Why Irma Kurtz is wrong about rape

In the June 2001 issue of British Cosmopolitan, the agony aunt Irma Kurtz replied to a reader's letter about rape. I think Irma's advice was irresponsible, insensitive, and re-iterates all the old myths about rape that we have tried so hard to break down over 30 years of feminism.

, 13 July 2001

In the June 2001 issue of British Cosmopolitan, the agony aunt

Irma Kurtz replied to a reader’s letter about rape. Here’s the

question and Irma’s reply:

Have I been raped?

I was in this guy’s bedroom – we’d fooled around once before, but

nothing serious. I didn’t feel like sex, so I pretended to be asleep.

He started to undress me and I froze as I realised he was entering me

from behind. Was I raped? I have threatened legal action but he claims

he only wanted to make the night special. I feel sick. What should I

do?

Did you tell him to get off you? Did you even say ‘No!’? If you

resisted and he carried on ‘making the night special’, then you’ve

every right to go to the law and you should, to protect other women

from his attention. However, the law is there to see both sides. When

you say that you didn’t ‘feel like sex’, it suggests you are sexually

experienced, even though you had not slept with this man before. And

so I (and probably the law) have to ask, what were you, a knowing

young woman, doing lying on his bed, if you did not expect him to take

it as an invitation? Unless he drugged you or you were desperately

ill, you are responsible for yourself. If you cannot say,

hand-on-heart, you have absolutely no responsibility for this

unfortunate event, I’m afraid the best thing you can do, is learn from

it. If a woman goes alone to a man’s room and lies down on his bed, it

will not generally be seen as an innocent act. Let the lesson remain:

you’re worth more than this – never let it happen

again.

Irma Kurtz in June 2001 Cosmopolitan

So, what do you think? Harsh, but fair? Telling it like it is?

Uncomfortable, but ultimately true?

Well, I disagree. I think that Irma has majorly screwed up, and

that her reply is irresponsible, insensitve and sends completely the

wrong messages out to the readers of Cosmopolitan.

My concerns are not just about the advice given to the particular person who

wrote the letter, but also the messages she is sending out to other

women who may have been raped and can relate to the girl’s situation.

I am not concerned about whether ‘the law’ would think it was rape or

not or whether the case would stand up in court. That’s a

whole other article. What bothers me is that Irma Kurtz seems

to be reiterating all the old myths about rape that we have tried so

hard to break down over 30 years of feminism.

This response from one of Cosmo’s veteran

contributers appalls me.[pulloutbox]

I am also not writing here about Cosmpolitan’s attitude to rape in

general, as a ‘magazine.’ I believe Cosmo has recently had some

articles about rape and on helping women to protect themselves.

Although they’d never mention the f-word (feminism), they do some good

work campaigning for women’s rights in areas like contraception and

the workplace. I applaud this. But I can’t be persuaded to see this

reply in context of the magazine’s previous issues and articles, and

to think it’s okay simply because they’ve addressed rape elsewhere. I

very rarely buy it; I have to look at what’s there in the issue I

have. And this particular response from one of Cosmo’s veteran

contributers (and I don’t mean that in a derogatory way) appalls me.

Let’s take another look at what Irma said. This will take a little

while but it helps to deconstruct what she is saying.

Did you tell him to get off you? Did you even say ‘No!’? If

you resisted and he carried on ‘making the night special’, then you’ve

every right to go to the law and you should, to protect other women

from his attention.

The original question was, ‘was I raped’? Irma is saying: it

depends. Well, that’s fair enough. But what does it depend on,

according to Irma? It doesn’t depend on consent, because that

obviously wasn’t given. It doesn’t depend on what the man

did. He entered her from behind without her consent when she was lying

frozen and unresponsive on a bed. But that doesn’t matter.

[pulloutbox]If you were too scared to fight back, it’s

not rape, and don’t waste everybody’s time.[pulloutbox]

No, according to Irma, whether it was rape or not depends on how

the she reacted to him entering her from behind. If she

screamed and fought and struggled, it was rape, and she should act

accordingly – which Irma says is going to the law. Nobody could argue

with that. However, if she froze, montionless, unresponsive – out

of fear, shock, or whatever – then it wasn’t rape, according to Irma.

If you are too scared to fight back, if you don’t have enough

confidence, if you think it would be safer to go along for fear of

worse being done to you, if you freeze, if you don’t have the courage,

then it’s not rape, and don’t waste everybody’s time.

