Congressman Todd Akin (R-MO) infamously claimed that
forced sexual encounters cannot lead to pregnancy because, and I quote him
precisely, “if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut
that whole thing down.”
In other words, rape prompted by date rape drugs, or
threats are not “forced” and this is then what?, “illegitimate” rape, meaning
that’s okay? Wrong! Definitely wrong! The critical element of any rape is the woman’s
refusal, the withholding of consent to having sexual intercourse; this is true
no matter how the violation of the woman’s soul and person is done, whether by
trick, threat, force, or lack of capacity or consciousness by the victim. Rape is rape.
Senator Claire McCaskill, Akin’s opponent for her Missouri
Senate seat said, “It is beyond comprehension that someone can be so ignorant
about the emotional and physical trauma brought on by rape.”
When I studied sociology, Margaret Mead, a world
renowned anthropologist, reported from her excursions to the South Pacific that
Trobriand Islanders believed that a woman became pregnant when she swam at low
tide. We need someone like Mead to find out
what tribe taught Todd that the female body can repel a rapist’s unwanted sperm. It is scarily ironic that Todd has a vote as
a member of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
Congressman Akin’s sexist and ignorant declaration
about rape brought on an almost universal rage as Akin revealed himself as a throwback
to the knuckle dragging days when women couldn’t vote and were treated as property
rather than persons.
Nor is this new for Akin. In the bill, HR 3, offered for consideration
last year, with Akin as a co-sponsor, Congress was forced to re-consider a long
standing policy (more than three decades old) of not funding abortions with
taxpayer funds except in the case of rape or incest. The fight was over the breadth of the
exceptions. The current Republican Vice Presidential Candidate, Congressman
Paul Ryan (R-WI), joined Congressman Akin and 225 other Republican members who wanted
to re-define rape by a “new and improved” definition, affixing the word, “forcible,”
to narrow the exception for rape, and to cut back on past protection afforded teenage
girls who were raped. Every Republican Congressman
in Virginia signed on as a co-sponsor to this hateful sexist revision (Reps.
Cantor, Forbes, Goodlatte, Griffith, Hurt, Rigell, Wittman, and Wolf); no
Democrat in Virginia supported this wrong-headed initiative (not Rep. Connolly,
Moran, nor Scott); in the end, mercifully, this heartless ruse was seen by the
public for what it was and struck from the bill. Congressman Akin’s recent quote only reminded
us of the unvarnished malicious intent of these 227 members of Congress.
There is more – sad to say. 31 state legislatures including Virginia do
not prohibit and thus enable the rapist to seek visitation with and custody
rights for any child that issues following any rape. When the rape victim decides as a matter of religious
belief or other reason to have the child, she may face the horror of the rapist
demanding his right to visit with and/or have custody of the child when s/he is
born. Suzanne Powell, a mother herself,
said, “Hell No.” Ms. Powell couldn’t
believe it. Few can.
Whatever anyone’s belief about terminating a
pregnancy, I would like to believe that, as a national and local community, we all
agree that rape disqualifies the rapist from having any rights of custody or
visitation should the rape victim give birth.
Rebekka Prinz said, “Rape is about control, so the idea that a child would be
handed over to someone who has already demonstrated a willingness to dehumanize
another person to the point of physical assault is, frankly, terrifying.”
Our model should
be the 19 States that have established affirmative safeguards against just this
happening, and that disqualify a rapist having either visitation or custody
rights.
Nor should it matter, that this may sometimes be
difficult to determine, for example, when the woman was raped by her
husband. To my mind, it doesn’t matter who
commits the rape. He should be barred
from visitation or custody. Of course, the
rapist may concoct the impermissible defense of threatening to seek custody or
visitation to coerce the rape victim into withdrawing her charge of rape.
Women should be on guard this election at what these
Republican throwbacks want to do to their rights, and we should see that every
state includes a prohibition in its code that no rapists shall have any rights
to custody or visitation for any child resulting from their rape of the mother.
No comments:
Post a Comment