I knew it was an eventuality. In due course, my desire to read a popular press magazine (albeit one that features the very same Margaret Cho performance that I've been raving about all week long) would have to come to an end. And with the publication of this week’s "The Sex Issue," Time Out New York has now made it onto my list of Magazines That I Will Not Support.Don't misunderstand me. There are a lot of good articles in this issue. The primary topic is actually something I find very pleasing. I was completely satisfied with the "Lip Service: tips on oral sex (for her)" article, and it was certainly interesting to learn that 74% of straight men trim, wax or shave their public hair. I even went to their website to see if my guesses were right for the "Who Just Had Sex?" photo quiz. But my entertainment ceased as soon as I got to the 11-page "What's Your Fantasy?" section, in which each article is a mini-erotic story of someone getting a sexual fantasy of their choice. To be more precise, my teeth clenched, my throat closed, and my stomach turned when I flipped the page and read the title "I want... to be raped," coupled by a photograph of a white woman - hands bound, with a fearful expression on her face - being forcefully held against a wall by a black woman who, with a hostile facial expression, is gripping the white woman's bare breast.
Let me just first say that rape is not sexy. Let me say next that neither are the sexually charged, racist overtones of the photo. It is interesting to me that, despite the fact that the article details the narrator being raped by a man, the accompanying depiction is of two women. Perhaps the editors knew that a rape story intended to titillate the reader would be disturbing enough without the supplementary portrayal being perpetrated by a man, particularly a white woman being raped by a black man. After all, there is a long history in this country of black men being lynched (literally and metaphorically) because of their interactions with white women, so this representation is, apparently, “off limits.”
The fact that the photo kept the racialized dimension of white woman as victim and black woman as attacker is disconcerting, nonetheless, and perpetuates the notion that black women are sexually aggressive and animalistic (visually shown through the black leather that she is wearing). And for those men who aren't turned on by rape (funny how sexual violence can feel like a cold shower), I guess the girl-on-girl action is supposed to heat them up while they're reading. Or maybe we're supposed to be thankful that the editors are 'exposing' the reality of sexual violence within the queer community. Is that it?
Then we get to the story itself, which could easily have been taken directly from the court records of any number of rape trials, save for the two opening paragraphs that attempt to justify the remaining six. The author attempts to assure the reader that she really does want to be raped at knifepoint by her current boyfriend, who has a similar sexual fantasy. (Aside: for most heterosexual women, a guy who fantasizes about rape is a signal that she might should find a different boyfriend.) Then the author writes, "Rape – even consensual rape – remains a huge taboo." First, rape is inherently a non-consensual act. Second, the reason it’s taboo is because sexual violence is one of the most physically, mentally, and emotionally traumatic experiences a woman (or man) can be made to have. Indeed, the author admits that in the aftermath of her "fantasy" she "felt off and edgy" and that "[i]t took me a long time to feel like myself again." She also details how terrified she was during the event, and how much she cried during and after.
I was horrified when the final sentence expressed the author's intention to "try this experience again." This approach begs the question, "why would someone intentionally sexually traumatize herself again and again?" As for Time Out New York, I hope they consider how a story like this can effect women and men in a society, such as ours, where a staggering number of women are victims of attempted or completed violence at the hands of men. Write to them and tell them what you think about their decision to attempt to make rape seem appealing to, and sought out by, women.
Review by M. Van Deven
21 comments:
That is just sick. Thank you for the heads up and I will definitely send them a scathing note.
I actually don't think you're being fair at all.
While I understand your reaction in some ways, are you aware that a fantasy of rape is one of the most common fantasies women have? I have had it myself.
Of course, they're usually not realistic rape scenes being imagined. And bring a fantasy the woman always gets to enter into it willingly and with a man of her choosing. The terror she induced on herself is not, what I think most women classify as part of their rape fantasy. But it still remains common for women to have one.
I would have been shocked if they DIDN'T include such an article!
The author's reaction is similarly honest, and personal. I would think it would make women who have the rape fantasy perhaps consider closer what it is about the encounter they want, what elements turn them on, and which ones would possibly be far more than they could handle, and not what they're really fantasizing about. I haven't read the original article, but I would think that's what she means by she would try it again, that she needs to review what was too much and adjust the scenario.
To me it sounds like a really thought provoking piece, and that almost always a good thing.
Yes, I am aware of that. I do think it's interesting, and wonder if it’s not a by-product of living in a rape culture. Does romanticizing trauma make it more palatable? I think it probably does to a lot of people, and that doesn’t make it any more comfortable to me. I hear (and respect) what you’re saying, and I just don’t agree with you. I do believe that there is a contextual space where these issues can be honestly explored, one where women are respected; I just don’t think Time Out New York is that space. And the other issues that I brought up regarding the coupling of the photo with the article, to me, proves my point. It seems to me that we're in a similar frame of mind as it relates to the issue of rape fantasies, just perhaps in a different space regarding how that issue might be easily exploited and misconstrued in a given popular press magazine.