So what was it then? We find out a little further down the

paragraph: ‘an unfortunate event.’ Never mind that this woman seems

confused and in her own words, feels sick. Never mind that she didn’t

want sex, didn’t give consent, and didn’t respond to his crude

attempts to ‘make the night special’. It was just an unfortunate

event, and what’s more, she bears responsibility for it.

However, the law is there to see both

sides.

Ah, here we go. Well, after just one miserly sentence on what to do

if she thinks it was rape (which according to Irma is a pretty narrow

definition), we get onto the real focus of Irma’s argument:

blaming the girl for what happened, and using ‘the law’ as her

reasoning. Well, if Irma thinks the law as it applies to rape is a

template for giving out advice to young women, she is living in

cloud-cuckoo land.

When I asked women on the thirdwave mailing list what they thought

about this whole thing, Charlotte

Honigman-Smith commented about this; “That’s a spectacularly weird

way to describe what the law is there for.”

When you say that you didn’t ‘feel like sex’, it

suggests you are sexually experienced, even though you had not slept

with this man before.

Oh, boy. Now that’s an old one, bringing out the previous sexual

experience issue. Irma is going waaayyy off track here.

First of all, how on earth does ‘didn’t feel like sex’ suggest that

she is sexually experienced? That’s one hell of an assumption. And

even if she has had sex before, what relevance does it

have?

[pulloutbox]The more sex a woman has had, the less

plausible she becomes as a rape victim.[pulloutbox]

We are getting into dangerous territory here; the

territory which says that if a woman has had sex before, she’s

probably partly responsible for the rape, or even if she wasn’t it

doesn’t matter as much as it would if she were a virgin. I

am not saying that Irma Kurtz believes this herself,

but by bringing up the issue of previous sexual experience she is

veering towards that mindset. Feminists have been fighting for years

to try to prevent a woman’s previous sexual history being brought up

in court. Research has shown that if a woman has had more than one or

two sexual partners in her life, the jury tends to trust her less and

her credibility goes down. The more sex a woman has had – if she has

even expressed an interest or enjoyment of sex – the less plausible

she becomes as a rape victim. That’s why people very rarely

care if a prostitute is raped, because they are seen to be slags

anyway.

So why did Irma bring up this issue? Read on:

And so I (and probably the law) have to ask, what were you,

a knowing young woman, doing lying on his bed, if you did not expect

him to take it as an invitation?

Irma is saying that, as a woman who’s had sex before (okay, we’ll

accept that assumption), she should have known better than to go into

a man’s room, alone, and lie on his bed. She should have known that

this would be seen as sending out a signal saying ‘you can have me.’

She should have known that all men are ignorant and stupid, and would

see this as an invitation. She should have known that this would end

in sex.

This is insulting to men and women. It implies that all men are

idiots or worse, all rapists, who when presented with a woman asleep

(or pretending to be asleep) on their bed, they take this as an

‘invitation’ for sex, whether consenting or not.

[pulloutbox]What kind of previous sexual experiences does

she think this woman has had?[pulloutbox]

Do you really believe that? What kind of previous sexual

experiences does Irma think this woman has had to make her have such a

bizarre view of relationships? Male reader – are you insulted? You

should be. Female reader – have you ever lay down on a man’s bed?

For whatever reason you did so – to cuddle, to kiss, to talk, to

relax, to hold each other, to chat to a friend – Irma is, in effect,

telling you that you were sending out ‘fuck me’ signals.

Impressed?

When I first read the writer’s question, the situation immediately

reminded me of when I was at university. People would be in and out of

each others rooms all the time, lying on the floor, lying on beds,

chatting, sleeping over. Men and women slept together without

necessarily having sex. That’s just what happened. I’m sure you’ve

experienced the same thing. This may have been what was happening in

the woman’s sitaution. Should she be condemned for it?

[pulloutbox]She seems to imply the writer was asking for

it.[pulloutbox]

Of course, some men are rapists, and they are undeniably

dangerous. I am not trying to deny the existence of male rapists.

But to condemn a woman for simply being alone in someone’s room and

lying on a bed, telling her she should have known that this would

happen, is ludicrous. “What were you doing, ” Irma askes, “if you

did not expect him to take it as an invitation?” Irma asks. She seems

to imply that the writer was asking for it. That she really wanted it.

“What were you doing… if you did not expect him to take it as an

invitation?” As if there could never be another reason for lying

on a bed.

As another member of the mailing list, Britta, said;

“The woman is frozen, clothed, face down, unresponsive? That’s what

Irma is calling an “invitation” for sex?”

