This post is posted in honor of International Woman’s Day, March 8

Four months ago (November, 2009) a young woman, Nofrat Frankel, was arrested because she prayed wrapped in cloth that had knots and tassels on each corner. Like any living religious tradition, there are a variety of subgroups in Judaism, each with its own understanding of what the tradition is. Not all Christians are Catholic; not all Jews are ultra-orthodox; not all Muslim are Sunni. The woman was arrested because one group of Jews decided for all others, that women can not pray in this cloth.

Women reading torah, wearing a variety of tallitot

Women wearing tallitot, reading Torah (Yael Katzir, from the documentary: Praying in her own voice)

In Jewish tradition the cloth, known as a tallit, is a symbol of God’s protective presence (Psalms 91:1). At each of the four corners hang knots and tassles that remind us of our responsibilities to act with mercy, justice, and humility in the world. (Micah 6:8). In Judaism, prayer stands between action in the world and relationship to God in our hearts. The cloth fittingly wraps and embraces the body, the tool we use, both to act in the world and to bend and flex in prayer to relate to heaven.

Once upon a time, this cloth, the tallit, was worn only by men. In the last thirty years, women have become more and more insistent on finding ways to pray that connect body and soul, belief and the practicalities, public life and personal responsibility. Jewish women from both liberal and traditionalist communities have begun adopting the tallit as their own. The traditional male version of the tallit is a white strip of cloth with either black or dark blue stripes at either end. Although some women wear the traditional men’s tallit, many women have experimented a great deal and opt for either colorful and rather feminine versions or a simple white on white striped cloth.

Clearly the group doing the opposing thinks they are in the right. They do not see themselves as denying the value of women or their prayers. In their eyes, the women wearing the tallit simply weren’t praying!

In the news articles and comments immediately after the arrest, one could read many such excuses: they wear tallitot as a fashion statement; they are ignorant; they can’t really mean it. But it isn’t just the rabble that gather around the comments of on line news that say this. Even the esteemed Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef, former Chief Rabbi of Israel, discounts the sincerity of the women’s prayers at the wall: “These are deviants who serve equality, not Heaven. They must be condemned and warned of.” A month later, when women gathered again for Rosh Hodesh services, some of whom were wearing tallitot, a group of ultra-orthodox hurled accusations of “Nazis” and “not Jews”

Selichot - Night prayers (Anna Kocherovsky)

Doubting the sincerity of a woman’s prayers is nothing new. In the biblical book of Samuel, Eli himself had similar things to say about Hannah, accusing her of being drunk, when in fact she was pouring out her heart to God. But Eli merely rebuked Hannah. When she explained herself he listened with compassion and told her “Go in peace and may the God of Israel grant your petition”. Hannah’s answered prayer was the birth of her son Samuel. When grown, Samuel anointed David as king. Year later, Samuel rebuked David when, as king, David abused his power to make love to Bathsheba. Hannah’s “drunken prayer” gave birth to courage, justice, and empowerment.

Unlike Eli, Ovadiah Yosef and those protesting in news article comments did not listen with compassion. Hannah is considered the true model of prayer by both traditional and liberal Jews. Judaism loves to take lofty ideals and capture them in ritual actions, but there is no formal rule of conduct in Judaism that prohibits women from praying with a tallit. The inability to listen with compassion therefore must come from something deeper and far more concerning: a hardening of the heart of one person against another.

A hardening of the heart. Judaism is a religion built around trauma and recovery: the trauma of slavery in Egypt and the joy of rescue; captivity in Babylon and the rebirth of Jerusalem and the Temple under Nehemiah; the fall of the second Temple and the rise of a rich rabbinic culture in Europe and North Africa; the Holocaust and the re-establishment of a Jewish state.

In each of these stories a hard heart plays a central role. The hard heart of Pharaoh brought 10 plagues on Egypt and the loss of his own first born son. The hard heart of Jews towards the widow and orphan caused Jews to lose the first Temple. Baseless hatred, a hardened heart of one Jew towards another, caused Jews to lose the second Temple.