I find it very troubling that the tone of your review and follow-up suggests that rape fantasies must be wrong, or bad, or the product of trauma, or the by-product of a ubiquitous rape culture. I am not disagreeing that we live in a culture where sexual violence is often used for titillation; what I find troubling is that your comments come dangerously close to suggesting that we should be policing the contents of women’s fantasies. If we begin to level judgment at women for having, acting on, and – heaven forbid – honestly expressing their fantasies (however distasteful some may find them), are we not simply duplicating the power structures that feminist discourse seeks to problematize and overthrow? Is feminism not centrally concerned with women’s full ownership of their bodies, their minds and their desires? Who are we to say that women aren’t allowed a full spectrum of fantasies? Does the story of a man visiting a professional dominatrix meet with a “feminist” approval? And do we find it “empowering” that a woman is able to make a profession out of participating in a man’s fantasies of submission and subjugation? Is it more palatable because she’s in control?
I appreciate and understand that this rape fantasy makes you feel uncomfortable. I also appreciate that you’ve noted the need for further discussion of these types of issues in a space that is respectful for women. However, I think the knee-jerk condemnation you’ve issued here actually denies that space. Further, I’d like to note that there aren’t many feminist spaces that actually wrestle with this topic – and that is far more damaging than anything TONY has done here. Why is feminist discussion afraid of topics that TONY is not?
Note: TONY does not include the rape fantasy among its list of “your fantas[ies]” on the cover of its magazine. I gather that this suggests they full well know the taboo nature of the topic, and have exercised some editorial judgment about advertising their inclusion of it on the newsstand. But I, for one, am glad that it’s included here because it’s exposing a topic that seems too fraught for feminist discussion.
Our politics and conversation should not be this fragile. Discussing rape fantasy in a sophisticated way without resorting to quick judgment and disgust does not undermine the reality of sexual violence or demean women who have survived it. What it does do is allow for the radical notion that women have varied fantasy lives and desires – and grants women the full subjectivity to acknowledge and express those fantasies and desires.
Is The Feminist Review now suggesting that the correct “feminist” thing to do is take up arms against TONY for this issue? I believe that including this call to action is an endorsement of this reviewer’s position on behalf of The Feminist Review, and that disappoints me. Your mission states that you have an understanding that “there are many different feminisms” and you seek to “provide a space where those differences can be represented and explored.” I’m glad that you have provided a space for this reviewer to discuss this issue (and for readers like me to comment), but I am troubled that you’ve included a call to action: you’re suggesting that this is the "correct" action, and by extension, the correct position to take on this article and issue. I believe you will find many feminists who disagree.
certainly i'm not saying that women aren't allowed to choose their own fantasies; what i am saying is that i think there is something to be gained by exploring the reasoning behind where that fantasy comes from, and that my having a negative reaction to it (judgments and all because i am merely a fallible human being) might also be considered. i'm well aware that this area is a very gray and that lines are blurred all over the place. cest la vie. this is exactly what you seem to be saying that you want from a feminist space - the ability to wrestle with a controversial, stigmatized topic - and i wholeheartedly agree with you. so here it is... a feminist space that isn't afraid for folks to have this conversation. let's utilize that.
what i'm also saying is that while i think it *is* worthwhile to explore these fantasies and understand where they're coming from and what functions they serve, i also think that TONY is not, in my estimation, an appropriate place for such exploration, and further, that my reading of this editorial choice is that TONY is exploiting such a 'taboo' fantasy for its own purposes. i don't feel that they have the best interests of women in mind when they decide to print a rape fantasy story in this particular context. i wonder what others think about whether TONY is an appropriate place for this story.
also, something that must not be overlooked is that no one, so far, has addressed the issues of racism and heterosexism that i brought up, particularly regarding the photo accompanying the story. i don't think the conversation about the story can be taken out of its pictorial context.
Feminist Review supports its writers and readers in having and expressing their opinions, and we recognize that some of those opinions might include a 'call for action', as activism is a fundamental part of the feminist movement. We stand firmly in our endorsement of multiple feminist perspectives (we are only who our writers and readers are) and in our commitment to NOT engage in the censorship of unpopular opinions. We have an open standing invitation to anyone interested to become a writer for Feminist Review and do not discriminate based on personal or political ideology. This is evident in the many conflicting opinions that can be found in the reviews published on this blog.
I find it very telling that many of the comments above champion freedom of expression solely for the purpose of being provocative and completely overlook the racist dynamic of the image which accompanied the article. It demonstrates the overall level of thought in the public regarding sex, power and racial stereotypes.
