Despite popular opinion to the contrary, Andrea Dworkin never asserted that “All heterosexual sex is rape.” She did, however, draw attention to the parallels that exist between heterosexual sex and rape. Specifically, in her important text Intercourse, Dworkin asserted that “Violation is a synonym for intercourse.” To understand the significance of the assertion, let’s view this section of the text together:
A human being has a body that is inviolate; and when it is violated, it is abused. A woman has a body that is penetrated in intercourse: permeable, its corporeal solidness a lie. The discourse of male truth—literature, science, philosophy, pornography—calls that penetration violation. This it does with some consistency and some confidence. Violation is a synonym for intercourse. At the same time, the penetration is taken to be a use, not an abuse; a normal use; it is appropriate to enter her, to push into (“violate”) the boundaries of her body. She is human, of course, but by a standard that does not include physical privacy. She is, in fact, human by a standard that precludes physical privacy, since to keep a man out altogether and for a lifetime is deviant in the extreme, a psychopathology, a repudiation of the way in which she is expected to manifest her humanity (154).
Here, Dworkin references how male-dominated spheres–such as literature, science, philosophy, pornography–conceptualize the penetration that transpires in heterosexual sex as violation. She goes on to point out that this penetration/violation is not conceptualized as abusive but rather a practice of normalcy and appropriateness. In recognizing these assertions, the reader can note the significance of Dworkin stating that “Violation is a synonym for intercourse.” She means that heterosexual sex involves a man penetrating a woman’s vagina with his penis; this process is viewed as a form of violation and the violation is not viewed as a problem. Dworkin problematizes this patriarchal view of intercourse in many ways, including by drawing attention to the way that women who refuse to engage in this heterosexual sex are deemed insane–deviants who are inundated in a realm of psychopathology which constitutes a deviation from the societal norms which construe female humanity in context of willing submission to heterosexual intercourse.
Furthermore, thinking of intercourse as similar to or a lot like rape is something that individuals who are regularly exposed to mainstream/malestream logic regarding sex will be disinclined to do, likely due to their immersion in patriarchal systems of thought which want to ensure that men are never punished for subjecting women to sexual violence. After all, one way to ensure that men can evade social, cultural, and legal punishment for raping women is to assert that what transpired–no matter how violent, coercive, or nonconsensual–was actually sex, not rape. This is at least part of the reason why phrases such as “bad sex” or “rough sex” frequently begin to circulate when a woman asserts that she has been raped. Mainstream/malestream people, who are essentially male apologists who work to legitimate and perpetuate male power by pretending that men can do no wrong, quickly rework reality with rhetoric that moves minds away from conceptualizing rape as rape while moving minds towards viewing rape as sex. If rape is viewed as sex, a man who rapes a woman need not fear punishment from people, court systems, and any other sentient force capable of administering a penalty.
Next, it’s important to understand why an individual might suggest that a feminist has made an assertion such as “All sex is rape.” I suggest that the intent is to insinuate or openly state that feminists regularly make ludicrous statements and therefore, they, along with their ideology, are absurd and not to be listened to. To elaborate, “all sex is rape” resituates the ideology and practices of radical feminists as outside the normative discourse which mainstream/malestream individuals promote through phrasings such as “bad sex” and “rough sex.” Within mainstream/malestream logic (which is also illogic), rape cannot happen because its existence would lead to awareness of male depravity. Therefore, women who come forward with accusations of rape are suppressed and silenced with rebuttals that include illogic like “You were not raped; you had bad sex and now regret it” or “You were not raped; you simply had rough sex and perhaps did not enjoy the more violent aspects of it.”
Finally, and per conversation with Peg Tittle, it is important to understand the role that the phrase “nonconsensual sex” plays in enabling us to comprehend the mainstream/malestream’s attempt to pretend that rape doesn’t exist while also asserting that individuals who discuss it are only doing so in nonsensical ways that involve suggesting that all sex is rape. As stated earlier, individuals who promote male supremacy do so by articulating their own illogical understandings of rape through masking terms such as “bad sex” and “rough sex.” This is why phrases like “nonconsensual sex” are not normalized when discourses regarding what rape is and whether rape has happened arise amongst individuals who promote mainstream/malestream logic. The reason the phrase “nonconsensual sex” has not been normalized (while phrases such as “rough sex” and “bad sex” have) is to continually erase from consciousness the reality that nonconsensual sex is happening. This is why patriarchal powers do not want the word “rape” and the phrase “nonconsensual sex” circulating during discourse pertaining to whether a woman has been raped, whether rape is a substantive problem, and whether punishments for rape should be more severe. The patriarchal powers that exist, as well as the individuals who have chosen to ideologically align themselves with those powers in order to gain social privilege and avoid the risk of losing various resources, want euphemisms or words that blatantly misrepresent reality.
The linguistic erasures pertaining to rape are not confined to utilizing terms like “rough sex” and “bad sex” in place of “nonconsensual sex” and “rape.” It also pertains to the realms of prostitution and sex trafficking. Specifically, individuals who operate in mainstream/malestream communities rarely use the phrase rape slaves to describe prostitutes, nor do they use the term paid rape to describe the process of men buying women. Yet this is exactly what happens within the institution of prostitution. Men pay to subject women to various forms of violent sex, including rape, with rape being the process through which a thinking feeling sentient being is reduced to a robotic slave who follows the orders of a male master. Yet, within mainstream/malestream realms, the depth of these horrors must be masked with terms like “sex work” that disguise oppression as a vocation involving consensual sex. The use of masking terms like “sex work” disguises the system of oppression so that, in thinking that prostitution is simply a process of exchanging sex for money, people will find no fault in it and allow slavery to keep existing without contention.
To repeat, Andrea Dworkin never stated that “all sex is rape.” However, radical feminists can learn a lot regarding how male supremacy and the people who support it operate by examining why she has been accused of making this assertion. Ultimately, the accusation that Dworkin asserted that “all sex is rape” reveals how individuals who support patriarchy seek to make their illogical understandings of rape and sex seem rational while rendering the logical analyses of radical feminists insane and unworthy of consideration.
