Its Only A Penis

"It's Only a Penis": Rape, Feminism, and Difference
Author(s): Christine Helliwell

Source: Signs, Vol. 25, No. 3 (Spring, 2000), pp. 789-816
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3175417 .
Accessed: 04/05/2014 21:34
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Signs.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 132.194.32.30 on Sun, 4 May 2014 21:34:54 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
C h r istine Helliwell
"It's
Only
a Penis":
Rape,
Feminism,
and Difference
n 1985 and 1986 I carried out
anthropological
fieldwork in the
Dayak
community
of Gerai in Indonesian Borneo. One
night
in
September
1985,
a man of the
village
climbed
through
a window into the freestand-
ing
house where a widow lived with her
elderly
mother,
younger (unmar-
ried) sister,
and
young
children. The widow
awoke,
in
darkness,
to feel the
man inside her
mosquito
net,
gripping
her shoulder while he climbed un-
der the blanket that covered her and her
youngest
child as
they slept (her
older children
slept
on mattresses
nearby).
He was
whispering,
"be
quiet,
be
quiet!"
She
responded by sitting up
in bed and
pushing
him
violently,
so that he stumbled
backward,
became
entangled
with her
mosquito
net,
and
then,
finally
free,
moved across the floor toward the window. In the
meantime,
the woman climbed from her bed and
pursued
him,
shouting
his name several times as she did so. His hurried exit
through
the
window,
with his clothes now in considerable
disarray,
was
accompanied by
a stream
of abuse from the woman and
by
excited
interrogations
from wakened
neighbors
in
adjoining
houses.
I awoke the
following morning
to raucous
laughter
on the
longhouse
verandah outside
my apartment
where a
group
of
elderly
women
gathered
regularly
to
thresh, winnow,
and
pound
rice.
They
were
recounting
this
tale
loudly,
and with enormous
enjoyment,
to all in the immediate
vicinity.
As I came out of
my
door,
one was
engaged
in
mimicking
the man climb-
ing
out the
window, sarong
falling
down,
genitals
askew. Those others
working
or
lounging
near her on the verandah
-
both men and women
-
shrieked with
laughter.
When told the
story,
I was shocked and
appalled.
An unknown man
had tried to climb into the bed of a woman in the
dead,
dark of
night?
I
knew what this was called:
attempted rape.
The woman had seen the man
and
recognized
him
(so
had others in the
village,
wakened
by
her shout-
ing).
I knew what he deserved: the
full
weight
of the law.
My
own fears
I am
grateful
to Francis Elliott for a crucial
reference,
to the editors and referees of
Signs
for their
thoughtful
comments and
suggestions,
to Barbara Sullivan for
many helpful
dis-
cussions,
and to
Barry
Hindess for his
customary
blend of
perceptive
criticism and
encouragement.
[Signs: Journal of
Women in Culture and
Society 2000,
vol.
25,
no.
3]
? 2000
by
The
University
of
Chicago.
All
rights
reserved.
0097-9740/2000/2503-0006$02.00
790 I Helliwell
about
being
a
single
woman alone in a
strange place, sleeping
in a
dwelling
that could not be secured at
night,
bubbled to the surface.
My
feminist
sentiments
poured
out. "How can
you laugh?"
I asked
my
women
friends;
"this is a
very
bad
thing
that he has tried to do." But
my outrage simply
served to fuel the
hilarity.
"No,
not
bad,"
said one of the old women
(a
particular
friend of
mine), "simply stupid."
I felt vindicated in
my response
when,
two hours
later,
the woman her-
self came onto the verandah to share betel nut and tobacco and to broad-
cast the
story.
Her
anger
was
palpable,
and she shouted for all to hear her
determination to exact a
compensation payment
from the man.
Thinking
to obtain information about local women's
responses
to
rape,
I
began
to
question
her. Had she been
frightened?
