Sarah over the Moon is writing a very interesting series on rape myths in Evangelical Christianity from the point of view of a feminist that mirrors my own work slowly redefining rape in light of Theology of the Body and a radical theory of individual responsibility.
Thanks to Sarah's theories, I have better language for my redefinition- really a replacement Rape Myth.
So here goes. Under the idea that beneficial sexism can go both ways, rape is the use of another person for sexual lust divorced from procreation or commitment to the other individual.
In fact, merely feeling lust for another human being that you do not or cannot procreate with, is a sign that you might become a rapist if you are not careful.
In addition to this, procreation in this case means not just having the baby- but in fact staying together to raise that child to full adulthood.
This means that up to 35 years after the incident- a divorce (legal or common separation) can turn all the sex you've had with that person into rape.
It means contracepting couples are practicing a form of mutual rape.
It means that the victim can never be directly blamed for the rape- it is YOUR job to control YOUR lust.
And yes, it means I have no room in this for non-romantic, non-procreative sex.
And Sarah's response to this was to call me a troll- so therefore clearly she isn't as into diversity as she claims.
After many months of arguing this, I've had a satori on this subject:
Contraception indicates a lack of consent on the part of one or both partners, because it denies the procreative aspect of sex. Since denial of consent is implied in the use of birth control, that turns sex into rape.
This links it all back together, and closes the circular reasoning that is indicative of all moral reasoning.