And remember, this is Cosmopolitan here, the magazine for

modern independent women, telling us that we should never be alone

with a man and never, ever, ever, lie on his bed, unless we expect to

be raped in return. If we lie on a bed, we are prick teases and

deserve all we get. If we are raped, it is our fault. We are

‘responsible.’ Cosmopolitan! Talk about confused

messages.

Unless he drugged you or you were desperately

ill, you are responsible for yourself.

[pulloutbox]“A woman who goes upstairs with a brother at a fraternity

party is an idiot. Feminists call this blaming the victim. I call it

common sense.” – Camille Paglia[pulloutbox]

It seems Irma Kurtz turned into Camille Paglia overnight.

Irma would say that she is living in the real world. That it is

sometimes dangerous to be a woman, and that going into a man’s room

alone is putting yourself into a dangerous situation, and that you are

stupid for doing so. Therefore, you are responsible for what

happened to you.

I agree that as women, we face dangers. It is sensible not to walk

down a dark alley in the middle of the night. It is sensible not to

walk down Oxford Street with your handbag half open. Of course we need

to be aware and take precautions to ensure that we don’t get into

dangerous situations in the first place.

[pulloutbox]In rape cases the woman seems to be

responsible for what happened to her.[pulloutbox]

But this does not detract from the fact of what happened. If a

house without a burglar alarm is robbed, do we treat the theives more

leniently because the owner of the house was ‘asking for it’? There

seems to be this thing with rape cases where the woman still bears

some or all of the responsibility for what happened to her, and is

treated as if she were the guilty one. Compare Irma’s response with

these comments made by judges in the past (which I have taken from the

book Misogynies by Joan Smith):

In January 1988, a judge said that a

twelve-year-old girl who had been raped has acted

foolishly. Ian Kenworthy, nineteen, appeared before

Lincoln High Court charged with raping the girl after she

went back to his bed-sit for a cup of coffee. Sentencing

him to three years’ youth custody, Mr Justice John Evans

said: ‘It was foolish of her to go.’ He remarked: ‘In

other days, you would have said she was asking for

trouble.’ [my italics]

In January 1988 a motorist called John Allen

was convicted of raping a seventeen-year-old girl who

hitched a lift with him after finding herself stranded

after a party. Fining Allwn a paltry £2,000 instead of

gaoling him, Judge Bertrand Richards observed: ‘The

victim was guilty of a great deal of contributory

negligence.’ [my italics]

I am hard pressed to tell the difference.

And still, all this woman did was pretend to be asleep on a guy’s

bed, someone she knew, someone she’d ‘fooled around with’ previously

and nothing bad had happened then. How could she have predicted what

would happen? She should not be told it was her fault.

[pulloutbox]‘Real’ rapes are done by strangers, at

knifepoint, by an unknown assailant on a dark street.[pulloutbox]

The other message I am getting from Irma’s reply is that

there are ‘real’ rapes on the one hand, and unfortunate incidents

on the other. This is another myth about rape that’s been around

for a long time. ‘Real’ rapes are done by strangers, the women are

physically beaten or attacked, they are bruised and bleeding. They

are done at knifepoint, by a stalker, by an unknown assailant on a

dark street. This is what people generally think of when they

think of rape.

But the fact is, the majority of rapes do not

occur like this. The majority of rapes are done by people known to

the woman. If you are too scared to fight back and go along with it

out of fear, isn’t it rape? If you are raped, but weren’t “drugged or

desperately ill”, was it your fault? It doesn’t depend on who did the

rape, whether a complete stranger or your husband. If he

forced sex on you, it was still rape. It doesn’t matter whether you

were bruised and bleeding or if there wasn’t a scratch on you; it was

still rape. It doesn’t matter if you felt completely devastated or

whether you dusted yourself off and kept going; it was still rape. It

doesn’t matter whether you took it to court or decided to try to live

through it; it was still rape. Rape is sex without consent. It is that

simple.

[pulloutbox]“If it’s a totally devastating psychological

experience to a woman then she does not have a proper

attitude towards sex.” – Camille Paglia[pulloutbox]

Women are confused about this. They are unsure about whether they

were raped or not. They are confused. This letter is an example of

this. Replies like Irma’s add to the confusion, the idea that there

are ‘real’ rapes on the one hand, and ‘unfortunate incidents’ on the

other, the idea that as it wasn’t a ‘real’ rape, the writer should

just get over it. Irma doesn’t seem to be taking the woman’s

feelings seriously. She was raped, and she is upset about it. She

needs help, not condemnation. Because the writer has had sex

before, because she was alone in a man’s room, it’s nothing to get

upset about. As Irma says, “the best thing you can do is learn from

it.”