Hannah Frank - The Garden

The Garden (Hannah Frank, 1932)

At the heart of all trauma, for Jew and non-Jew is a hard heart. The world over, when we value power and privilege over compassion we, like Pharaoh, can become self-destructive. When we ignore other’s needs because we ourselves are comfortable, we, like the ancient citizens of Judah, destroy our societies ability to defend itself against outside threats. When we place certainty in our own rightness over respect for honest differences of opinion and the sincerity of our peers and neighbors, we lose the center of holiness, the Temple, within our own lives.

At the heart of injustice to women is a refusal to learn the lessons of person-on-person trauma. At the heart of injustice to women is a hard heart. The lure of privilege overwhelms compassion. The satisfaction of having our own needs met makes us blind to the vulnerable and needy. At the heart of injustice to women is certainty: certainty that all women’s needs are met; or failing that, certainty that all women who suffer are either rare tragic victims of chance or else ultimately to blame for being inadequate daughters, wives, or mothers.

The tallit symbolizes the transformation of heavenly respect into day to day action. It is the bridge between the heart and the world. There is no better symbol to fight over when it comes to the matter of justice for women.

Susanna and the Elders

Judith Beheading Holofernes

Self Portrait

Artemisia Gentileschi (1593 – 1652/1653) was the one of the most important early Baroque women painters and the first woman ever to be admitted to the esteemed Accademia di Arte del Disegno in Florence. She was a contemporary of Galileo and counted herself among his friends.

She is particularly well known for her portrayal of women. In Susanna and the Elders she defies the then current tradition of portraying Susanna as a seductress. Instead Susanna is clearly intimidated by the attention of the elders who look upon her with whispers and accusatory words. This is arguably the first painting in history that portrays unwanted sexual attention through a woman’s eyes.

Her painting of Judith’s slaying of Holofernes portrays the same scene as a well known painting by Carravagio, but shows much more powerful women. Carravagio’s Judith appears almost afraid of her own sword and her accomplice is an old woman who stands to the side. In Artemisia’s painting, Judith wields the sword with determination and her accomplice is her own age and bent over to help her.

Both painting were produced in the order displayed above at a particularly difficult time of her life. At 17 Artemisia’s father had tried to find a place for her to study at an artist’s academy but she was refused a place since she was female. Her father did not want her to stop painting so he apprenticed her to his friend, Agostino Tassi. Shortly after, she was raped by her teacher. Her father pressed charges and Tassi was tried and convicted for rape. A transcript of the rape trial exists to this day. Excerpts may be seen here. Shamed by the way the trial assaulted her reputation, Artemisia moved to Florence.

The third painting, sometimes titled “The Angel” or “Allegory of Inclination”, is believed to be a self portrait. It was painted in Florence two years after the trial. In the painting she holds a compass and looks to the distance with both sadness and expectancy. The original painting was a full length nude, the drapery was added a generation later in the name of modesty.

There is no way of knowing what was in her mind at the time of these paintings, but three paintings together portray a journey from shame to empowerment to determined hope. The last is the painting of a survivor whose determination to follow her inclinations and look towards her source of meaning cannot be stopped no matter what sadness her artistic inclinations have brought to her.

An additional 31 paintings with biographical and artistic commentary may be seen here.

February 18, 2010toMarch 4, 2010

It began with a guerrilla art campaign in New York in 1994. Today it is a three part fine art exhibit at the University of Pennsylvania running from February 17 through March 5.

Charles Hall, then a creative director at Chiat Day Advertising, threw himself a 30th birthday party. The next morning he found out that one of his guests had been raped by someone at the party. In response he designed a stickers with the slogan “This isn’t an invitation to rape me” and plastered them all over New York City.

But it didn’t stop there. He convinced a group of photographers to donate striking black and white photographs and arranged to have them published in mass media publications, among them Der Speigel, Elle, and Playboy. The stickers and ad campaign were eventually donated to Peace Over Violence (formerly the Los Angeles Commission on Assaults Against Women). It was used in anti-rape campaigns throughout the state of California. Posters and stickers based on the original ad campaign were also sold at minimal cost to anti-rape organizations across the USA.