I'm not familiar with TONY, I don't think I've ever actually read it, so I can't make any judgments on that account.
But it does seem to me they're "exploiting" the idea of sexual fantasies just in general with this issue. It also seems to me that they are doing so because they know fantasies are a personal, and possibly controversial, issue. I have to question why you would overall be ok with such an issue, but be disgusted when you found such a personal account which was controversial to you.
I'm not trying to question at all your general distaste with the writing, or this woman's fantasy, or the overall way it seemed the magazine was selling that fantasy. Since I haven't seen the actual article, I can't comment on that part. But in dealing with the personal, it seems to me you will inherently find something you are just NOT into, and I don't really see the need for a call to action against the publication when that is in fact found.
i'm not new to the idea of sexuality, particularly women's sexuality, being exploited so i didn't feel *as* moved to respond to it. i do agree with you, though, in that i think the entire issue is exploitative and fraught with sexist, classist, fat phobic, heterosexist norms. it's an issue of my level of expectation. i expect TONY to have these shortcomings and go into it with that impression. what was unexpected was (what i see as) its exploitation and promotion the rape of women by men.
you can read the story (and other exerpts from this issue) on the TONY website. it doesn't, however, feature the photo that i've described.
and it seems we will just have to agree to disagree about my call to action (what's the use in having an opinion if you keep it to yourself), as well as our personal reactions to rape fantasies.
"Consensual rape"? I wasn't aware that existed.
Thanks for this review.
That's the part I have problem with. Consensual rape fantasy, fine; consensual rape? And rape as a "taboo?" Rape isn't taboo, it's evil (bearing in mind she's distinguishing it from the consensual thing she did with her boyfriend); taboo is a word you use for something that's frowned on but not really all that bad.
For this reason I think I side with Mandy.
One of my primary concerns with this story (and the use of the term “consensual rape”) is that it blurs the linguistic line of what "rape" is, which is problematic in that “rape” is (as I stated before), by definition, a non-consensual sexual act, and the term “rape” is consistently undermined in this regard. If she's over the legal limit in terms of alcohol consumption... if she doesn't explicitly say 'no'... if she's married to him... if she's had sex with him before... if she was engaging with other sexual acts consensually... the list goes on. This type of undermining and lack of clarity leaves so much room in our society to downplay and deny when women are raped. And we see this happen over and over again.
Excellent review, and follow-up responses
I am not going to address the heterosexist and racist issues in this article as I have not read it and do not have the context for the accompanying pictoral. (I'll take your word for it.)
I do think it is wrong of us to presume to censor anyone's fantasies because we personally find them abhorrent. Personally I find the idea of a foot fetish abhorrent, as well as scatological fantasies. I don't understand them, but I will not judge them.
To discuss this I think we need to consider what rape is about. On every feminist blog I read it eventually comes up that rape is about control, and dominance, not necessarily about sex.
Taking this tack, it follows that rape fantasies are really about loss of control for some individuals. Anyone remotely familiar with the ideas behind bondage games understands that many people desire to be controlled during sex. (Both male and female) It easily follows that this type of fantasy is just a manifestation of that desire.
On the other hand, perhaps this kind of fantasy allows the woman to feel that she *is* in control, since she's supposed to be able to have the power to stop it by using an agreed upon word (which the author of this story did) or gesture. This is something that people use enacting S&M/B&D fantasies.
Related, I'm reminded of something I read once by a woman who was recounting some of her more memorable experiences and thoughts growing up, and she said that she remembered wishing that she would be raped so she could just get it over with. That kind of resignation to the unwavering eventuality of sexual violence is a terrible thing to feel, and I'm sure most women have felt something like that in their lives. I wonder if the fantasy of sexual violence is related to these kinds of thoughts about the certainty of rape.
TONY is trying to create a sexually titillating magazine article that will sell issues and and advertising. Obviously they are not invested in exploring the problematics of rape, consent, fantasy, etc. Everyone has a right to sexual fantasies, and according to most research and studies rape fantasies are almost ubiquitous amongst women. That has nothing to do with wanting to be raped. The article's author (a woman) was irresponsible in not drawing a clear line between actual rape (non-consentual sex) and rape or loss-of-control fantasies. The magazine made a poor decision to use that particular racially-charged imagery. I am sure they did this because the alternative (to show a woman being coerced by a man of any race) seemed even more of a risk.
So yes. TONY = lame and not very smart. But that is to be expected. Rape = very bad. Rape fantasies = normal and okay. Acting out rape fantasies = okay between consenting adults who know how to manage domination play in a safe and sane manner?
I think what Mandy is saying is important at its core, beyond some other arguments here: we live in a rape culture, which we can't (or at least shouldn't) forget in our day to day media consumption. I'm very pleased that this review tore into something we see daily, to varying degrees and mostly nonconsensually. This is what I call getting it done.
