Status Updates From Rape: A History From 1860 T...

The emergence of the term "sexual psychopath" arose in a period where it was politically expedient for governments to seem tough on crime. This diagnosis could lead to indefinite incarceration and circumvented legal processes and verdicts, and often applied to non-violent sex criminals (including gays). The most violent sex criminals may not have been subject to this as they didn't display symptoms of mental illness.

I hate psychoanalysis, not least of all because a woman is always to blame for a man's behaviour. Apparently men are exhibitionists because they have narcissistic mothers or frigid wives. One cure depends on directing their rage upon their wives, another demands that their wife is sexually available at any time to him. Exhibitionists are white men, men of colour are indecent exposers.

It's sad to point this out, but really appreciating the author's continual attention to questions about class, sexuality and, particularly, race in this book. Chapter on exhibitionism notes experts' 'confusion' regarding lower incidences of exhibitionism in non-white men compared with white. The conclusions these experts draw are still racist, go figure.

Discussion of female rapists focussed on social anxieties of the day: class, then women's lib, idea of women emulating men. Male rape victims treated with even more skepticism than females in studies: thought to be making false allegations, that the lasting impact less severe. Bodily responses (erections, ejaculations) seen as confirmation they 'wanted it'. How these responses actually closer to a form of paralysis.

Excellent discussion about the problem of treating the rapist as unwell or criminal, of medical or legal categorisation and outcome. Medical opinion is disregarded in courts unless it serves to deliver legal justice. The proximity of both approaches differs according to political expediency.

Chapter on female aggressors: opens with Lynndie England at Abu Ghraib, the vulnerability of male bodies.

Interesting discussion of the move from mid-20th century from focussing on the act of rape (criminalisation) to the identity of the rapist (pathology). Of course, the question of who receives treatment depends on race, class, perceived intelligence. In surveys of the general public in 1950s, it seems treatment was preferable even for paedophiles, whereas today's thinking tends towards criminalisation.

Rapists sentenced to forcible sterilisation for eugenics reasons. Falls out of favour as "cruel and unusual punishment" and because infertility may encourage further sexual assaults. Completely irrelevant for victims, actual and potential future.

So many racist and classist ideas propping up rape myths. When all else fails, blame victims and perpetrators' mothers. Urban life is to blame, but also the suburbs. Uneducated and educated women are both responsible. The (mostly male) theorists of many fields can't conceive of environmental causes for men to commit rape generally: the criminals must be divided by race/class because white middle-class men are exempt.