Each picture illustrated a different circumstance where people tend to excuse a man’s behavior and see it as “bad sex” rather than rape: marriage, sexy clothes, drunkenness, homelessness, kissing, and so on. The phrase “This is not an invitation to rape me” was included in small red print on each image. A sampling of the images are shown below. The full collection of stickers and images can be seen here.

Ellen Von Unwerth

drunken girl

Mario de Lopez

man and woman kissing

Tony Ward

little girl and adult

Moshe Brahka


Scottish campaign - kiss

Scottish campaign

The campaign went international in 2007 when the government of Scotland asked Charles Hall to adapt the campaign to the UK market. For the revision, Charles worked together with Clifford Graham and Julie Cerise. Full color photographs replaced the original black and white images. On the new color images, the difficult-to-see red slogan was replaced with the same words in yellow framed by a pink tear drop.

The Scottish campaign ran in two phases, in the fall of 2008 and 2009. A website with interactive posters was created. The images were plastered on billboards and bus stops.  The campaign was warmly received by the advertising industry, feminists, and anti-rape activists, and even the Scottish trade unions. However, many of the comments left on the website and non-feminist blogs do raise doubts about how effective the campaign is at changing attitudes. One of the participants in the campaign, a rape survivor who had done voice overs and interviews for a radio and television component to the campaign recently went public with her identity. She protested the offensive comments left on the campaign website and also highlighted the need for additional efforts to change public attitudes.

Fox Exhibit Hall (Daily Pennsylvanian)

The University of Pennsylvania exhibit represents the next stage in the development of this campaign, both in terms of message and art. It attempts to address some of the limitations of earlier versions of the campaign.

To expand the range of artistic voices, students and artists around the globe were invited to contribute. Up until this point the artistic content has been limited by governmental concerns and the limits of popular media. By formulating this as an art exhibit rather than a public service campaign, the relationship between consent and sensuality could be explored in further depth and with greater artistic freedom.  A full list of artists on exhibit can be found here.

The new exhibit has three components: the first part in Fox Hall focuses on the connection between sensuality, relationship, and consent. The second part displayed on campus sidewalks and titled “The Joy of Consent” focuses on the positive value of consent. The third part of the exhibit, titled “I am the Me”, focuses on the variety of victims and potential victims. It includes self-portraits of victims and people who see themselves as potential victims.

Both the UK and US public service campaigns have been criticized for using only professional model-quality white women as potential rape victims. Unless ordinary people are seen as victims, people may not make the connection between their day to day interactions and the campaign message. Thus the first part includes male and non-white artistic models. The third component insures that ordinary people, and not just professional models are included as potential victims.

Tony Ward: Sex Without Consent Isn't Sex

From "Joy of Consent" (Tony Ward)

A second criticism of the original campaign is its focus on the negative: it teaches what isn’t a yes to sex, but neglects to teach what is a yes to sex. Increasingly anti-rape advocates are feeling that “no means no” needs to be replaced with “only yes means yes”. Hence, the exhibit titled “The Joy of Consent”.

Photos of all three parts of the exhibit can be found on Facebook.

It is a story none of us would ever want to live, from rising media star to crime victim to survivor on a mission. Katie Piper has started a foundation, The Katie Piper Foundation, to advocate for burn victims, but the road to its creation is anything but easy.

In mid March, 2008 media personality and rising model Katie Piper began dating a man she had met through Facebook. He seemed like a wonderful match, and she even called her mother to tell her how happy she was. But two weeks later when they finished a night of partying in London in a hotel room, he beat her, raped her, and held her hostage for 8 hours.

She managed to persuade him to release her by promising that they could continue to see each other. Like many women, she decided not to report, fearing that the police would discount her story since she voluntarily went to a hotel room with him. Even when she had to go to the hospital to get stitches for a head wound, she made up a story to explain her injuries to emergency room personnel.

Once home, she refused to leave her apartment. He continued to contact her and eventually persuaded her to go out to a local internet cafe to check her email. On her way to the cafe she saw a beggar with a cup. As she reached in her purse to put money in the’s beggar cup, he threw the cup at her. It was full of acid.