I asked. Of course she had-
Wouldn't I feel
frightened
if I awoke in the dark to find an unknown
per-
son inside
my mosquito
net? Wouldn't I be
angry? Why
then,
I
asked,
hadn't she taken the
opportunity,
while he was
entangled
in her
mosquito
net,
to kick him hard or to hit him with one of the
many
wooden
imple-
ments near at hand? She looked shocked.
Why
would she do that? she
asked- after
all,
he hadn't hurt her.
No,
but he had wanted
to,
I
replied.
She looked at me with
puzzlement.
Not able to find a local word for
rape
in
my vocabulary,
I scrabbled to
explain myself:
"He was
trying
to have
sex with
you,"
I
said,
"although you
didn't want to. He was
trying
to hurt
you."
She looked at
me,
more with
pity
than with
puzzlement
now,
al-
though
both were mixed in her
expression.
"Tin
[Christine],
it's
only
a
penis,"
she said. "How can a
penis
hurt
anyone?"
Rape,
feminism,
and difference
A central feature of
many
feminist
writings
about
rape
in the
past twenty
years
is their concern to eschew the view of
rape
as a natural function of
male
biology
and to stress instead its bases in
society
and culture. It is
curious, then,
that so much of this work talks of
rape
in terms that
sug-
gest-either implicitly
or
explicitly-
that it is a universal
practice.
To take
only
several
examples:
Pauline Bart and Patricia O'Brien tell us that
"every
female from nine months to
ninety years
is at risk"
(1985, 1);
Anna Clark
argues
that "all women know the
paralyzing
fear of
walking
down a dark
street at
night....
It seems to be a fact of life that the fear of
rape imposes
a curfew on our movements"
(1987, 1);
Catharine MacKinnon claims that
"sexuality
is central to women's definition and forced sex is central to sexu-
ality,"
so
"rape
is
indigenous,
not
exceptional,
to women's social condition"
(1989b, 172)
and "all women live all the time under the shadow of the
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 791
threat of sexual abuse"
(1989a, 340);
Lee
Madigan
and
Nancy
Gamble
write of "the
global
terrorism of
rape" (1991, 21-22);
and Susan Brison
asserts that "the fact that all women's lives are restricted
by
sexual violence
is
indisputable" (1993, 17).
The
potted
"world histories" of
rape
-which
attempt
to trace the
practice
in a
range
of different societies
against
a
single
historical/evolutionary
timeline -found in a number of feminist
writings
on the
topic,
further illustrate this
universalizing tendency.'
Just as
I,
an
anthropologist
trained to be
particularly
sensitive to the
impact
of cultural
difference,
nevertheless took for
granted
the occurrence of
rape
in a social
and cultural context that I knew to be
profoundly
different from
my
own,
so most other feminists also
unwittingly
assume that the
practice
occurs in
all human societies.2 This is
particularly puzzling given
that
Peggy
Reeves
Sanday,
for
one,
long ago
demonstrated that while
rape
occurs
widely
throughout
the
world,
it is
by
no means a human universal: some societies
can indeed be classified as
rape
free
(1981).
There are two
general
reasons for this universalization of
rape among
Western feminists. The first of these has to do with the
understanding
of
the
practice
as horrific
by
most women in Western societies. In these set-
tings, rape
is seen as "a fate worse
than,
or tantamount
to,
death"
(S.
Mar-
cus
1992,
387):
a
shattering
of
identity
that,
for
instance,
left one North
American survivor
feeling
"not
quite
sure whether I had died and the world
went on without
me,
or whether I was alive in a
totally
alien world"
(Bri-
son
1993, 10).
