Hugo Schwyzer, folks. This is an essay in which a man tells his readers about how he willfully and repeatedly disregarded his partner’s negative responses to his sexual advances, and then insists that she played an equal part in the situation because she didn’t explicitly say no.
What he refers to here as “[w]hat Katie and I had conspired to allow to happen” is him having sex with her in spite of her giving clear non-verbal indications that she didn’t want sex. On multiple occasions. Don’t you just love that vague passiveness (“allowed to happen”)? His use of the term “conspired” is particularly disgusting, since it suggests a consensus between the two of them that obviously didn’t exist. The issue is precisely that his girlfriend (and I really, really hope that her real name isn’t “Katie”) did not feel she could tell him what she wanted and didn’t want. That’s the exact opposite of a conspiracy, which requires an agreement between at least two people.
Hugo first invokes and then distances himself from the term “accidental rape”; he doesn’t describe himself as an “accidental rapist,” he merely says that he “fe[lt] very much like” one. And the fact that he will admit to feeling this way, even though he totally doesn’t need to because it was her fault too, is supposed to make us think he’s a super good guy, especially since he’s been super careful ever since this incident to never ever allow a thing like this to happen again (except for all those times he slept with his students, and the time he tried to murder another girlfriend, but whatever).
It’s not fair to expect men to read minds, or even to perfectly intuit subtle body language. As I tell the teens with whom I work, a precondition for being ready for a sexual relationship is having the courage to say a firm “No” to the people you love.
The silence and unresponsiveness of a partner are not “subtle” to anyone who values their partner’s pleasure. And surely paying some goddamn attention to your partner ought to be at least as important a ”precondition for being ready for a sexual relationship” as “having the courage to say a firm ‘No.’” And even though he uses the gender-neutral “teens” in this passage, let’s be clear that this is a gendered issue. The people who most often find themselves in unwanted sexual situations and still remain hesitant to “say a firm ‘No’” are female; the people who most often benefit from this hesitation are male.
The reason it’s important for women to be able “to say a firm ‘no’” is that so many men refuse to acknowledge any refusal short of that from their female partners. They do so because they’ve been taught that this is acceptable behavior by people like Hugo, in articles exactly like this one. The reason it takes “courage” for women to say “no” is that so many men — including Hugo, here and elsewhere — actively reinforce cultural messages about how much it hurts men when women reject them (just read any of the many passages in this article about how bad Hugo felt when Katie told him what had been going on). Women respond by trying to refuse unwanted sex without saying “no,” because they don’t want to be “cruel” to their partners. Men respond to this by ignoring women’s refusals, because they’re not saying the word “no.” Everything about this dynamic contributes to making it easy for men to ignore women’s signals and hard for women to make their signals loud enough to get past men’s determination to ignore them.
It’s a major problem that so many women have so much hesitation about saying the word “no” in sexual situations. But the source of that problem is the overall dynamic, which originates in men’s behavior, and a more appropriate way to address it — especially for a man writing to men on a men’s website — would be to address the fact that not enough men pay attention to the ways women are already saying “no.” As valuable as explicit communication can be, it’s not the only clear way to communicate, which Hugo even admits:
Katie had seemed so passionate when we’d been making out, but then gotten very quiet once all our clothes were off. I’d told myself she wanted to have one ear cocked for the sound of a key in the door. I hadn’t considered—or hadn’t wanted to consider—the more obvious possibility: she was trying to tell me that she didn’t want to have sex.
That was indeed “the more obvious possibility,” and he even admits the possibility that his refusal to see it was willful. And yet:
[O]n those not-infrequent occasions when she wanted to make out and “fool around” but nothing more—she had no vocabulary for that. And over and over again, I took her reticence as a sign to “try harder” rather than to slow down. The blame for that rested on both of us.
Right. She “had no vocabulary” for saying no, which is why she gave him signs of refusal that just a few paragraphs earlier he called “obvious.” And his refusal to read them is her fault, too, because she didn’t explicitly say the word “no.” Never mind that he also didn’t explicitly ask her what she wanted — apparently she’s the only one who had any responsibility to make things clear verbally.
No, this was not “accidental rape.” As for whether it should be called “rape,” Katie is the only one who can determine that; but whatever you call it, it was clearly a violation, and it was just as clearly not accidental. Even if it was unconscious on Hugo’s part (and given his history and the way he tells this story, I have my doubts about that), unconscious is not the same as accidental.