In Irma’s reply, I am also getting overtones of an argument I have

heard before, namely from Lord Abernethy. He was a Scottish judge who

just this year, cleared a defendent in a rape case, ruling that rape

was only rape if force could be shown to be used, and that just saying

‘no’ was not enough. He said: “To have sexual intercourse with a woman

without her consent in itself if not rape”

As Charlotte

from the mailing list commented; “So, within the law, a woman is

required to get herself beaten up as well as raped?”

If she wants to be believed, if she wants to be treated seriously,

if she wants her concerns addressed, maybe, sadly, yes. And Irma

Kurtz, respected agony aunt in a hugely popular women’s magazine,

seems to be implying the same thing.

If you cannot say, hand-on-heart, you have absolutely no

responsibility for this unfortunate event, I’m afraid the best thing

you can do, is learn from it. If a woman goes alone to a man’s room and lies down

on his bed, it will not generally be seen as an innocent

act.

As I have argued above, I disagree strongly that being in a man’s

room and lying on a bed is an ‘invitation’ for sex. What about lying

on a bed to kiss and cuddle and nothing more? What about lying there

having a conversation? What about just going to sleep cosily in each

others arms? Are we supposed to believe that men are all evil

bastards who’ll misinterpret all we do?

I don’t believe all this crap about misunderstanding ‘signals’

and ‘signs’ and it not being clear if the woman if consenting or not.

It should be blatently obvious to any man with a heart if he makes a

move and she doesn’t want it. It doesn’t matter if she doesn’t say

anything. Has she frozen? Does she look scared? Is she smiling? Have

you even asked? If they hadn’t had sex before, it is

acceptable for a man to just go ahead without checking first whether

it’s okay? No, it’s not.

[pulloutbox]Irma wants the writer to stop focusing on the appalling arrogance

of the man who did this to her, and start blaming herself.[pulloutbox]

Irma wants the writer to stop focusing on the appalling arrogance

of the man who did this to her, and start blaming herself. Irma wants

her to ruefully shake her head and think, well, yes, I was really to

blame, wasn’t I? I lay on a man’s bed. I was alone in a man’s room. Oh

dear, stupid old me. As if women don’t blame themselves enough! It’s

like someone who’s been mugged or punched, thinking well, yes, I

was walking down the street alone, so perhaps it’s my fault.

Well, I did criticise him that time, so it’s my fault he beat

me up. If we thought like this all the time, blaming ourselves as

Irma wants us to do, we’d never leave the house. Is it any wonder

that the majority of agraphobics are women?

The weirdest thing is, in a reply to a different reader on the same

agony page, Irma tells a woman whose boyfriend had sexual problems:

“Please don’t cultivate the great feminine weakness for self-blame in

these situations.” So what are we supposed to take from that? If your

boyfriend can’t get it up, don’t blame youself, but if you were raped,

do?

[pulloutbox]

“Yes means yes

No means no

However we dress

Wherever we go.”

– feminist chant

[pulloutbox]

I maintain that it is our right, as human beings, (and I include

men in this) not to be forced into anything we do not want to do. If

we are walking down the street alone, we have a right not to be

attacked. If we go out on a date, we have a right not to be raped. We

have a right to wear short skirts, to have previous sexual

experiences, to wear makeup without it being thought that we were

asking for it. I maintain that our right is to have sex when and how

we want.

It’s absolutely unbelievable that we still have to reiterate these

basic concepts in this day and age. But it seems some people still

don’t get it. So let’s reiterate:

A woman can enter a man’s house, his room, even his bed, and still

have a right not to be forced into sexual intercourse. Irma would

probably say that by doing this a woman is leading a man on, is asking

for it, is giving an invitation. It depends on the situation, and

communication is the key. But the fact remains that even if a woman

thought she wanted sex, even told him so, and then for whatever

reason, wants to back down at the last minute, she has a right to do

so. So does a man.

[pulloutbox]Why do we think it is okay when it comes

to sex?[pulloutbox]

What if you agreed to go on a bungee jump and got to the top and

then decided you really didn’t want to? Would the instructor

be justified in shoving you off the bridge? What if you were walking

down the aisle and realised it would be totally wrong to marry the

man. Would the groom be justified in physically forcing you down to

the altar and making you go through with it against your will?

Obviously it would be better if it hadn’t got that far. But of course

it isn’t okay, even in these situations when an express promise of

something has been given. So why do we think it is okay when it comes

to sex, even in situations when consent has not been expressly

given?

The idea seems to remain that men are uncontrollable animals,

driven by wild sexual urges that cannot be controlled, and they will

attack (i.e. rape) if provoked. It’s almost thought of as an instinct.

