes to people taking her seriously on anything she says. I think there is a valid point somewhere in there, but you’re right – she doesn’t deserve any credit when she’s playing the rape denial card.
On a more positive note, I do genuinely love your blog, and am a long time reader.
Like or Dislike:
7 
1
I think this issue is greyer than people have been making it out to be. Everyone is lining up and picking sides. And I’m totally with you re: moving from no means no to yes means yes. And some of the things Naomi Wolfe has said are kind of victim blaming. That’s bad. So is the notion that there’s real rape and then there’s rape lite.
But I think I took the same thing as Lily away from the Huffington Post article: as a rape survivor I’m really offended by the notion that rape is a crime to be ignored by the powers that be unless it becomes politically convenient. The notion that it’s ok to rape with impunity unless you do something that’s politically unpopular and they need to get something on you… that’s really horrific. Because if all rapes were pursued this way, it wouldn’t be an anomaly and the women bringing charges wouldn’t be singled out in the way that they are. I mean, if they got the guy on a more widely prosecuted crime, we wouldn’t see the victims singled out in the same way.
I’ve since read some things that make me doubt my original reading of this article and feel less sanguine about Naomi Wolfe’s position. But initially, I choose to read this article as a call for various governments to put their money where their mouth is. If this isn’t politically motivated, I want to see all rapes pursued to the same degree as the Assange case. If the standard for Assange is yes means yes and that consent has to be maintained throughout the sexual encounter, then that’s the standard by which rape charges should be taken from here on out by any government that wants to pretend that rape isn’t just a convenient tool if they’ve got a political axe to grind and don’t have any other options. So the gauntlent has been thrown. If the involved countries want to pretend they aren’t just in this for political reasons, we’d better see a whole slew of prosecutions of politically innocuous rapists who I’ve never heard of. Until then, I choose to be offended.
This comment is hotly debated.
10 
2
I am a law enforcement officer and have also been involved in various types of self-defense training for women over the past 10 years. Your essay raises insightful and, more importantly, useful ideas that I plan to carry into my work and my development of personal safety education for women.
Thanks for writing this. You’re reaching more than just feminists.
This comment is the best!
26 
0
So well written. Thank you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
:
Maybe you’re referred to some other “people,” but if you’re talking about the feminist blogosphere, I think this is a really disingenuous summary of what’s been happening. The “sides” I’m seeing picked are “Assange is innocent, those women are liars, that wasn’t rape, you can be arrested in Sweden for a broken condom!” vs. “None of that is necessarily true, and most of it is an outright attack of rape accusers, which is partly why people do not report rapes in the first place.” If Wolf had only argued that countries should put their money where their mouth is, I’d have no problem with this. But instead, she argued that you can have sex with women when they’re asleep and that’s totally not rape, and she misrepresented the charges against Assange, and she dismissed the charges as entirely political. That is rape apologism. There’s nothing gray about that.
You’ve picked one point that is not utter shit out of the cascading stream of victim smearing and rape apology that has been coming out of Naomi Wolf. I don’t have to make this out to be anything; Wolf has been pretty clear what she thinks. And if denouncing rape apologism means I’m picking sides, well, I’m picking the side that doesn’t apologize for rape, and I’m pretty pleased with that.
Kind of? Wow.
Yes, I’m also offended by that. But you know what — I can say that without saying that women who are asleep can be forced into sex, or that a yes after twenty no’s is a perfectly legitimate way to get sex from a woman. Naomi Wolf apparently can’t. I have no faith that she cares that rape survivors have been “slapped in the face” by this, because so far, it appears that’s the only care she extends to rape survivors — that, and protecting them from other women who file rape charges, since they are apparently the real enemy. She pulled this point to make it sound like she cares about rape survivors, but she doesn’t have anything to back that up with, because everything else she says indicates that if you or I wanted to charge rape against somebody she politically enjoys, she would call us liars who are hurting the real victims (who she cares so much about, you know!)
You know what? I’m not giving an inch on this shit, and I’m not going to do anymore educating in my space today about why one not-horrible thing in the midst of a screed about how rape victims are goddamn liars means this is “gray” or I’m “picking sides” or it’s “kind of” victim-blaming. Banned.
This comment is the best!
21 
7
@JB: That is nice to hear! Thank you!
I don’t know if this will help as well, but a lot of this letter contained ideas I’ve cribbed from other posts in the past. This one, especially, was very very popular for a long time, so, just in case it provides extra assistance:
https://fugitivus.net/2009/06/26/another-post-about-rape-3/
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I would like to mail my dog-eared copy of “The Beauty Myth” back to Naomi Wolf. Anybody got any ideas what the most direct/useful way to do that would be? (No this is not a request to post her home address.)
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
Susan Brownmiller signed a petition in support of Wikileaks.
http://thekomisarscoop.com/2010/11/journalists-from-40-countries-join-in-support-for-wikileaks/
I looked for any news of Gloria Allred, Gloria Steinem, Germaine Greer, Cherrie Moraga, Gloria Anzaldua, bell hooks, and Alice Walker, related to Assange. I found nothing else.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0