Rape fodder
If, like me, you were beginning to suspect Germaine Greer had completely lost the plot, her latest column will confirm your suspicions. It’s disgusting.
She calls the victims of sexual assault by elite sportsmen “rape fodder” and implies that they deserve what they get. The players don’t rape the women, they “succumb to the groupies’ onslaught” — it’s almost as if the victims are raping the perpetrators! You can’t really blame the poor blokes anyway, because they’re under pressure to perform or be dropped from the team.
Moreover, the only thing that has changed since the good old days when her father was involved, is that women are “stroppier” (an interesting way to describe someone who is complaining about being gang raped), and they’re after the players’ money.
Feminist my arse.
G’day Robert,
First off, I agree with you that Greer’s article is superficial and badly written, but your reading of her articles seems to have been particularly superficial.
Your quoted line that the players “succumb to the groupies’ onslaught” is NOT/NOT talking about the women raped – but at groupies that are willing to degrade themselves to sleep with players. She then notes that the players enter into a macho cycle of grossness leading, in some cases, to gang rape.
While the article definitely needs critiquing – you need to understand what you read in order to do the job properly.
Russell, there is obviously a bit more nuance in 1200 word essay than in my 130 word summary. However, I don’t think I’ve fundamentally distorted her argument. She wrote:
In other words, “good family men” are corrupted by these “stupid slags”, who deserve to be punished by gang rape.
Greer’s article takes every opportunity to play down the crime of rape, and to exaggerate the responsibility of the “rape fodder”.
Robert,
I’m not sure what you are objecting to precisely.
You keep leaping passed whats’ on the page to such extermities as “these “stupid slags”, who deserve to be punished by gang rape.”
It is a very harsh reading to suggest that Greer is saying any woman deserves rape.
And what is the implication of your ridicule of the “good family men” line. It is a trite description – but she is actually suggesting that most men will behave in this way given the right conditions. It is more an indictment, perhaps, of all men.
Whatever, Greer to me is attacking the male dominated culture where these events take place and is thus definitely a feminist critique.
She uses unusually rough langauage for such a subject in a family newspaper, but that shouldn’t mislead us to think that she is blaming the vitims of rape for their assault.
She certainly implies that some of the women who she describes as “groupies” – which is hardly a controversial classification – are letting themselves in for more than they bargain for – eg they rightly object when they are “brutalised, insulted or humiliated”.
The line about the “stupid slags” is clearly from the viewpoint of the men and is not to be taken as Greer’s voice.
I found also found Greer’s article disturbing. The point you have noted is the obvious one. The less obvious one is the side-swipe she takes at men in pretty much the same breath. Early on in her piece she explains to us that mutual transgression (eg. gang rape) is a fundamentally and exclusively male trait, which, in combination with inculcated female submissive tendencies inexorably leads to such outcomes. The point apparently being that this is what happens when fathers don’t protect their daughters from male-kind.
Some interesting thoughts do arise from the essay, but it’s more in spite of her thesis, rather than from any point she is actually trying to make. To her crredit, Greer is a consummate shit-stirrer.
To me, Greer is defending the culture that allows these crimes to occur. At every point where she accepts there is wrongdoing, she takes the opportunity to excuse the men involved (they were good family men led astray by hussies) and condemn the victims (who were shameless, money-seeking whores who should have expected the abuse they received). The thrust of her argument is to let the poor, vulnerable rapists off the hook and condemn the victims for luring them down that path.
John, I did notice the shared guilt thing (it’s something I’d studied in relation to genocide, kapos and the like) but I think Greer shies away from it. She pushes up against a criticism of the men, but then shrugs her shoulders and says, “boys will be boys, and girls should know better.” It’s altogether an unsatisfactory response to the issue.
Hey Rob, your last line — is that some weird sort of request.
Hmmm. I got the impression she was trying to describe the mindset that led to this stuff, rather than condone it. But in that special bacon-fisted way that only La Greer can achieve.
PS has anyone feministed your arse yet?
I agree with Robert’s interpretation.
It has appeared for a while that the idea train has departed, and Germaine has been left standing on the platform.
John Carney is on the money, she is the consumate shit stirrer. A bit like Tim Blair wants to be.
Let’s not forget that no football players have yet been convicted of any rapes. Are we to believe that there are no such thing as football groupies?
Whilst I don’t entirely agree with Rob’s reading of the article, I understand the concerns he’s raised. Yobbo, Greer was never intending to argue the innocence of the footballers. In fact, her point about the women being “stroppier” is, I think, a point about the problems women can have now securing a conviction. Because they are now willing to admit they did agree to a one-night stand with one man, it is harder to prove where she started to say no. Colleen Egan wrote about that in the Sunday times here- the women are getting “more sex than they wanted”.
The problem is, many people view rape as less serious if the woman already said yes to a different guy. That she was slut, who probably deserved or enjoyed it.
I think that the article raises some good points (although they may not have been intended by Greer). The sporting culture, and some of the the women who are attracted to it- women who seek affirmation by sleeping with “masculine”, famous men,has lead to “grossness”, moral confusion and a fundamental lack of respect for ALL women. This is an issue that needs to be debated publicly, and the boys (as most of them are) who are immersed in this lifestyle, need to be taught that women must be respected, and that vulnerable women should not be taken advantage of.
Just because something isn’t, and shouldn’t be, illegal, doesn’t mean that it’s always OK. Not all women are victims. But, some of the women who are involved in this culture are insecure and do not have a lot of respect for themselves. And the problem that Greer (I think) raises, is that this leads to many sportsmen extending their opinion of these women to all women.