While
any
form of violent attack
may
have severe emotional
consequences
for its
victims,
the sexualization of violence in
rape greatly
intensifies those
consequences
for women in Western societies: "To show
power
and
anger through rape
-
as
opposed
to
mugging
or assault
-
men
are
calling
on lessons women learn from
society,
from
history
and
religion,
to
defile,
degrade
and shame in addition to
inflicting physical pain. Rapists
have
learned,
as have their
victims,
that to
rape
is to do
something
worse
than to assault"
(Gordon
and
Riger
1989, 45;
see also Koss and
Harvey
1991). Clearly,
the
intermeshing
of
sexuality
and
personal identity
in con-
temporary
Western
societies--such
that Michel Foucault refers to sex as
"that secret which seems to underlie all that we are"
(1978, 155)
-
imbues
1
For recent
examples
of such
histories,
see
Madigan
and Gamble
1991, 11ff.;
McColgan
1996,
12-27.
2
There are some
exceptions
to this. For
example, Peggy
Sanday's
work on
rape among
the
Minangkabau (1986)
and within U.S.
college
fraternities
(1990b) emphasizes very
much
its contextualized character. In
fact,
Sanday
is one of the few feminists who has
attempted
to
formulate a more
general theory concerning
the conditions under which
rape
occurs and
under which it does not occur
(1981; 1986; 1990b, 8).
792 I Helliwell
the
practice
of
rape
with
particular
horror for most victims from those
societies,
since there it involves a violation of
personhood
itself.3
Significantly,
almost one-third of the
respondents
in Bart and O'Brien's
sample
of U.S. women
subject
to
rape attempts
were more afraid of
being
raped by
their attackers than
they
were of
being
murdered
and/or
muti-
lated
by
them
(1985, 52-53)
-
an
extraordinarily large
number
given
that
American women are
reported
to fear murder more than
any
other crime
(Gordon
and
Riger
1989, 2).4 Rape
is the second most feared crime
among
women in
America,
a situation that is no doubt exacerbated
by
the
frequency
with which it occurs there.5
Margaret
Gordon and
Stephanie
Riger (1989)
have documented at
length
the
way
fear of
rape
-
"the female
fear" or "this
special
fear,"
as
they
call it -
pervades
the lives and
shapes
the
actions of American women. So
deep
is this fear for
many
Western women
3
It is clear from the
ethnographic
record that while for women in
many
non-Western
societies the
experience
of
rape
is similar to that of most Western
women,
this is not the case
in all societies. Material
from,
e.g.,
Mehinaku
(Gregor 1990)
and some
Papua
New Guinea
societies
suggests
that
rape
takes on rather different
meanings
and
significances
in these set-
tings
and,
in
particular,
that
rape
is not
everywhere experienced
by
women victims in the
deeply
traumatic terms taken for
granted by
most Western feminist writers on the
topic.
Indeed,
there is evidence to
suggest
that,
even within
specific
Western
contexts,
rape
can
mean rather different
things
to different
people: Bourque
1989,
for
instance,
has shown that
within a
single community
in southern
California,
definitions of
rape vary enormously,
both
between men and women and between different women. It is
important
to
point
out in this
context that to
acknowledge
the social and cultural
variability
of the
meaning
of
rape
is not
to
deny
its horror or invalidate its trauma for most women victims in the West. The work of
such
disparate
thinkers as Maurice
Merleau-Ponty,
Foucault,
and Pierre Bourdieu has demon-
strated that
bodily (including emotional) responses
are
largely socially
constituted;
the fact
that
they
are therefore not
universally
shared renders them no less real for those who
experi-
ence them. Iris Marion
Young's
classic account
(1990)
of how Western women's
oppression
is lived in their
bodily experience,
for
instance,
makes
very
clear the connection between social
institutions and
practices
and the
bodily/emotional responses
of individuals.
4
Twenty-nine
women out of
ninety-two
were more afraid of
being raped by
their attackers
than of
being
murdered
and/or
mutilated
by
them.
Forty-seven
women were more afraid of
being
murdered
and/or mutilated,
and sixteen were unclear on this
point (Bart
and O'Brien
1985, 53).
Bart and O'Brien
suggest
that women who are more afraid of
being raped
than of
being
murdered
and/or
mutilated are more
likely
to avoid
rape
when attacked
by
a
potential
rapist.
