Hey Dick! [trigger warning: rape]

Richard Dawkins continues his descent into utter assholery.

The Tweets he is referring to can be found here.

So now Dawkins is claiming that whether or not someone can remember being raped has bearing on whether or not they were actually raped.  As if not being able to remember being raped somehow means a victim wasn’t raped.  I think we’ll call this the Cee-lo Green defense.

The singer Cee Lo Green has discussed a court case in which he pleaded no contest to supplying ecstasy to a woman in a series of tweets, including one that read : “People who have really been raped REMEMBER!!!”

The woman had claimed that she had no memory of the period between dining with Green at a sushi restaurant in 2012 and waking up naked in the singer’s bed.

Green’s lawyer argued that Green, 40, and the woman had “consensual relations”. No rape charges were filed due to lack of evidence.

Both Cee-lo Green and Richard Dawkins fail to understand (or they do understand but simply don’t care) that if there is no consent to sex, it is rape. If a woman says “I can’t remember what happened”, that doesn’t mean no rape happened. In fact, if she says that, you’ve likely crossed a line, bc you had sex with someone who was possibly impaired.  If your thought processes are impaired, you can’t give informed consent. Without informed consent, IT. IS. RAPE.

{advertisement}
Hey Dick! [trigger warning: rape]
{advertisement}
The Orbit is still fighting a SLAPP suit! Help defend freedom of speech, click here to find out more and donate!

4 thoughts on “Hey Dick! [trigger warning: rape]

  1. 1

    Man, this bugs me. I know what it is that’s bothering me too, it is the idea that default for sex is always an implied “yes”. And that any time sex happens without memory it must have been a yes.
    That’s yet another face of compulsory sexuality, and that idea should be composted like the rotten egg it is.

    It’s people buying in the the idea that if you’re drunk enough, you would have “said yes”. Ignoring that it’s, at best, coercion.

  2. 2

    Yeah. The default for sex, according to some, is yes. I think that’s in large part because we’re socialized to think others owe us their bodies and or their time. It wasn’t until the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that bodily autonomy became a human right. The idea that each human being is, basically sovereign ruler of their body, and no one has the right to do anything to them without their consent…that’s an incredibly new concept in the history of humanity. Prior to (and even in the years after), people weren’t the owners of their bodies. Women could be raped and beaten. Children could be given away, sold, or beaten. Black people, Hispanic people, First Nations people, Aboriginal people…they were all treated as less than human. Bought. Sold. Beaten. For much of human history, those in power have treated others as if they have a right to the use of their bodies. This continues today, in big ways and small. That’s why it’s incredibly essential, IMHO, to raise children to understand that even the simple things involving others require consent. Teach children that if you want to hug someone-ASK. Teach children that if they don’t like grandma or grandpa squeezing their cheeks, to say something. Raise children with an understanding that no one has the right to use their bodies against their wishes, and that they also do not have the right to use others’ bodies against their wishes. Teach them the value and importance of bodily autonomy, so that when they get older, this lesson is drilled into their heads. Teach them that dominance over another human is never wrong, and teach them why. If they can come to understand and comprehend that, we’ll see a lot less rape happening in the world

  3. 3

    I pretty sure you meant that dominance over another is always wrong — And yes, I agree. If we can teach our kids (and other adults too) about bodily autonomy it is better for everyone.

    It stresses me out because I have ‘another horse’ entirely as to the question of if no should be the default. That is, I want to stand up for those who never want sex. Those for whom the answer is always no, and make sure the world knows they exist and that their no is respected.
    And I think maybe having no as the default answer to sex might make it easier for their no to be accepted.

    If one of those people didn’t remember, there’s no way they would have said yes. There the Dawk’s argument truly breaks down completely, because it it can’t accommodate “ifs”.
    But of course it can’t, because without consent being dividing line all other mentions of yes/no about sex become illogical.
    It makes me sad that someone as prominent an intellectual as the Dawk, can’t seem to grasp it.

    Oh well, I guess the little guys like you and I will just have to try to tell the world how darned important consent is, eh?

  4. 4

    Crap. I failed to edit that one. You’re right, I did mean “dominance over another is always wrong”.

    WRT to people who don’t want to have sex, this is yet another area that I found myself completely shifting my views on over the years. Like many people, I used to shame those who hadn’t had sex. Looking back on how I used to be, I want to smack my old self. As if there’s something wrong with someone, some sort of character defect with them, if they have never had sex, or have no desire. I think I had to fully accept that not only is no one else like me, and no one else thinks exactly like me, but I also had to realize that my experiences only shape me. They don’t shape others. I cannot and should not expect others to approach situations in life exactly as I do, and therefore, I should respect the differing experiences of others. I should understand that those experiences (obviously barring any that adversely affect others) are as valid as my own. It was part of learning to recognize my privilege (an ongoing process).

    And yes, people like you and I can and will continue to do our part.

Comments are closed.