I am not my own- a replacement myth for rape culture.
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.
-----
Edit: 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.
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.
-----
Edit: 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.
Comments
See edit above for the final word on this subject.
Right. The Church doesn't teach that. It is just your twisted worldview. So sad. What a waste of your intelligence.
Science teaches us that the consequence of heterosexual sex is pregnancy. That means the normal purpose of sex is procreation.
Therefore consent to sex implies consent to pregnancy.
Contraception is using technology to defeat procreation.
Therefore, the use of that technology, is denial of consent to pregnancy, thus denial of consent to sex.
And when you have sexual activity without consent, you have rape.
The logical chain is sound. But since worship of the holy orgasm is denied by this chain of logic, I have no doubt but you will be forced to reject it due to some superficial and irrational statement.
What is so hard for YOU to understand about that?
Were you truly worshiping the Holy Orgasm, or were you "open to life"- that is, praying for another child? Which is of course what sex is for- the "magic spell" for making more children.
Distracting from the topic is worthless. It is only by thinking deeply that advancements can be made.
And as it is, I've already made some change on this topic. I no longer separate contraception and consent, and consent now makes a LOT more sense to me.
Surely, you can't be so serious all the time. Don't you ever lighten up?
Lightening up is only for the increasingly rare times when I can truly play. And even then, there's usually a good deal of anger to take out on tiny Zerg, Humans, and Protoss in Starcraft. Especially when I'm playing human and have nukes available.