Pockets of misogyny like Harvard University have somehow escaped the thought revolution on rape following the dark ages of 1994. Jill Filipovic writes about the “latest depressing chapter” in unprovable rape allegations:
The latest depressing chapter arrived this week at Harvard, where a student penned an anonymous letter in the school newspaper detailing what she says was an assault on her and inaction by her university. The woman was in a friend’s dorm room—intoxicated, she writes—when “a friend” pressured her into sexual activity. There wasn’t physical force, she says, but there were demands and there was pain inflicted, and she was scared and drunk and trapped between him and a wall.
The woman reported the assault, but Harvard’s 20-year-old sexual assault policy is so outdated – less comprehensive than that of all the other Ivies, less inclusive even than the guidelines of the Justice Department – that the administration told her there was little they could do.
If, in enlightened, “inclusive” jurisdictions, criminal investigations hinge on boozy recollections of frightened consent in which “yes” means “no,” rape allegations lose much of their legitimacy. In other words, Todd Akin was right.
College kangaroo courts’ prudish definition of rape, egged on by the likes of Filipovic, is striking given the fog of hedonism and perversion that pervades college campuses around the country. The duality, irreconcilable to the untrained eye, progresses fluidly from a reactionary, post-feminist perspective.
The license that the sexual revolution won was a net loss for women. It actually shifted more power to men. By reducing conception and gestation from natural features of feminine sexuality to the will, feminists cost women their dignity. The danger of licentiousness—getting a girl pregnant—was no longer an incentive for men to stay chaste. Together they could screw all they wanted, and the responsibility fell on her to manage her reproductive cycle.
The freedom feminists celebrated is the means of their dehumanization. Realizing the dreadful truth, rather than scale back that freedom and restore women’s lost dignity, feminists became moralists. Degradation became exclusively a feminine imperative, and only as long as she liked it.
Under this second lens, the transaction of easy sex prioritizes her sexual and emotional needs. Her withdrawal of consent becomes the point of no return. Further, consent is retroactively annulled when she reports feeling conflicted.
Which explains how Filipovic views 1994 occasionally with the same bitterness as she views 1959.