There’s a reason Hugo feels it’s perfectly reasonable to assign at least half the blame for this situation to his girlfriend because she didn’t say the word “no.” It’s because the default view of heterosexual relations is that men always want sex and are always going to try to get it, and they can’t be expected to care how their female partners feel about it unless they’re forced to. Therefore if women don’t want sex, it’s completely their responsibility to make that absolutely 100% explicitly clear in so many words, at the appropriate time, because expecting men to initiate a discussion about sex is patently ridiculous, because why would they do that when they know they can just go ahead and try for it and at least some of the time end up in a situation in which the woman doesn’t feel comfortable explicitly saying “no” because she’s been trained her whole life to think that others’ needs are more important than her own, and that refusing sex is crippling to the male ego, etc. etc., and therefore the man can retain plausible deniability because even though she made it clear she wasn’t into it, she never said the word “no.”
I remember reading this ages ago and thinking it was insightful. Re-reading it now, what angers and sickens me is how good it is at playing up the guilt most people - particularly women - are made to feel about the ways in which we communicate our consent or lack of consent, in order to excuse predatory behavior.
I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve had a sexual partner violate some physical boundary of mine because I “didn’t communicate clearly enough”, I wasn’t vocal about it and it wasn’t a big deal anyway, not like rape-rape, more like something accidental, even if it was triggering or upsetting, and the other person was a great person who would have stopped if I’d just said no, and blah blah blah. The fact is, saying no, communicating a lack of consent, is not something we’re taught do, let alone to feel okay doing. Especially as a survivor of sexual assault, it has in the past often come down to “well I don’t want to seem like damaged goods” or some other such internalized bullshit. Women, survivors, etc, are told constantly to feel ashamed of even HAVING boundaries. And so we learn subtle ways of communicating things like “stop” and “go” - body language, enthusiasm, non-verbal cues. And when someone disregards those cues, we’re told that it’s because those cues weren’t enough.
First we’re told, “don’t say no, let them down easy”; then we’re told “well, you can’t be upset, because you didn’t say no, you tried to let them down easy, so it was really just as much your own fault as theirs”.
And this is something I thought I’d worked through years ago, that I thought I was solid on. It’s kind of shaking me up to realize that when I read this bullshit, I DIDN’T EVEN RECOGNIZE IT FOR THE BULLSHIT IT WAS. I thought, “oh yeah, that sounds legit”, because apparently I still have that much internalized victim-blaming crap in my head.
Does he still “work with teens”? I hope to G-d not.
And this commentary is excellent.
And funny how I’ve been with men who had no fucking problem telling when I was uncomfortable or not into it without my having to shout it in their face. Only people like Hugo, i.e. narcissistic abusers, have these issues with boundaries. And then feel the need to share their misogyny with the world in a series of onanistic reflections on how ~badly~ they felt.
isn’t he about to go on a ~speaking tour~ through high schools?
i’ve read this article before, but i want it here with all the commentary.
so is the POINT of the good men project that they are all ~*reformed*~ rapists? because they all kind of sound like rapists.
i think their definition of “good men” is “yeah we’re misogynists who assault and hate women, but we’re not violent about it!”
- sneaky-dickgrabber likes this
- keshik reblogged this from fucknohugoschwyzer
- sadmuffinss likes this
- sufficiently-accurate likes this
- silentaj reblogged this from speakofmeinpresenttense
- silentaj likes this
- speakofmeinpresenttense reblogged this from wantthepharaohs
- aeryllou reblogged this from elizabitchez
- jen-the-pariah reblogged this from ionsfolly
- zazikelofchaos reblogged this from ionsfolly
- sushifer likes this
- nerozane likes this
- ilikelookingatnakedmen likes this
- absurditiesandspoons likes this
- pandamonium411 likes this
- janewaytookmycoffeecastle reblogged this from latinumcatlady
- equalityeducation reblogged this from elizabitchez
- lillinox likes this
- jen-the-pariah likes this
- latinumcatlady reblogged this from fucknohugoschwyzer
- acaciakitty reblogged this from ionsfolly
- alex-spooks-aeryn reblogged this from ouyangdan
- alex-spooks-aeryn likes this
- zhenarator likes this
- consistentlyaverage likes this
- solitae likes this
- jingleurgil likes this
- littlevisibledelight likes this
- ladywinde likes this
- elizabitchez reblogged this from ouyangdan
- kamidoodles likes this
- ionsfolly reblogged this from wantthepharaohs
- ouyangdan reblogged this from wantthepharaohs
- ouyangdan likes this
- tartmuse reblogged this from wantthepharaohs
- wantthepharaohs reblogged this from fucknohugoschwyzer
- onespeckonastar likes this
- courfeyrockets likes this
- aimsme reblogged this from acafenfan
- theplanetmidnight reblogged this from acafenfan
- acafenfan reblogged this from jackpendragon
- dea-thgrips reblogged this from leahxvx
- fun-gal-infection reblogged this from basedmcgoats
- myselfandmyother likes this
- heroin-e reblogged this from genderbitch
- partiallystarsmostlyvoid likes this
- sex-with-ducks reblogged this from lightspeedsound
- trulyanonymously reblogged this from hughinmunin
- relevancylost reblogged this from asleepinthestorm