For Dandelion
We both seem to want the same thing (a culture where women are free to live without being raped in any way shape or form, mental, physical, emotional or spiritual). Yet we have not really come to much understanding. Where has this conversation led us, other than further into our own ideas of having the right perspective?
I want to clarify some of my ideas on the attitude of victimization.
I’m certainly not proposing that choosing not to have an attitude of victimization will guarantee that I will never be raped. And I think it’s absolutely natural to not want to be raped and to live in a way that minimizes that happening. For me, living in a way that minimizes that happening means choosing not so see myself as a victim. This isn’t just philosophy, it’s basic physics. I have noticed how the victim mentality actually very literally draws and attracts predatory energy (and therefore contributes to it) because of the power that is given to the predator in fearing it so. Exreme aversion is a power vaccuum that screams to be filled, just as intense clinging is a guarantee not to get what one so very much wants.
When I lived in an intentional community, I watched with fascination as one member whose identity was very much that of a victim after years of living with an alcoholic was given opportunity after oppurtunity to wake up and stop identifying in this way. The more she held on to this identity, the more situations arose in which she was shooken up, or “attacked.” Some of the attacks were total hallucinations on her part, merely situations that she chose to perceive as attacks because she so required being attacked to have her identity.
I think that an extreme hatred of culture is a similar transference of personal power onto something which is conveniently abstract and uncontrollable. I say conveniently becuase if we believe so firmly that that which we hate is not us, then we can more easily depend on the despicableness of that thing to know who we are (we are “not that”).
Just my opinions here.
I also have a male friend who was so traumatized from being beaten up in school as a child that he became a martial artist. Considering some of the things he has gone through, he has come out remarkably positive, but the majority of his conversation is centered around issues of fighting, combat, war, knives, women he knows who have been raped. His entire consciousness is dominated by this one theme. It’s not that it is unnatural to be concerned with self-preservation if you’ve been attacked. But if you let if fully define who you are, you have given it a lot of power, since it can consume most of your attention and make you hallucinate, believing that there is harm in situations where there might not be. It is sad to watch.
As for the part about being too compassionate, well . … . compassion is compassion. There’s no 50% compassion. Either you are empathetic or you aren’t. I’m only intellectually empathetic at this point, but it’s a start. Empathizing doesn’t mean a support of unacceptable behavior. It means acknowledging that a human being is suffering. If we were to look within the heart of a rapist, I am sure we would see a suffering human being. A suffering human being is a suffering human being is a suffering human being. Because that person has caused another to suffer doesn’t make their suffering less real. It may make it less valid in some people’s eyes, but I doubt that ignoring the source of the perpetrator’s suffering will help us to really heal our cultural wounds. Putting a perpetrator in a lesser-than box is certainly easier though - cleaner and more efficient, and requiring less of a demand on our own hearts.