This is also an old post – the draft has been sitting around waiting for proof-reading since June – but in it I address many of the specifically sexual issues exposed by revelations about Trump. I have edited this now rather more substantially than the previous piece, while keeping a lot of the overall structure. But this still isn’t really about Trump, because Trump is a symptom, not the problem itself. Trump is a disastrous reflection of what a lot of us Americans have been practicing unnoticed all along now.
The main fact I wish to address is this: rape is bad. A rapist is a violent criminal and sinner. It seems odd – almost vulgar – to state the case so plainly: not because there is any moral doubt on the subject, but because we instinctively understand rape to be a certain kind of evil, and one not to be dwelt on too much. Or at least, one which a healthy society understands and does not need to tell on too much. It’s an evil we associate in stories with wicked brigands, barbarians, and out-of-control armies in the worst wars; one we learn about indirectly as the desire of wicked villains and villainous knights.
Fundamentally, rape is an uncivilized crime in a way which many others are not. Sex is necessary for the continuation of the species and any society which is a part of humanity; by an obvious growth from that necessity, a culture’s sexual habits, codes, and taboos are among its most essential characteristics. Many throughout history have argued and still argue that determining and maintaining correct sexual behavior is vital to the health of a society: tellingly, most today within this tradition condemn our modern sexual libertinism.
I have been horrified, as discussion of rape has spread recently, to find the phrase “boys will be boys” discussed as though it were an excuse commonly made for abusive or sexually-charged behavior. Previously I cannot remember encountering the sentiment as anything other than a way of summing up – some would say stereotyping – young male behavior as opposed to female: fights and noise and not sitting still versus hair-pulling and screaming and talking too much. But even allowing some misinterpretation by persons dismayed by any differences between the sexes, I have simply seen the sinister use alleged far too often to dismiss it as non-existent. Moreover, I have on the internet personally observed far too many persons, mainly male, supposedly committed to equality or feminism or (in contrast) gentlemanly behavior discussing women in terms mainly or only of attractiveness, or justifying fairly embarrassing, or occasionally contemptible stories with the disreputable phrase, “Doesn’t matter; had sex.” This is putting aside, for the moment, relatively less contemptible stories, desires, and anecdotes I’ve heard of in face to face encounters – “IRL” in cheezburgrspeek.
There is a plain explanation for this unbridled public lust. We have been told for some time now of the joys of sexual liberation. Who does what with whom is largely regarded as nobody else’s business. Sex, sometimes in its kinkier variations, is generally celebrated in movies, checkout line magazines, and popular books. The “sex scene” for many if not most people has lost whatever shock value in once had by virtue of rarity. “The internet is for porn” is a standard joke and a by-word around that same internet.
One of the dangers of telling people what to do is that they may do it, and you may not like the consequences. And many young people – especially young men – have embraced this sexual “liberation”. The apparently unexpected consequence – unexpected by the “liberators”, at least – has been that sex is for many no longer a subject of cultural taboos but instead a rabid expectation. If – especially – a woman does not “put out”, she’s regarded as not playing fair, because one is expected to want to have sex at any if not all times.
In this toxic cultural context, rape becomes to many little more than taking what one “should” be getting anyway. There is little hope of overcoming “rape culture” as long as “sex culture” holds sway, especially over the young men who have throughout history generally been the majority of the most violent criminals. Certainly the element of violence still generates horror in most minds, but the act itself becomes no more terrible morally to this corrupted conscience than a gunpoint robbery. (That is itself a nasty crime, but I note that while discussion of the problem of rape has grown more frequent, there has been at the same time a tendency to want to reduce penalties for crimes in general. Perhaps another indication that, while many “crimes” are almost legal fictions, people know rape harms the social foundations?)
There is an especially dangerous mix in many parts of America, where Christian social roles have not been exactly lost, but are corrupted by widespread abandonment of accompanying responsibilities. (Determining to what extent they were ever fulfilled is not my purpose here: but when the ideal result is barely even taught, certainly the overall results will degrade.) A man by social habit still expecting to be treated as a leader, but no longer raised with any significant awareness of the corresponding duties and also in the modern manner expecting and desiring sex, becomes a vicious predator. Various men, particularly pastors, have masked despicably hypocritical behavior this way. But I am not sure such massive scandals, bad as they are, are as worrying as the widespread degradation of behavior I refer to here, except as a symptom. More young men play sports than middle-age ones lead churches: not only pastors commit crimes.