In 2009 Channel 4 in the UK used her story as its “Alternative to the Queen’s Christmas Message”. The six part documentary can be seen here: 1 2 3 4 5 6. Titled “My Beautiful Face”, it chronicles both her medical and emotional journey towards healing. It closes with her reflections fourteen months after the attack: “I want to break free and be my own person. Obviously I have days, weeks, months where it is really hard and I don’t see a future. But then I have this inner thing, where I say, no, I’m going to do this, get back to normality. I did have these terrible attacks. I do look totally different physically, but I want to be the woman that got through that and is now living.” She is a woman on a journey, but clearly the journey has only begun.

Katie Piper, before and after (ABC News)

In the documentary, the beautiful face is backwards looking.   The documentary begins with slides and videos of her former career and face. Early on she looks through pictures and jokes about how she feels like a 60 year old woman reminiscing about her younger days when she was a sexy young thing. She laments midway through the documentary that the scars on her face make her feel “owned” by her attacker.

Two months after the close of “My Beautiful Face” she is interviewed by Sky TV and “My Beautiful Face” appears to have taken on new meaning.  She says:  “The title of the documentary is ‘My Beautiful Face’ and I think my face is beautiful and tells a story and I’m very happy with it.”

My face tells a story… there are few statements more compelling. Each of our faces tells a story. Our beauty comes not from the features of our face, but the way we wear them and the story they tell.

Katie Piper’s willingness to share her story is an important counterbalance to media’s incessant focus on perfect complexions, perfect curves, sexy poses, and near weightlessness. This is not joyous sexuality, but driven sexuality. Sexuality driven by money, fear, and a deep sense of unworth. In 2007, the APA put out a report examining how the media’s focus on sexual attractiveness affects the development of girls. It found that rather than generate joy and self-confidence, it was producing depression, low self-worth, and eating disorders.

Its primary recommendation to parents was to teach their daughters to value themselves for who they are and not how they look.   Parents can make a huge difference, but it isn’t enough.   To be whole we need to look beyond parents, out to society and backwards through the generations. We need stories both past and present to remind us that beauty can come from within as well as from without.   Looking out to society it is important to see women like Katie Piper who can find beauty in the story their faces tell. Looking back in history we need stories like the story of Purim, a Jewish holiday celebrated every spring.

Vashti sent away (Marc Chagall)

The Purim story tells of two women: Queen Vashti who based her life on beauty defined by men and Queen Esther who based her life on a beauty within her. Vashti bargained for love by agreement and sexual compliance with the men around her. One day she had enough. When her husband asked her to dance naked not only in front of him, but also the entire court, she balked. But since her relationship was based only on compliance and the king had all the power, she was banished for her refusal. Vashti’s story is the story of every woman who has believed she had no value of her own and can only win love by bending to the needs of others, including their sexual needs.

After her death, the king sought a new wife and sent out a call for virgins to be brought to his household. Among the virgins was a certain Esther. Esther wasn’t willing to be measured only by her external beauty. She worked on creating a relationship with the king. She consulted with the head of the concubines to understand what the king needed and was willing to give. She asked for no more than he was willing to give and payed attention to what he needed. The king fell in love, chose her first among the virgins, and made her his Queen. Even after this she continue to build the relationship based on her intelligence and sensitivity to others. When there were whispers of a coup, she told him the names of the instigators.

Queen Esther revealing her true identity (Lilian Broca)

What a difference building a relationship based on one’s personality rather than one’s looks makes! Eventually a political leader, Haman, arises that sees Esther’s uncle and Esther’s entire ethnic group, the Jews, as a political liability and he sets out to destroy them. He even convinces the king to pass a decree to kill all the Jews. Her uncle sends a message to Esther asking for her help.

Esther is in a predicament. The king has not asked for her presence in 30 days and approaching the king unbidden could mean death. Esther approaches him anyway. The king is so in love with Esther that he cares nothing for protocol and offers her anything up to half the kingdom. For three days running Esther invites the king and Haman to a banquet. On the third day she reveals that Haman’s death decree will include her.   The king nullifies the decree and kills Haman instead.

Esther was beautiful within and without. She could be bold and break the rules because she understood that her real power was not in her face or her naked body but in her soul: her sensitivity to the needs of others, her connections and intelligence, even her boldness.