Recent research published in the New Scientist suggested that

rapists are attracked by ‘unconscious signals’ that ovulating women

send out. Like the Incredible Hulk, they are overtaken by urges

they simply cannot control. When alone with a woman in a room, they

will attempt to mate with her. They are overtaken – they

just can’t stop themselves. They’re not really responsible for

their actions, because they are driven wild by the sexual signals

supposedly given off by the woman.

Yet again, it’s not the

rapist’s fault, it is the woman’s fault. This harks back to medieval

times when women were seen as the corrupters of men. It

continues today in the Taliban regime, where women are forced to wear

Burqas covering their whole body, to avoid laughter, to even make

a sound whilst walking; otherwise the men will be corrupted.

This way of thinking ignores the fact that rape is generally not

about sexual gratification. It has deeper, more complex causes

involving power, hatred, and control.

[pulloutbox]Only 7.5% of reported rapists get convicted.

It is dangerous and patronising to think about men this way. It

excuses atrocities. It demeans men and women. In an age where only

7.5% of reported rapists get convicted – and that’s only the

reported rapes, mind you; in an age where a lawyer can use

previous sexual experiences, clothing, abortions, the way you dance in

a nightclub, and more irrelvant facts about you to defend your rapist,

I feel it is important that magazines like Cosmopolitan do not

compound matters by repeating all the old garbage, all the old myths

about rape that we have been trying to lay to rest.

So how would I have advised the young woman?

First of all, and I would have thought this would have been

obvious, I would have included contact details for rape organisations,

helplines, counselling, etc., such as Rape Crisis. Irma did not give

any such details or even mention that such things exist. It’s almost

as if one tiny paragraph of her advice should be enough, now the woman

should get over it. I’m still amazed that this information wasn’t

given. All it took was one phone number to be printed. What if some of

the readers of Cosmo who’ve been raped were reading it? They need to

be told where to get help.

Secondly, Irma does not mention possible pregnancy, or STD’s.

If the man did not use a condom she needs to be checked out.

Should she go to the law? I would hesitate to give a yes or no

answer. I would say that it is her decision and she needs to take lots

of advice, possibly from a rape support organisation. I would point

out that it could be a difficult and painful process, but that if she

feels it is the right thing to do after seeking advice, this should

not stop her.

In an ideal world, she could have screamed and

got the hell out of there.

Was she raped? I would say yes. In an ideal world, she could

have screamed, thrown the idiot off the bed and got the hell out of

there. But for whatever reason, she didn’t. It

seems she was too frightened. In an ideal world, instead of pretending

to be asleep she could have said to him, ‘Look, I’m a bit tired and

not in the mood, do you mind if we just cuddle?’ But this is not the

time for recriminations and making her feel even worse. Maybe she is

young, shy, inexperienced, uncomfortable expressing herself. How many

young women are given the skills to express themselves clearly when it

comes to sex and relationships? We are almost expected to read each

others minds when it comes to sex. Young women need to be given these

skills. The fact that this woman could not do this, this time, does

not mean she was ‘responsible’ for the rape.

So, if I were the Agony Aunt, I would tell her that nobody has

the right to force sex on her. This is never, ever, acceptable. If

she is in this situation again, she should grit her teeth and

speak out, and fight back if necessary. To do this, she may need to be

trained in self-assertion and confidence. It would also be useful to

get some self-defence training too. I would give contact details for

both of those.

Let the lesson remain: you’re worth more than this – never

let it happen again.

Yes, the writer is worth more than this. She also worth more

than Irma’s Kurtz’s advice.

Irma wasted the small paragraph she had by focusing on completely

the wrong issues, and making the writer feel worse instead of helping

her feel better. I think I know why Irma did it this way; she did it

to keep up her reputation for being ‘frank’ and ‘brusque’. It’s fair

enough to have that style of writing, but at what expense? I believe

she failed the young woman who wrote to her and dealt with it in the

wrong way.

As feminists, as women, as human beings, we should not let these

outdated opinions about rape creep back in to our consciousness.

I have sent a copy of this article to Cosmopolitan to give them

an opportunity to respond.

Thanks to Charlotte and Britta for input and comments.

If you want to contact Cosmopolitan, email cosmo.mail@natmags.co.uk

or write to:

Cosmopolitan

National Magazine House

72 Broadwick Street

London

England

W1V 2BP

Have Your say

Comments are closed on this post

  • The F-Word on Twitter
  • The F-Word on Facebook
  • Our XML Feeds