Sorry this was a bit long winded…
I’ve little time for Greer’s approach to intellectual issues, and see her as someone who’ll try almost any line that will ensure publicity. Unlike, Robert, however, I don’t see gratuitous insults and simply ignoring the politically incorrect implications of her item as an appropriate reaction. It may be emotionally comforting, of course, but it avoids facing up to a very real problem now confronting western “progressive” society.
No one seems anxious to analyse the effects of turning sport [and other aspects of life] into something which is more entertainmnet than anything else. At the same time this has been happening, in the guise of a perveted form of “equality”, many young women have been led into seeing their big “achievement” in life, as revolving around their ability to act in much the same manner as any drunken football yobbos with whom they’re able to “associate” themselves.
I don’t suggest the ultimate responsibility for this form of behaviour becoming so popular lies with those who have been participating in it for quite some time now — with everyone pretending we weren’t aware of it. Gradually the sorts of behaviours which were part and parcel of the pop music world, flowed through to elite sport and elsewhere. But no-one “noticed” it?
A world was created in which boundaries became very blurred, but on a far bigger scale than had been the case in the pop music scene. There were FAR more elite sportsmen available than there had been their musical equivalents, and as times changed, it had become far more acceptable for young women to engage in a free life style.
I’m not, as careful readers will have noted, suggesting we consider ANY of these changes from a moral perspective. Nor am I suggesting we consider any possible consequences for society as a whole. I do suggest, however, that in our implicit acceptance of what has been happening, we created a culture in which young women [who were not even aware of the existence of this "anything goes" mentality] would become victims.
This is NOT an excuse for the perpetrators. This is NOT placing responsibility on those women who enthusiastically participated in the activities; but it IS an argument that we should be looking at issues that are clearly to be found, if only one is prepared to look.
By all means throw out germaine’s bathwater. I always thought there was too much of that when she was popular among the “progressives”. By all means, if it makes you feel more politically correct, shoot the messenger.
But is it asking too much that you don’t throw out the baby as well? It may, in terms of our political preconceptions, be an especially painful baby to deliver; but I’d suggest it’s a baby that needs to be saved — even if it means our more politically correct comrades won’t be happy with us?
I really disagree with referrring to the young women involved as “victims”. I have had a conversation with a young woman who engaged in group sex with 4 members of an AFL team. She was quite happy to tell me about it and certainly didn’t consider herself a “victim”.
In fact, she said she felt sorry for one of the 4 guys she took on. He couldn’t get it up in front of his mates.
The mail I received in the Milne/Montagna case amounts to more of a falling out between friends than anyone being assaulted. One of the girls got pissed off when she realised that her friend enjoyed rooting HER boyfriend more than she enjoyed the thought of it.
Yobbo, would I be right in suggesting that the woman who willingly participated in group sex with those four players has not complained of being raped? In that case, good for her. It’s women who don’t willingly participate that I’m describing as victims.
Yobbo
You still writing for Forum?
I think the problem with Greer’s article is summed up in her parting words – the players are now more vulnerable than ever.
I think Greer raises some interesting points. I wonder about the extent to which money is a motivating factor in some (albeit very few) cases, for example. But the article on the whole is, and I agree here with Rob, supremely disturbing in its implication that what goes on in this blokey world has always gone on, and always will, and so women should stay out if they want to avoid being hurt. Most disturbing of all is its explicit portrayal of the exposed men as the
And Yobbo, the point you raise in relation to this article is clearly irrelevant – consensual group sex is an entirely different thing from gang rape.
Women ‘getting more sex than they bargained for’ is surely unacceptable. Why is it OK for guys to sleep around wherever and whenever they choose (because lets’ face it, it is seen as OK, isn’t it) but if a girl does the same and ends up being raped it must be her own fault – clearly she asked for it?
Germaine Greer is not the only woman I have heard expressing this sentiment. I cannot begin to express my horror at this view. Rape is not OK or excuseable in any circumstances.
What we need to address is not the woman’s supposed failure to adequately protect herself from rape, but society’s failure, given the fact that women should have to protect themselves from this kind of behaviour at all, in the first place.
Why should a woman not be able to hang out with a bunch of guys from a footy team, without having to worry that it might lead to some kind of assault, an intrusion to her person? It simply shouldn’t be that society continues to make it OK for this kind of culture to predominate among our sporting teams or anywhere.
I find Greer’s article a tragic reflection of society’s attitude to these problems. “Oh, the poor footballers with all this pressure, they just can’t help themselves, and now look how they have to pay for it”.
What a disgrace.
P.S. I will not be feministing Rob’s arse…
It’s a sad day when greer [whom I've never rated particularly highly] is such a red rag to the bulls [sorry, bovines] that they become not only incapable of understanding the validity in some of her points, but [and this has far more serious implications for the future] so emotionally blinded, that they can’t even recognise the underlying causes of what has been happening, and how it’s likely to develop.
As a gang-rape survivor, I reflect on what Greer has said with horror. Perhaps if she had ever had to endure a second of what I was forced to, then perhaps she might not see rape victims-especially pack rape victims-as “slags”. I think I’ve got a few descriptive words about her, none of which I could repeat here. Maybe she should read what she’s written and then ask herself why rape victims have to fight to just get recognition for what they have had to endure. Stupid cow.
Pathetic old cow
Robert Corr sums up my attitude to Germaine Greer’s latest repugnant attention-seeking effort in the Sydney Morning Herald, about footballers and gag rape. I just chose to ignore the pathetic old cow to avoid gratifying her increasingly pathological de…