#terf critical | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

the-feminist-philosopher · 2 years

Text

I don't know how else I can make this clear.

RAPE does not exist for the purpose of reproduction, the continuation of ("male") genes and the continuation of family lines. RAPE is not a natural or biological phenomenon.

The idea that RAPE is a product of evolution is a theory pushed forth by some men to discount holding perpetrators accountable. There is a reason feminists have long rejected the biological theory of rape. Such a theory naturalizes rape, and in-turn normalizes it's existence rather than regarding it as the perverse, depraved and inhumane crime that it is.

This application of Social Darwinism is insidious. Because once we accept rape as natural to men and the continuation of the human race, we pave a path to justify rape for the perseverance of human populations and the continued "domestic supply of infants." It will be used to justify that some men are naturally more inclined to rape than others. And it will be used to justify holding anyone capable of pregnancy as chattel for the purposes of propagating the race while discarding any "female" or "woman" who cannot produce as desired.

Accepting it as simply an evolutionary development carried out by "males" with limited social skills or limited mating opportunities for the chance to propagate at all is concession. It is concession to an oppression tactic; to a tactic used to strip people of their autonomy. If we accept it as something natural, it becomes something inescapable.

It would mean that no matter what type of hierarchical system we abolish, no matter if gender exists or not, no matter what we do, rape will always exist. If rape is natural, no matter if the patriarchy and gender is abolished, rape will still exist. This would mean that the bodily oppression of female people through rape will still exist outside gender and outside the patriarchy. This would mean that reproductive injustice is natural to our species.

Because rape is "natural" to our reproduction.

And as someone who has worked with rape and domestic crises centers, this rhetoric is very harmful to survivors of assault.

"Rape can be about control and dominance. It can also be about hate and hostility. A rapist usually believes misogynistic rape myths like the idea that women play hard to get. They feel they are entitled to someone else's time and body. They get off on depriving someone else of power. There is a link between narcissism and rape with repeat offenders displaying signs of narcissism. Men who rape sometimes have antisocial tendencies, so they really don't care about social perceptions of them.

However, it is important to note that there is no evidence that mentally ill men are more likely to rape compared to non-mentally ill men.

Social pressure and culture have greater influence over someone's behavior than genetics or biology. Those who feel sure they can get away with rape without punishment are more likely to report they used coercive behavior. Those with friends who display aggressive behavior or acceptance of aggressive behavior are themselves more likely to engage in aggressive behavior." X

A rapist typically knows their victim and is often sexually experienced and the acquaintance-rapist rarely resort to the SAME levels of physical force or violence that stranger-rapists or serial rapists employ.

If something is culturally reinforced and rooted in what someone is taught, raised to view, and in how they're socialized, then it is not a biological strategy. It is a social tactic of an oppressive system.

Power is socialized.

Rape is either an instinctual urge to reproduce or something that reproduces a power dynamic under an oppressive system. It cannot be both. Because, by it's nature, rape steals power and autonomy from the victim. So, if rape is a natural strategy for reproduction, then that power dynamic is natural too.

This ideology would mean that rape will always exist as a biological system. It would mean that the deprivation of bodily autonomy and the dominance, power, and control reinforced through rape is natural. And if it is natural, then it is inescapable.

So, either it is an instinctual desire to propagate genes or it is a socially construction tactic for power, control, and dominance within an oppressive system. And if your answer is, "our socials just reinforce what is instinctual," then I'll remind you that even without the cultural, we are still left with the instinctual. If rape is not solely socially constructed among humans, then it will continue to oppress you even without gender and the patriarchy. It would thus always exist, and especially so if you enforce this material and physical reality you base your ideology on.

Because the more we reinforce that "males" and "females" are inherently, biologically different, the easier it is for us to be alienated and dehumanized by the system that oppresses us. The more we encourage this idea that we're so fundamentally different and fundamentally incompatible and practically separate species, the more likely we will be treated as only the reproductive capacity you insist on defining us by.

You do not change our societal views on the FEMALE SEX simply by emphasizing women as our sex. You said it yourself. They are socialized to view our SEX to be subhuman. To the patriarchy, what makes us lesser is our biology; our reproduction; our parts; our SEX.

You are also applying our modern understanding of a social concept to the past. You are applying the idea that genetic relation is what makes someone a legitimate heir/child. This is itself a social construction of how descent and family works. Back in the day, biology did shit-all to legitimize an heir. The only thing that legitimized someone's children as their own and legitimized their inheritance was marriage. Bastards did not have inheritance rights.

And before civilization? We had no systems of law and land ownership through which concepts of inheritance- and thus heirs- would have been necessary.

Today, despite the prevalence of adoption and extended and blended families, we hold that biology is paramount in the creation of family; that what is most important in your "legacy" (a social construct) is the continuation of you through genes. And while such a social constructed existed in the past, only today is such a concept largely divorced from marriage (in some places).

"If the reason for rape is reproduction, then men and children would never be victims of rape. And if it's reason was reproduction and the continuation of a man's genes, we would see proportional statistics across nation, culture, race, and ethnicity. Women of color are at a greater risk of rape than white women, and women in war-torn countries are at a greater risk than women living in peace. If it's purpose was for "males" to pass on their genes, then sex workers wouldn't face higher numbers of assault and we'd see a consistent trend of a rise in assaults in countries with falling birth rates.