One of the things that is most wonderful about watching Shakira belly dance is the raw joy. It is the dance of a woman feeling completely safe in her sexuality, able to share its beauty without fear or reprisal or attack.

All women should feel that safe with their bodies. Sadly, even 30 or more years of anti-rape activism, few women feel either freedom or joy in their sexuality. A significant number of people still believe that a woman “is asking for it” if she dresses or dances suggestively. According to a survey of Londonners (UK) recently publicized by the BBC, more than half presumed that a woman must at least partly to blame if she was raped. 16% (28% of 56%) of respondents believed a woman is at least partly at fault for rape if she wears provacative clothes, 12% (21% of 56%) if she dances in a provocative fashion.

12% doesn’t sound like much, but the numbers are shocking if we plug in an individual name or consider other crimes. If Shakira were raped after she walked off of the stage, apparently 12% believe she would be partly to blame. If Shakira were murdered after she walked off of the stage, would 12% believe she was partly to blame? If she were blown up by a suicide bomber, would 12% believe she was partly to blame?

Of course not. Part of the reason behind the different perceptions is that sex and rape use the same physical equipment. Sex is good. Rape is bad. How can one thing be at both ends of the spectrum? One possibility is that our discussions of sexual ethics tend to be entirely focused on permissible and impermissible acts, rather than permissible and impermissible ways of relating. We focus on the equipment used for sex rather than the quality of relationship that distinguishes it from rape.

When we focus on acts and equipment, then the only thing that separates sex and rape is the psychological state of consent and perception of consent. Psychological states are hard to prove, so it is very easy for doubt and blame to creep in.

But if we turn our attention to relationship rather than acts, then the difference is obvious. The difference between rape and sex is mutuality, not consent. Concern for mutuality is much easier to observe, because it exists after the fact. It shapes our failures as well as our successes.

A person whose concern is mutuality acts and speaks quite differently. When such a person makes a genuine mistake they say: “I’m so sorry. I misunderstood. I misjudged. I didn’t take care to make sure you wanted this as much as I did. How can I make it up to you? What do you need to heal?” Rapists self-justify. They find every reason possible for saying their actions are right or at least excusable. And even when they apologize, they refuse to acknowledge damage is done and expect the other person to just “get over it”. Since they didn’t mean it, there should be no consequences.

A person whose concern is mutuality seeks to improve their skills for judging when consent exists. They avoid making complex decisions when they are drunk or when they have only shallow knowledge of a person. They avoid jumping to conclusions based on externals: clothing, dancing, singing, even flirtatious behavior. They know that appearances can be deceiving. Mutuality comes from the heart, and can only be measured by the heart. A rapist will continue to point to the outside, never understanding that he or she forgot to measure the heart before proceeding.

A person whose concern is mutuality understands that sex, like dance, requires constant attention to your partner. In dance it is never enough to pay attention to the first step. To keep together and avoid stepping on toes dancers must pay attention to each and every step there after. The minute one stops, the dance stops. Period.

March 8, 2010

This year the United Nations has chosen the theme “Equal rights, equal opportunities: Progress for all” for International Women’s Day.

Blog for International Women's DayFirst observed in 1911, International Women’s Day events typically focus on women’s stories and women’s empowerment. In the UK alone more than 160 events have been registered with the International Women’s Day website. They include story-telling, comedy routines, free beauty therapies, lectures, art exhibits, food bazaars, special television programming, charity fund-raisers, film-screenings, poetry readings, conferences, marches, and a discussion in the House of Lords.

Equally diverse activities can be found around the globe. In India, there is a run in Bangalore sponsored by Adidas and free tailoring classes in Lucknow. In Guatemala and Bolivia, two women artists blogging and cycling from Quetzaltenango, Guatemala to Bogota, Columbia to learn more about the lives of women in those countries. The ride will end with an art exhibit in Bogota, Columbia. In Nigeria, a day of advocacy is planned with TV and radio broadcasts, meetings with political and religious leaders, a solidarity march, lectures and an award ceremony.

