Thursday 11 December 2014

The Lanchester Review: America's Real Rape Culture


Fair Warning.

This article is not about Rolling Stone or the University of Virginia. Nor is this an anti-American piece; one could say plenty about the United Kingdom.

The rape culture in the United States consists in the staggering prevalence of even quite casual references to heterosexual and homosexual rape as a way of referring to domination and humiliation.

And, for that matter, in the staggering prevalence of even quite casual references to domination and humiliation themselves. Why do so many things have to be framed in those terms?

A sports team, even a school one, only has to beat its rival for it to be said to have "raped" the other side. 

Whether playfully or menacingly, a heterosexual man will state his intention to make another heterosexual man his "bitch", which sounds hilariously gay to British ears.

Over here, calling a man a "bitch" is done only by the kind of men who refer to each other as "she", a small minority even of gay men, high camp to the point of social and cultural separatism.

"Faggot" means something quite different, and now rather obscure, in Britain, where it otherwise still sounds American on the rare occasions that it is heard. But it is an insult of first resort in America.

It is true that "bugger" and "sod" are treated as mild, and even quaintly old-fashioned, profanities on these shores, scarcely more serious than "bloody". But that is because their use is entirely divorced from their original meaning, of which, in the case of "sod", most people are probably unaware.

Americans even say "f**k you" instead of "f**k off". They manage to shock even those of us who are quite hardened to these things, by addressing the c-word to women, something that almost never happens in Britain.

Indeed, that word seems to be addressed mostly to women, such that its use against men, which is nearly its only use among Britons, would presumably sound odd to Americans.

Most bizarre of all to the rest of us are those invitations to suck the genitals of men or boys who, like those to whom they issue those invitations, are assumed to be of the most unimpeachable heterosexuality.

Lurking behind all of this, and not very far in its background, is the horrific level of prison rape in the United States.

That is part of the general harshness of the American penal system, and it is connected to the very lengthy sentences that are handed down there as a matter of routine.

Prison rape happens in Britain, but it is far less common, and it is certainly not something that mainstream entertainment regularly uses for comedic purposes.

Fear of being raped seems to be seen as part of the deterrent value of the American system of mass incarceration, itself so integral to American economic and political activity that its subcultural features are prominent as points of normal cultural reference.

And there would be no fear of being raped in prison unless it were known as a day-to-day fact of life that men truly were being raped in prison.

Meanwhile, other, although not unrelated, forces compel that huge numbers of people, especially men, and most especially young and non-white men (categories that are in any case depicted in hypersexualised ways), have to spend often prolonged periods inside that system.

As we saw first at Abu Ghraib and now also in the Senate report on torture, the American Republic has taken to using sexual violence as an official weapon of war, in at least the latter case with full approval all the way up to the very top of the Bush Administration.

That Administration was not the first, of either party, to have been steeped in fraternities and related organisations, the likes of Skull and Bones, that are as baffling when seen from this side of the Atlantic as is the not unconnected system of legacy admissions.

The strongly sexual aspect of that kind of thing, even if not actually violent or non-consensual, is nevertheless as coercive and exploitative of the men involved as it is of the women.

Being rich and, although Americans would delude themselves and dispute the term, being posh do not make one any older than one is in actual fact.

Still only in their late teens and desperate to fit in, as well as often having a family tradition to keep up, these men are told that this is how to do so.

Products of what in itself is this wildly atypical milieu wield vastly disproportionate economic, social, cultural and political influence.

Thus is rape really quite central to even humdrum American cultural expression.

If there is in fact a huge incidence of sexual violence in general in the United States, then that is hardly surprising.

8 comments:

  1. Very long sentences even when nobody died or anything came to Britain when the Great Train Robbers got 20 and 25 years. At that stage, the engine driver was still alive.

    Few murderers or rapists would have got that then, even though the death penalty was still in place. But they had not made the Establishment look silly. After that robbers started going tooled up because they ran the risk of as heavy a sentence if they shot a man as if they were unarmed.

    All while hanging was still on the books, it had nothing to do with abolishing that, it pre-dated it by several years. The rest is history, armed robbery exploded in the UK.

    I have a feeling I first read about that on here.

    Great post, by the way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you.

      You very well might have done. It has been on here in the past.

      The huge increase in the use of firearms in the course of crimes such as robbery predated the abolition of capital punishment, and began with the sentences handed down to the Great Train Robbers, who had not at that point killed anyone, or else they would have been charged with murder or manslaughter.

      I regard it as a considerable scandal that none of them ever was later charged with manslaughter, at least. Had their actions caused the death of someone grander than the driver of a train, then they undoubtedly would have been so charged and prosecuted.

      But no one had died at the time of their original trial and sentencing, after which it was universally remarked, while the death penalty was still in place, that "you wouldn't have got that for murder".

      As a result, all manner of villains started to go on jobs tooled up as a matter of course.

      The abolition of the death penalty did not cause that.

      Delete
  2. Great post. This is all too true and I have seen this sort of thinking increase tremendously in last ten years.

    Unfortunately, prison rape jokes and rape jokes in general are very common subjects of jest in the U.S. Many Americans don’t care about issues like prison rape because they see it as part of the punishment aspect of the criminal justice system. Basically, it is seen as a component of your sentence. It is all very brutish and depressing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are very kind, John. Good to hear from you. It's been too long.

      Delete
  3. Long sentences for murderers is the only alternative to capital punishment. What else is the alternative sentence for convicted killers?
    If you people ever tried thinking, it would hurt.

    Those who oppose long prison sentences can't seriously oppose capital punishment.

    There is only one alternative: early release for murderers,to then kill again.

    29 killers released early have killed again in the last decade in Britain. Conversely, 90 lifers have committed suicide rather than see out their days in jail.

    Those who abolished capital punishment have the blood of them all on their hands.

    Many more have been gunned down by our newly armed police (in a country that once prided itself on the fact it's "policemen carry no revolvers" as Orwell wrote).

    The increase in armed crime (and the resultant creation of an armed police) coincided precisely with the abolition of capital punishment and not just its final abolition.

    When it was briefly abolished in 1948 and again in 57 armed crime instantly rose, only to fall as soon as it was reinstated.

    The year Roy Jenkins abolished it (yes David Lindsay is taking the side of Roy Jenkins on this issue; think about that) three policemen were shot and killed and armed crime rose sharply as it has ever since.

    And the people who did that call themselves "humane".

    It's positively embarrassing.

    ReplyDelete