AmateurScientist said:
Well, I can link to a source just as you can, although I do not vouch for its accuracy anymore than you should automatically vouch for snopes.com's.
I agree; snopes.com is not unproblematic, but it does typically provide evidence which can be used to verify its claims (and yes, I've checked to see if snopes's accusation against Cal Thomas is accurate, and it appears to be so, albeit there is always the possibility that someone else wrote the article in question and attributed it to him).
I'm less willing, though, to accept the accuracy of a problematically referenced collection of quotes, which is reproduced, in an un-reflexive manner,
ad nauseum throughout the internet which in and of itself betrays the bias of those publishing these pages. But I notice you don't vouch for its accuracy, so that's okay then.
How's this?
Selected Man-hating quotes from Radical Feminists
If Dworkin's quotes attributed to her there are accurate, then I would argue that they are quite hateful and twisted.
I'd be cautious about committing to a position on Dworkin without confirming the validity and context of these quotes.
I would say the same about the one quote on the page attributed to MacKinnon. It is utterly subjective and cheapens the term "rape." It allows alleged victims to decide based solely on their own subjective feelings whether or not a very serious crime has been committed.
Bearing in mind the caution I make above, I would note that quote attributed to her commences with "Politically...", which directs the context and meaning. However...
Of course, that view is not surprising coming from the chief proponent of allowing alleged victims of sexual harassment to decide if they were harassed based solely on their subjective feelings.
Interesting... The implication of this would be that a women cannot know if she has been harrassed or violated, unless it has been objectively tested by the legal system. But surely the law has to take into account this subjective experience in deciding if a criminal act has, indeed been committed?
Law must have objective tests for liability. Subjective tests do not allow any reasonable actor to decide in advance whether his or her behavior is lawful or not.
I'd argue that this approach is problematic, in that the fundamental issue os one of consent, rather than legitimacy. For instance, I understand that in the US there are a number of sexual acts which, regardless of the consent of the people involved, prohibited by law. However, with regard to rape we're tlaking about an act that in and of itself is not illegal, but rather it's the context of the act. I don't see how one can objectively test that context. For instance, if a women doesn't explicitly protest, could the act be considered rape? As an aside, it's interesting to note that rape inside marriage has only recently been recognised by British law, which problematises traditional ideas of consent within marriage, and particularly the idea of a wife's duty.
Subjective tests remind me very much of a lyric from Van Halen's "Hot for Teacher."
"I don't feel tardy."
Surely you understand that being tardy is an objective measure. How one feels about it has nothing to do with it. (Yeah, I know, it's a very rough analogy because being tardy doesn't involve an alleged victim, etc. I'm just voicing my thoughts aloud.)
AS
I'm equally unfamiliar with the word "tardy" as I am of the works of Van Halen (I was an indie kid, sorry!). But please continue to voice your thoughts, and I hope you'll indulge me as I do the same (as I have above).
[edited to add a source I found attributing the "all sex is rape" business to MacKinnon, complete with a reference and page number. Here it is, if you care to look into it:
"In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent."
-- Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies, pg 129
Look down page for MacKinnon's name
The link doesn't work for me, it requires some kind of log-in? Anyway, this charge is not exactly uncommon on the internet, and as snopes.com mentions, it appears to arise from an article by Cal Thomas (
version available here) which incorrectly attributes authorship of this book to MacKinnon. Bearing in mind that the book is a rather... one-sided critique of feminism, it's quite possible that she is quoted therein. Conditions as outlined above apply here, except to note that it's an interesting conflation to take the above and arive at "all sex is rape".
[edited a second time to add a quote from Dworkin which comes very close to calling all men potential rapists. I'm comfortable calling her views despicable.
"Under patriarchy, no woman is safe to live her life, or to love, or to mother children. Under patriarchy, every woman is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's daughter is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman."
-- Liberty, pg 58
(Also found on the site where the MacKinnon quote is attributed)]
Usual terms and conditions not withstanding, I don't find this statement dispicable; I find it problematic in that it appears to treat patriarchy as monolithic, but I would be uncomfortable about interpreting this to mean that all men are even potential rapists, because in noting the condition that her analysis applies to, she gives both men and women a choice, and as such recognises their agency to make that choice. It's the essentialists (you are evil because you are a man, end of story) who are the bad bunch, and Dworkin sure isn't one of them!
