National Review: Rape is Actually a Compliment

Nabokov strikes from the grave... (0.00 / 0)

I am no defender of the National Review and the linked article is a rather lame attempt at social commentary on political correctness via Lolita - going so far as to half-heartedly mimic Nabokov’s style and imagery.  While the subject matter of Lolita is repugnant, it is irresponsible to suggest that the Derbyshire condones the crimes the novel chronicles.  By insinuating that Derbyshire condones statutory rape you only serve to prove his point that our times have become so politically correct that discussion of a 50 year old novel is impossible because people today take it even more literally than your grandparents did in the 1950s when it was first published.  Your knee-jerk attack is precisely the reaction Derbyshire intended to provoke. So, if your post was serious, you bought the bait, hook, line and sinker.

---

by: SPS @ Thu May 18, 2006 at 20:15:59 PM CDT

Interesting. (0.00 / 0)

"No defender of the National Review?" Isn't that precisely what you are doing? A "knee jerk" attack? Really?

Frankly his discussion of Lolita was not what concerned me, and your attempt to suggest that this was my point proof that anytime anybody needs to innoculate themselves from patently offensive commentary, all they need to do these days is pre-emptively accuse those who disagree with them of "political correctness" and they can get away with virtually anything. That's the worn out bait you've bought "hook, line, and sinker."

So -- let's break this down into simple terms, so neither you or Derbyshire can try to misdirect by saying I am just too "prim, sissified, feminized, swooning, emoting, mealy mouthed, litigation-whipped, "diversity"-terrorized, race-and-"gender"-panicked" to discuss Lolita.

These are the points that Derbyshire uses rape statistics and his reading of Lolita to support:

* Derbyshire states that rape is mainly based on the sexual attractiveness of the victim. (I suppose the militias in Darfur intended to simply massacre their victims, but found all the women of every age just so darn attractive once they got there...)

* Derbyshire states that the statistics showing that most rape victims are 12-14 support his thesis.

* Derbyshire also explicitly states that, in his opinion, women lose their attractiveness after thheeave their teens.

Now, he further supplements his notions with this arguments:

* He insists this is not his opinion, but biological imperative

What he leaves out of his equation is equally telling:

* He makes no distinction between being sexual attracted to a 12 year old child and a full grown adult. Most people distinguish the two by virtue of a well-defined concept called "pedophilia." Maybe you should look it up.

Frankly, I don't give a damn that he's using "Lolita" as an attempted basis to couch these obviously simplistic and offensive views in some sort of intellectual legitimacy. He could try citing "A Charlie Brown Christmas" for all I care. Nor do I care that he has pre-emptively called me a "sissy" for disputing them. Obviously these deflections worked like a dream on you.

But now that we've dispensed with the psuedo-intellectual facade he wrapped himself in, do tell which of his premises you are so eager to defend:

* that rape is mainly about the sexual attractiveness of the victim?

* that rape statistics prove that 12-14 girls are the most sexually attractive demographic?

* that women cease to be attractive when they leve their teens?

After you've defended these statements, perhaps then you can explain to me why I'm "diversity-terrorized" to suggest that I wouldn't want someone who holds such views -- and has so little self-awareness and cultural understanding that he brags about them openly, suggesting detractors are "sissified" -- anywhere near the 12 year old daughter of my close friend?

Go on. I'm listening.

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Fri May 19, 2006 at 06:59:37 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh the wicked irony.... (0.00 / 0)

I've re-read the article a couple of times and, while I find the use of the quoted study clumsy, I think it is quite clear that Derbyshire is not defending statutory rape.  He is using Lolita and the study as examples of a broader point.  That is what bothers me about your posts.  You are conflating the example Derbyshire chooses to use with what he believes as his personal values.  Your subsequent post then tries to transpose those fictional beliefs on to me even though I have also said nothing of the sort.  To be more succinct: Do you honestly believe ANYONE would support the notions you are arguing Derbyshire endorses? C'mon - don't be absurd.

Conflating examples and values is irresponsible in my opinion.  More importantly, your posts serve to illustrate Derbyshire's point far better than he actually did in the article.

I follow your posts and usually like them.  However, I reserve the right to point out when you are off base.  Accusing one's political opponents of supporting rape because they published a silly piece on Lolita is not  intelligent discourse.  You can do better than this.

I think I've made my point.  Feel free to get in the last word and then let's move on. 

 

---

by: SPS @ Fri May 19, 2006 at 10:10:41 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It still looks to me... (0.00 / 0)

...like he's got you right where he wants you -- too afraid of looking unsophisticated or sissified to actually address the naked, obvious content of the piece. But it's clear I'm not changing your mind.

I'll move on until someone else chimes in. It's a wide open blog.

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Fri May 19, 2006 at 11:06:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Lolita recipe (0.00 / 0)

Ingredients
Scale ingredients to servings

20 ml tequila
10 ml lime juice
1 tsp honey
2 dashes Angostura® bitters

Directions of recipe
Shake, strain over one or two ice cubes in a cocktail glass, and serve.

Magic 95.5 LIVE!(800)296-9267 Defending Rosemarie

---

by: Ed Garcia @ Fri May 19, 2006 at 07:15:12 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Rape is power over the powerless (0.00 / 0)

I am speechless!  Rape is about wielding power over someone seen to be weaker.

Young people of either sex as seen as vulnerable, and are most likely not to report an attack.  The feeling of violation, of having to re-enact the attack in words to parents or the police, fearing a criminal trial where the defense attorney will again open the wounds .. all conspire to let the criminal go free .. to rape again, at will.

Attractiveness is not an option when women over 60 are attacked, either.

A rapist can be rich, or poor, a father or a grandfather or other relative.  A rapist can be attractive and be in a seemingly stable relationship.  A rapist can be a trusted neighbor, or babysitter, or a priest.

It's not about attractiveness -- it's about the physical power of one person over another.  It's a sick mind with no conscience, whether it occurs on our streets or at war.

If Razib Khan is raped, he'll realize -- too late.  He and his ilk are the reason more rapes aren't reported and more rapists roam the streets.

Barbara

---

by: vtpeace @ Fri May 19, 2006 at 15:53:16 PM CDT

from Andrew Sullivan's blog (0.00 / 0)

Now don't get me wrong -- although Sullivan is useful for beating up on, as he rightfully calls them, the "theocons," he generally bugs the crap out of me. But I was surfing around following the link from 802 Online and found a bit where he posts a reader email regarding this Derbyshire NRO piece. I thought it worth repeating here:

Over my lunch break, I couldn't help pondering Derb's Lolita article a little more and I found the bright side!

If I understand Derb's rationale, my 29th birthday will really be cause to celebrate! If, as Derb suggests, rape is mainly a function of the victim's hotness, and if a woman's hotness (and therefore probability of being raped) drops off like a "continental shelf" at age 29, then come November, I'm virtually home free! As I enter my last year as a twenty-something and my buttocks begin to sag, I'll be able to walk without worry down darkened city alleys, jog with my headphones on through the park after sunset, and forget about double-checking the locks on the doors before bed! Alas, a life free from all that fuss about personal safety. 

And all this time I've been under the mistaken impression that older women might - might - be less likely to be raped because they (like most adults, about most dangers) are more in touch with their own mortality/vulnerability and more savvy in avoiding dangerous situations. But Derb has made perfect sense of those rape statistics: Hot girls get raped because they're hot and once you're past your mid-twenties, you're not hot.

On this birthday, I'll drink one (or ten) for Derb and stumble home worry free!

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Sat May 20, 2006 at 11:05:34 AM CDT