Thursday, February 3, 2011

Re-Defining Rape

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Rape Victim Abortion Funding
Daily Show Full EpisodesPolitical Humor & Satire Blog</a>The Daily Show on Facebook
I find satire to be one of the best ways to point out absurdities.

Copious amounts of text on the internet and in print have been used to criticize H.R. 3., The "No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act", so I won't rehash all of that here. All I've been saying, this entire time, is that the very fact that any elected official in this country would say out loud or write on paper the absurd "distinction" between "forcible rape" and "non-forcible rape" makes me so incensed I can hardly see straight. After a huge outpouring of criticism, they are changing the language, but the fact that they even went there in the first place is unbelievable and makes me seriously concerned as to the lack of understanding they have related to sexual assault. *Trigger warning for the next rant*


How hard is that to understand? You don't have to say "forcible rape". That's repetitive and ignorant, quite frankly. Rape, in and of itself, is a force of a sexual act on another human being against their will. There is no need to say "forcible rape". Rape, in and of itself, is plenty violating enough on its own. It doesn't need to involve a broken face, or dislocated shoulders, or bloody lips or creeping strangers breaking into the house to be about FORCE. And I could truly, really, honestly care less about why they are trying to do this. If they are truly, really, honestly doing this out of respect for life due to their objection to abortion, then they need to find another way to do this that doesn't involve dis-respecting women** by telling them that rapes only count if the violence is horrific enough on top of the inherent violation of rape.

The bottom line is that it is a slap in the face to rape victims to say that their rape doesn't count unless it was accompanied by an arbitrarily decided sufficient amount of additional physical violence. Rape is a violation and a crime regardless. Women do not need to be violently beaten and broken, in addition to being raped, for it to "count"- a lack of consent equals rape, period. I realize the sponsors of this bill are trying to hedge and say it is just in relation to taxpayer funded abortions, and as I said they have changed the bit about "forcible rape", but the language that they have been using speaks volumes about their general ideas about rape, violence against women, and helping rape victims, and it points out a glaring lack of understanding and compassion in all of those areas.

There are 173 sponsors of the bill- 9 Democrats, and 164 Republicans. You can find more information about it at You can get information there on what representatives are sponsoring the bill, and if you would like you can write to your representative.

**Men are raped too, but as the bill is tied directly to tax payers funding abortions in cases of rape or incest I'm not addressing male victims of rape in this instance.


  1. AMEN.

    This makes me mad mad mad.

  2. This whole thing is just so ridiculous. What right do they have to go insinuating that date rape is any less of rape than any other rape situation? Disgusting.

  3. This is terrible.
    I'm pro-life, and I still hate this. I hate it because it gives the illusion that there is still some "choice" when women aren't violently raped. Like, they should have known better to wear that outfit, or go out with that guy. Are we really regressing as a society that we would start blaming women for rape?

  4. Agree on all counts my friends. This is sad and frustrating.