In the blogosphere, International Women’s Day (IWD) is being observed with blogathons and story collection drives. To participate, visit any one of these sites:

the young Gregg Milligan and his mother

Gregg Milligan and his mother

In the first two weeks of February, Oprah Winfrey decided to focus on child sexual abuse. She aired two shows. The first interviewed four perpetrators. The second show interviewed a 40-something year old man, Gregg Milligan, who had been sexually abused by his mother.

Judging by the reaction on Oprah’s website, blogs and on self-help discussion boards that include male survivors, the interview with Gregg Milligan has done untold good. It has opened up discussion on this difficult topic. Even more important it has given survivors a chance to hear someone like themselves tell a story they identify with strongly. Male survivors of childhood sexual abuse often suffer in silence, afraid that no one can possibly understand their story.

In both interviews Oprah seems bound to a commonly believed but highly questionable idea: that abusers go on to abuse others. In the interview with perpetrators, she asks two of them whether or not they had been abused. One answers yes and it the statement goes without comment. One answers “no” and Oprah expresses surprise. There is an unstated assumption that abuse somehow causes abuse.

This assumption reappears in the middle of the interview with Gregg Milligan. Oprah and Gregg are discussing why Gregg’s mother treated him this way. Oprah tries to explain Greg’s abuse in terms of his mothers own suffering. Then at the end of the show she describes Gregg’s excellent parenting as “breaking the cycle”. She concludes the interview observing that his choice not to continue the cycle is a choice too few people make. This implies that abuse is a default choice and non-abuse requires positive and exceptional action.

We talk so easily about a “cycle of violence” but what is the evidence for it? One of the most frequently cited studies used to support the cycle of violence (Widom, 1989) in fact found that the vast majority of abuse survivors did NOT go on to abuse. Something can’t be a “cause” if it fails to produce the expected result in the majority of cases. The author herself stressed the variety of responses to abuse, but that hasn’t stopped people from using her study over and over as “proof” that abusers go on to be abusers.

Later studies that have broken down adult behavior by type of abuse find that among all forms of abuse, sexually abused individuals are among the least likely to themselves become abusers. In fact, it is possible that the reverse is true: those who have been abused this way often exhibit higher levels of altruistic behavior. Many of the people working in low-status and low-paying jobs in rape crisis centers are survivors of sexual abuse. Gregg Milligan sacrificed himself and his relationship with his mother to protect his sister.

Mosaic by Norman Rockwell: The Golden Rule

The Golden Rule, mosaic designed by Norman Rockwell and donated to the UN in 1985

The altruistic behavior of survivors should hardly be surprising. One of the most basic rules of human relationships east and west is the Golden Rule: “do unto others as you would have others do to you”. Across centuries and cultures, this rule has taken many forms: For millenia doctors have been vowing to “do no harm” when they make the Hippocratic oath. The Hebrew Bible commands “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Leviticus, 19:18). Rabbi Hillel in the 1st century B.C.E. told his students to “Do not do to others what is hateful to yourself.”. Jesus told his disciples “Love your neighbor as yourself”. Confucius teaches a similar lesson to Tsze-kung:

Tsze-kung asked, saying, “Is there one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one’s life?” The Master said, “Is not RECIPROCITY such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.”Analects 15:24

No matter how we word the Golden Rule, the Golden Rule presumes the existence of empathy. We need to be able to see and know what harmful, hurtful, unloving behavior is. Survivors don’t have to play guessing games about the injury caused by abuse. Some live it every day and others have spent long hours and many tears overcoming it. But all survivors know first hand how much abuse hurts. They are in fact in a better position to live the Golden Rule than those who have no personal experience of suffering.

The counter argument is that people do not act based on moral choice, but conditioning. We do as we see. Furthermore, some victims are so damaged psychologically that they lack the interpersonal skills to avoid abuse. This state of affairs can only be changed with extensive therapy.