This year we have seen this breakdown of cultural morality come to vivid political life in the person of Donald Trump – who periodically claims to be a Christian, and many of whose supporters at least attach the cultural label “Christian” to themselves. Among those with no particular moral education, beliefs, or habits I fail to find it surprising, but we need to address the problem of why these failures – exemplified now by this support for Trump – are prevalent among the culturally “Christian” or “conservative”.
The first is a desperate opposition to the far more popular perversions, which are often understood strictly “us” versus “them”. It would be deadly to the morality play propagated by many – especially leaders – to admit our own failures, so mere sexual violence – as opposed to the other depravities – is ignored if at all possible. After all – as I said above – we all know it’s wrong and don’t need to dwell on it, right? This allows “them” to continue to be evil only, while “our” intentions are pure, and the frenzy of zealotry is maintained. Yet we know that, when a problem does exist, it needs to be addressed, and by more than the word “mistake”.
The second is that most in these communities don’t really expect the problem to occur, and may not look for it or understand what they should be seeing. “Somebody else” has sexual problems. Small town horrors are probably not as rare as we like to think, but still shock us when they make the news: violence and sex – and sexual violence – these are (in part justifiably) thought of as “inner city” problems.
The third is a sometimes over-generous application of a particular understanding of Christian charity – and American privacy. If a problem has occurred, if it can be dealt with quietly, it is often felt that even an effort to alert people that there has been a sin or crime – or that there is potential for a problem to occur or reoccur – is somehow a violation of confidences. Although the potential for abuse is heightened when combined with wilful ignorance, this motivation I at least find laudable in as much as it shows concern for others – but in practice it is merely concern for personal popularity (no one wants to be known for offering bad news) and even amounts to a lack of awareness and accountability. Worse still is when reluctance to make problems public becomes a reluctance to even take proper measures to keep original offenders accountable – what if someone notices that?
However, while the conservative holdouts of America see this obsession with sex combining with their own typical sins in deadly ways – while many find themselves in the despairing position of feeling driven to vote for a lewd and predatory man – while many are not even particularly despairing about it because at least “he” isn’t “them” (never mind that Trump was and still, substantially, in habits and associations, is) – it is oversimplifying things if we try to shuffle off American sexual brokenness on conservatives alone. It is even oversimplifying things when churches – trying to be responsible – attempt to “own up” to any and all American sexual failings, as though they all originated with hypocritical Christians.
I have no idea what the distribution of violent sexual misconduct is now when correlated with political party or professed ideology. I do not know how things would break down if we count up cases of adultery and divorce, though allegedly the latter at least is, without fine distinctions among creeds, indistinguishable from churches’ American surroundings. The Republican party has had a great number of sexual scandals among its leadership. All of this is true: but it must be said that the conservatives have not – generally speaking – yet been guilty of the public embrace of sexual libertines and perversion which more and more characterize progressive politics. The failures of the conservatives – including religious conservatives – are many: but the responsibility for propagating the anti-social beliefs and habits driving much of the sexual breakdown is not to be put on the conservatives, except in so far as they – we – failed to successfully combat pernicious ideas before they took hold.
How do we break the grip of this sex obsession? There is an earnest effort underway by the heirs of the original sexual liberators to focus on the violent aspect of rape and create a new feeling of guilt for violating a person’s body without their consent. This is well-intentioned and correct as far as it goes, but it is not sufficient, because it does not address the fundamental problem. As long as sex is considered to be practically an abstraction; as long as we talk about sex as though its natural place were merely among the pleasures like chocolate or music, separated from any relationship or biological realities of society; as long as we treat sex as something to be desired in any context and at any time, rape will continue to be just another petty misdeed, another stolen candy bar, to many people.
I am not demanding that a largely areligious society return – if in fact it was ever really there – to some ideal of Christian marriage. I am not that unrealistic, nor do I particularly believe in making adults do things they do not understand and do not themselves believe in. But it will be impossible to maintain sexual sanity without some set of rules, call them what you will: habits, taboos, expectations in the culture generally. To an extent I think I see this happening already, in reaction, as the “status” of relationships takes on social importance, and many people begin to treat at least certain kinds of – still unmarried – sexual partner with as much seriousness or more than others have come to treat a spouse. I don’t think all of the resulting habits are good; I think it will take far more than a little quiet reaction (while the loonies still go on preaching “liberation” and “finding yourself”) to regain stability; I think among the worst mistakes made by popular culture is to ignore conservative and especially Christian warnings that sexual relationships need to be taken seriously. The re-emphasis of the villainy of sexual crimes is hopeful, although some of the proposed solutions and resolutions are – curious. Still, while as a Christian I remain less than sanguine about the long-term prospects without actual reformation and repentance, as a mere citizen I see some hopeful signs that the seriousness of the situation is being realized, and slowly addressed.