And if your theory were the case, we'd also see similar incident of rape among straight, bisexual, and lesbian women. We'd also see little to no incident of rape among transwomen if this were the case as they cannot get pregnant."

The reason "people with vaginas are raped," does not work grammatically isn't because it centers "person" and thus personhood, but because it is in the passive voice. If I replaced that with "women," we'd still run into the same issue.

"Women are raped and impregnated." By who?

Advocates and feminists most certainly use the active voice, and encourage it's use. Rather than "Women are raped," thus making their rapist some shadowy, unknown figure and making rape something done to her rather done by someone, we would say, "Josh raped Sarah." The subject should perform the action.

That would go for other examples too:

"Steven was robbed." -> "Josh robbed Steven."

"My cat was run over." -> "Josh ran over my cat."

"The road was crossed by the chicken." -> "The chicken crossed the road."

Medical research does not lack clarity because of gender or because of an internal sense of self. It lacks clarity because what is oppressed is not just gender identity, but also sex. Sex was oppressed before the concept of gender existed, sex was oppressed when "gender-roles" (a term that did not exist until the 70s) looked very different, and it would be oppressed even if gender distinctions did not at all exist.

Defining us solely as our sex does not challenge this and does not change sex-based oppression. Because if certain people are oppressed on the basis of sex, using the basis of that oppression (sex) as THE concept which defines and connects them only reinforces the binary and hierarchy that oppresses us. The patriarchy has always striven to divide us into fundamentally separate and supposedly incompatible binaries and has always striven to define as as our sex; to define us as our capacity for reproduction; to define us as "females."

It has always striven to define us by our parts, by our functions, by our capacity to produce ova, by our immutable biology -- and THEN to tie norms and standards and expectations to this. Without the norms and standards and expectations, we still have the patriarchy reducing us as nothing more than machines for the reproduction of workers, soldiers, and the race.

Gender- in terms of roles and norms- may be a social construction used to reinforce social hierarchies under the patriarchy, but the way to fight that is through epicinity. Epicinity, defined as a lack of gender distinction, is- in part- making language gender-neutral.

Gender-neutral language may include the use of person-centered language ("person with the capacity for pregnancy") or a lack of gendered distinction in a word's use ("woman" and "she" or "man" and "he" being used to refer to anyone, regardless of sex). Epicinity means allowing for people to be non-binary, agender, androgynous, and trans.

Epicinity means not reinforcing binaries. Trans/Cis is not a binary. AFAB/AMAB is not a binary. Woman/Man is not a binary. Male/Female is not a binary. TME/TMA is not a binary. TRA/TERF is not a binary.

You are advocating for a biological hierarchy that does not exist. You are advocating that men and women are fundamentally different because, why? The oft misunderstood and oft weaponized sexual dimorphism?

"Biology and it’s discourse are still structured by historic and current social and political views. That includes using “sexual dimorphism” as an excuse to justify the racist and misogynistic standards used by TERFs in their Sex Pattern Recognition, and the classification and categorization of faces. It’s constant emphasis in arguments for sex separatism is a political choice influenced by one’s socialization, rather than one that can claim to neutrally reflect what the world is “really” like.

So too is the insistence on defining “woman” as “females.” Emphasizing a label that is ascribed to all at birth is also a political choice influenced by one’s socialization, (rather than one that can claim to neutrally reflect what the world is “really” like).

Sex, as much as gender, is socially and culturally imbued. That is not to say that sex does not exist or that there is no advantage to acknowledging that different bodies have different organs that require different care (a cervical exam v. a prostate exam, for example). This also does not mean that “female” doesn’t refer to a sex. It does. It also is still something that is ascribed to people at birth.

All of the terms we use and concepts and standards we apply to bodies are still influenced by patriarchal, white supremacist, and heteronormative standards, including the classification of sex. And we’re inherently biased about the level of differences when we talk about humans, as humans. The fact you perceive the differences you do doesn’t necessarily reflect our actual level of genetic and anatomical diversity, because those differences you perceive are a result of your environment.

Because it is a fact that humans today display relatively limited sexual dimorphism. It is also a fact that most of our sexual dimorphis cannot readily be seen, like the placement of hips or size of bronchi.

I want to let you know that I hate you. I have not felt such disdain for someone since confronting the boy who was stalking me in secondary school.

I'd forgotten what hate feels like. I'd forgotten that hate is a silent rage; one that makes you go cold at your core.

For you to tell me this- privately message me this at that- after I explicitly told you that I was assaulted by an adult woman as a child in a room full of women and girls- is cruel.

My cheer leading coach held me down as I kicked and screamed for my mother. She stripped me bare while every woman and girl in the room stood around and watched. They did nothing. I was alone in a female-only space and violently stripped of my bodily autonomy, dignity, and integrity.

She looked me in the eye and tole me and told me it was okay because, "We all look the same. We're all female here."

She was a very real risk to my bodily autonomy and bodily integrity. I took my "chances," and I guess my "luck" just ran out faster than yours.

I'd try to suffocate myself to death a year later.

I was 7.

#TW: rape #TW: assault #TW: suicide #TERF critical #rad fem critical #TERFism #radblr #TERFblr #radical feminism #rad fem #gender critical #TW: suicide attempt #TW: self harm #The idea that there are an entire separate set of genes for 'males' is also factually incorrect

167 notes · View notes