Child survivors of Buchenwald leaving the camp

Child survivors of Buchenwald leaving the camp

There is something deeply disturbing in this logic. By this reasoning children growing up in concentration camps during the Holocaust should believe that starving people and sending them to gas chambers and crematoria is proper behavior. Initially, their behavior after rescue from the concentration camps was wild – they would rage and insist on foraging for food. They were considered beyond redemption. After a time they began to settle down, and most moved onto foster care or job training within a matter of months, barely enough time for any sort of serious therapy. And yet, among this group of survivors include three rabbis, one of whom was the Chief Rabbi of Israel. Others grew up to be doctors, medical directors, children home directors. One, Eli Wiesel, even won the Nobel Peace Prize. You can read more about child survivors of concentration camps here.

Of course, the only solution to argument and counter argument is research. It may also be possible that neither thesis is right. It may be that trauma pushes human behavior to the extremes, producing both high morals and angry disregard of others. Unfortunately, there are few, if any, studies to test the hypothesis that abuse leads to higher levels of moral behavior. We have only theories and unanswered questions.

Mother EarthMy journey of healing from rape has led me from a therapeutic interest in gardening to the search for ways to create a balanced and self-sustaining system for my own small garden to a wider interest in environmental issues.  Starting from when I moved into my current house, gradually clearing out the rubbish from the garden and carefully choosing just the right herbs and plants to bring the life back into it, gardening has become an important symbol of hope for myself.

As herbs, fruit bushes and useful native plants take over from the ‘wasteland’ that I’d inherited with the house, I’ve been able to observe how certain plants and wildlife work in harmony together – for example the lovage attracts hoverflies that keep the aphids off my roses, while the large clump of lemon balm also repels many pests from my fruit bushes.  It’s been a small-scale demonstration of how nature only needs a little bit of a helping hand to find her own balance.  Having seen for myself how it can work, how could I not also care about the wider garden of the planet?  How could I not want to see the balance restored on a broader scale than my own tiny patch?

How could I not want to see the balance restored on a broader scale than my own tiny patch?

How could I not want to see the balance restored on a broader scale than my own tiny patch?

There’s also no denying that as I’ve become more disciminating about who I want to spend my free time with, the environmental movement has brought me into contact with rather pleasanter, more idealistic people (of all faiths and none), than I often have to deal with day to day.  But the only problem with ideals is that they can all too often lead to over-enthusiasm, and a rather one-sided way of viewing the world.  I suspect this could be why I so often have to flinch and bite my tongue whenever some well-meaning idealist waxes lyrical about the “rape” of the earth.

It’s not that I can’t sympathise with the underlying message they’re trying to convey.  As countless species of wildlife go extinct, as huge areas of rainforest disappear, the words that spring to my mind are words such as destruction, vandalism, or even desecration to say that something sacred and vitally important is being lost to the world.  But still, none of these things are rape and nor will they ever be.

In the past, trying to speak out openly about my own experience of rape has come at a huge personal cost to me.  I have been met with disbelief, sheepish embarrassment, pity; peoples’ perceptions of me have changed in an instant from an intelligent and capable woman to a victim; and even long-standing friends have ceased to call and slowly drifted away from my life, because my truth makes them uncomfortable.  To me, rape is a terrifying word to say out loud because I know all too well the consequences of speaking up.  Silence, isolation and frustration have been a large part of my life for fifteen years now, and time definitely does not heal wounds such as these.

Is it any wonder, then, that hearing people casually toss out the rhetoric about the rape of the earth feels like yet another kick in the teeth to me?  It’s one more small betrayal, yet another diminishment of my personal struggle to find a life with some meaning and dignity.  Granted, the scale of the crisis that looms globally might seem to put my own personal problems into the shade – and yet, deep down I still feel that if those of us in the movement can’t deal respectfully with each others’ individual wounds, how will we ever learn to find a more gentle and balanced relationship with the natural world?

For myself, my journey has revealed to me that my own personal healing will not happen within some cosy, isolated little bubble.  As I keep working to find my place within the world, I am learning slowly to see how all of life is interconnected in subtle yet undeniable ways.  And thus, learning to reduce my own impact upon the earth isn’t simply some duty that I carry out for future generations – it becomes a task that I must undertake for my own benefit.  Caring for the earth becomes something as necessary to me as cleaning and renovating my own home, and my own garden.  Of course I couldn’t claim to always get it right, but each small step that I do take makes greater things possible over time.

