Day of Blogs

If there’s one thing that pisses me the fuck off, it’s watching the media use ridiculously apologetic and incorrect euphemisms for rape.  Like here:

The teenage victim of a rapist who took advantage of her after she passed out drunk was still unconscious when taken to hospital.

That fact was revealed yesterday in a court exhibit presented to Justice Sandy Park in the prosecution of Calgarian Amir Nawaz.

In the agreed statement of facts, Nawaz admitted taking advantage of a 15-year-old girl after she passed out at a southeast residence.

[. . .]

In the statement, drafted by Crown prosecutor Grant Schorn and signed by Nawaz and his lawyer, Jack Kelly, the city man admitted having sex with the victim.

It said the girl, who can’t be identified, smoked an entire marijuana cigarette and poured herself two half-glasses of booze before becoming ill, losing consciousness and falling to the floor.

The victim, who had never consumed marijuana or alcohol before, was carried to an upstairs bedroom and placed on a bed, the statement said.

Concerned about her friend’s well-being, the other girl went upstairs 15 minutes later and caught Nawaz in the act.

“(The victim) was unconscious and lying on the bed, naked from the waist down,” the agreed statement said.

“Nawaz had his pants off and was having sex with the unconscious (teen).”

Now, let us look at the facts.  The word “rape” is used in the headline — the only time it’s used.  The rapist has pleaded guilty.  The article states that the victim was unconscious at the time of the assault.

Based on these facts, there is absolutely no reason in the world to call this anything other than rape.  It was rape.  Of course, I’m used to seeing descriptions of someone “having sex” with an unconscious victim.  Even though the very nature of the unconsciousness makes consent impossible.

But this “taking advantage of” line isn’t one you normally see in newspapers.  You hear it on TV, you see it in every day conversation.  I’ve heard women who have been raped refer to the assault in this way: “he took advantage of me.”  I of course don’t get angry with survivors for using this language, but I do get furious with the culture that promotes it, encourages it, and rewards it by not slut-shaming the woman who was “taken advantage of” but blasting the woman who was “raped.”

Rape is not “taking advantage.”  When a person “takes advantage” of a situation, this is meant in one of two ways: either the person taking advantage is making an intelligent and shrewd decision (i.e. taking advantage of one’s connections to land a good job) or one that is shitty and morally reprehensible, but hardly criminal (i.e. taking advantage of one’s knowledge of another’s affair to land a good job).  Rape falls under neither of these categories.  Rape is of course shitty and morally reprehensible, but to stop there at a *tsk* is to let the rapist off far too easy.  Rape is violence, indeed one of the worst kinds a person can commit.

I’ve always felt like there was a bit of winking connotation to “take advantage” as well.  There’s not only a subtle apology, there’s also a “we all might if in the same situation” aspect to it.  After all, we all want to use situations in a way that will benefit us — and we’ve all had our cold and calculating moments.

And I think this is the reason behind it — to portray this kind of rape, the kind that involves a victim who is particularly vulnerable emotionally, mentally, or physically as not really that bad.  You know, it’s bad, but not that bad.  Because she was there, after all.  Am I the only one who sees a “come on fellas, now if you saw her laying down on that bed, you wanna tell me that you wouldn’t . . .” subtext to this language?  Because it makes me want to puke.

Image via Hoyden About Town through Creative Commons Attribution License.