Such knee jerk anti-sex sentiment... why when a mainstream magazine creates a dialogue around real and common sexual fantasies is your first reaction NOT to engage them in the dialogue, but to try to silence them with a boycott, stop reading their discourse, etc?
I can't speak to the lesbian photographic turn... but I think if it had been a black woman being "raped" by a white woman, you would still have had a negative reaction and accused them of stereotyping (e.g. encouraging violence against women of color.) In fact, I can't imagine any combination of bodies in that photo that you wouldn't have found offensive.
You have no idea what their editorial motives were for raising the issue, but a letter to the editor that would be read by TONY'S readers would be a more appropriate response and the optimal forum for debate.
Your reaction to take arms against a magazine for discussing fantasies that you don't personally share is indicative of the worst sort of Mackinnon, Dworkin, Farley-esque sex hating feminism.
I'll buy an extra copy this week to compensate for your lost busines.
I believe you are confusing “anti-sex” with anti-rape. I don’t take issue with sexual fantasies, in general; that’s apparent from my lack of commentary on the other erotic fantasy stories published in this issue of TONY, as well as my expressed enjoyment of other aspects of this issue. Clearly the intention with this comment is your own knee-jerk reaction to this review or a means to attempt to make me back off of my argument. The latter happening is unlikely. And yes, it is problematic to promote violence against women in a pictorial way, regardless of who that violence is being perpetrated against. What is of particular interest in this context, though, is what the picture actually *does* depict, and what those depictions might say through a gendered and racialized lens, not what it *doesn’t* or *might* depict.
It’s a safe bet to assume that a popular press magazine’s *primary* “motive” is to make money, and making money off of the fantasy of raping women is unacceptable. Perhaps you prefer to simply write a letter to the editor (which I’ve done as well), and perhaps I prefer to take another approach. It appears that this is a good time to say, “Yeah for democracy!”
I am Tess Danesi, the author of the rape fantasy piece in Time Out NY.
I have several points I’d like to make, the first being about the very strong exception you took to that photograph. That photo was not meant to accompany my piece at all, but in fact, was the illustration for the “I want a…Pro Domme” fantasy, where the writer describes her visit to professional dominatrix. I don’t even think the domme in the photo is black, she looks more Latina or olive skinned to me. I think what happened when you saw that photo is that your own preconceptions kicked in and you didn’t take the time to read the next article on that page. I don’t see a race issue rearing its ugly head here, just a fairly standard depiction of the fantasy thigh high boot clad, black latex wearing dominant woman. I cannot for the life of me figure out how you extrapolated that it shows black woman as animalistic and sexually aggressive, in fact I am not even aware that this is a notion in anyway prevalent in today’s society.
You do make one point I agree with. If there was one thing I would change in that article it was the sentence you referenced to about rape, even consensual rape being taboo. Rape is much more than taboo, it is a crime of violence and rage with devastating consequences for the victim. Consensual rape, a term I am not altogether thrilled with, is an entirely different thing. For whatever reasons, rape fantasies are common among women. Many who, for fear of similar reactions to yours, cannot or will not talk about them. Whether a woman chooses to act on this particular fantasy is wholly up to her own discretion.
Your suggestion that I spend time considering why I have this particular fantasy is offensive. I have always been fueled by adrenaline. Some people take this desire for a rush and go skydiving, mountain climbing or base jumping. The rush I get from power play is much the same. For my part, I am an almost fifty-year old woman with a successful career, a child, and a trauma free childhood. My parents loved and love me and I was constantly told that I could be whatever I wanted to be. I was never abused by parents, boyfriends or anyone else. The earliest memories of masturbation I have were accompanied by fantasies of being forced. I feel that by making my fantasy come true in a controlled environment, one where I not only had a “safe word,” but when I uttered it, the action stopped immediately, I took charge of my sexuality. And that is empowering.
Through the years, my eyes have been opened to all forms of kink, some which I previously thought to be too much. Needle play, while not for me, is something I can now understand and I don’t find the people who practice it to be any less normal or sane than the rest of us.
I do not advocate this for anyone else; it is merely my personal experience. The tears I cried, while my lover cradled me in his arms, were the most cathartic thing I have ever experienced. So yes, I do hope to repeat it, in the same safe, sane and consensual spirit in which it was done the first time.
Thank you to the many commenters here who understood that this was my personal fantasy, more importantly, that women who have this fantasy aren’t feeling anything bad or wrong, to Time Out for putting out what they had to know would be a controversial issue and for promoting the discussion and acceptance of all sorts of sexual fantasies, and finally, that I do not seek to minimize the horror that is rape.
Post a Comment