I would however ask that any environmentalists who read this re-consider their use of metaphor.  Perhaps there are many in the movement who would respond to my history, if they were to hear of it, with more respect than certain one-time friends who have drifted away from my life.  But each time I hear the word “rape” repeated so easily, and seemingly with so little thought, I become less and less willing to take that risk.

Nemetona was the ancient Romano-British name for the guardian goddess of the sacred grove. It’s also the pen name of a reclusive and not-at-all famous writer and whisky lover who lives in Central England.

Marc Chagall - "Paysage Bleu"

Marc Chagall - "Paysage Bleu"

I don’t for one second doubt the existence of a rape culture. All the same, I am deeply uncomfortable with the common feminist definition:

It is a society where violence is seen as sexy and sexuality as violent. In a rape culture, women perceive a continuum of threatened violence that ranges from sexual remarks to sexual touching to rape itself. — Transforming a Rape Culture

As a survivor of rape, I feel that this definition is fundamentally flawed. Speech, touch, and penetration only represent a continuum if there is a relationship of mutual care that connects them together. Only love, joy and the desire to give them physical form can bind speech, touch, and penetration into a sequence of increasingly intense and intimate interaction.

When there is no mutual care or shared physical joy, these acts are discontinuous acts of invasiveness. Each has a significance all its own. They are not sex. They are violence pure and simple. No matter how attractively it is portrayed in the media, body parts aren’t being used as symbols of relationship or tools of pleasure. They are being used as weapons to wound and maim the soul.

The definition provided by Transforming a Rape Culture has the best of intentions, yet it implicitly accepts assumptions that create the very culture it is trying to fight. By seeing sexualized violence as sexuality, albeit in a perverted form, it confuses tools of relationship and pleasure with weapons of war and wounding. Seeing sexualized violence as a continuum conflates the violation of rape with the violation of abuse. We miss a crucial understanding of what makes rape culture so dangerous, not just to women, but to humanity itself.

Touching and speech are a normal part of human interaction, even among strangers. Inappropriately sexualized remarks and touching are abuse: they use what is given in trust to presume rights that a person doesn’t have. Abuse is deeply distressing and traumatic because it violates a relationship. We give someone a right to do something to us in kindness and love and then they misuse it to hurt us. It really doesn’t matter how they violate that trust, what hurts about abuse is the fact of violated trust.

Abuse presumes relationship. The hurt of rape is entirely different. It can and does exist with or without relationship because it has nothing to do with relationship. To the contrary, rape is the violation of separateness.

Rape violates the sacred boundaries of the body. Our bodies are the symbolic boundary between the self and the world. My body is the sanctuary of my soul, the place where my essence lives and contains itself. My body is also the only sign I have that I am alive. My being able to move my body, use my hands to help others, put food in my mouth, welcome someone special into my body, all of this makes my body indistinguishable from my being alive, my being able to connect to people, my being able to be myself in safety, even my ability to create life. So when everything is turned on its head and someone enters that space without permission, it is like they are taking life, messing with life, stealing a part of my self-hood.

If we’re going to talk about a rape culture, the definition of a rape culture needs to reflect the experience of rape. Rape is not the culmination of a rape culture, but its beginning. What would such a definition look like?

A rape culture is a culture that fails to acknowledge the sanctity of the body, the life within the body or the significance of violating its boundaries.

In a rape culture the receptive partner of any sexual interaction is most at risk for violation. Since women’s bodies are constructed for receptivity, women bear the brunt of suffering in any culture that failures to recognize the sacred boundaries of the body. But the suffering of a rape culture isn’t a gender issue. It is a receptivity issue. Any person, male or female, who takes the receptive role in an interaction is at risk.

A rape culture tells us it is permissible to violate receptivity in all its forms. It lets us laugh at things we ought to treat with respect.

The implications of this go well beyond rape. Receptivity is essential in all human interaction. If we live in a culture where we condone or look the other way when receptivity is violated, we destroy the very basis of trust and communication in our society. Creativity also requires receptivity and people who are afraid to be receptive will always be limited in their creativity. So long as a rape culture persists and receptivity is violated, we can never have peace. Sustained peace requires both trust and creativity in its fullest measure.