5
Madigan
and Gamble state that an estimated 15 to 40
percent
of women
(presumably
of American
women)
are "victims of
attempted
or
completed rapes during
their lifetimes"
(1991, 4;
see also Russell
1984;
Bart and O'Brien
1985, 129-30; Kilpatrick
et al.
1987;
Koss
and
Harvey
1991, 22-29).
Koss and
Harvey
cite a
study showing
that one in 3.6 American
college
women has been
subject
to
rape
or
attempted rape
in her lifetime
(1991, 24).
While
the
frequency
rates are lower in most other Western
countries, they
are nonetheless
high;
McColgan, e.g.,
refers to a 1982
study
in London that found that one woman in
every
six
had been
raped
and a further one in five had been
subject
to
attempted rape (1996, 94).
S I G N S
Spring
2000 1 793
that
they anticipate
the
possibility
of
rape everywhere: rape
comes to be
understood
simply
as
part
of the "natural" human condition. Susan Griffin
puts
it
eloquently:
"I have never been free of the fear of
rape.
From a
very
early age
I,
like most
women,
have
thought
of
rape
as
part
of
my
natural
environment-
something
to be feared and
prayed against
like fire and
lightning.
I never asked
why
men
raped;
I
simply thought
it one of the
many mysteries
of human nature"
(1986, 3).
Since feminists
are,
undoubt-
edly,
as
subject
to this fear as
any
other Western
women,
our
tendency
to
universalize
rape
is almost
overwhelming.
In
addition,
because within Western feminist discourse
rape
is
depicted
as a
shockingly
barbaric
practice- "illuminat[ing] gendered
relations of
power
in their
rawest,
most brutal forms"
(Dubinsky
1993, 8)
-
there is a
tendency
to view it as atavistic. Because the
practice
is
widespread
in "civi-
lized" Western
countries,
it is assumed to
pervade
all other societies as
well,
since these latter are understood as located closer to the
savagery
end of
the
evolutionary
ladder. This relates
very closely
to what Chandra
Mohanty
has described as "the third world difference": "that stable ahistorical some-
thing" that,
in
many
feminist
accounts,
oppresses
the women of Third
World countries in addition to their
oppression by
men
(1991, 53).
Under
this
logic, practices
deemed
oppressive
to women that are not
commonly
found in the
West,
such as
clitoridectomy
and
sati,
are
explained
as re-
sulting
from the barbarism of Third World
peoples,
while
oppressive prac-
tices that are common in the
West,
such as
rape,
are
explained
in universal-
istic terms.6 The related
tendency
within Western
iconography
to sexualize
black female bodies
(see
Gilman
1985)
means that
rape
is
readily
assumed
to be a characteristic of "other"
-
especially
black- societies. In
fact,
the
link between this racist
iconography
and the
frequency
with which white
men
rape
black women in countries like the United States should lead us
to be
extremely wary
of this kind of
assumption.
Feminists cannot
sidestep
this
problem by claiming
that
apparently universalizing
statements about
rape
are meant to refer to Western societies
only,
since the
assumption
that
6
Kathleen
Barry's
recent book on
prostitution provides
a
good example
of this kind of
approach.
Without
providing
any
historical or
ethnographic
evidence
whatsoever,
she claims
that in
"pre-industrial
and feudal societies"
(the
first of four
progessive
historical
"stages
of
sexual
exploitation"),
"women's reduction to sex is a fact of their status as the
property
of
their husbands. Under such conditions women are
governed by
marital relations of
power
through
the
exploitation
of their
unpaid
labor in the
home,
their
reproduction,
and their
sexuality....
Men
may
sexually exploit
their
wives,
take
concubines,
and
buy prostitutes
with
impunity
as the
privilege
of male domination that services their
promiscuity. By
contrast,
as
women are sexual
property
of
men,
any
sexual act outside of their
marriage,
including
rape
and forced
prostitution,
is
usually
considered
infidelity
and the victims are
severely punished"
(Barry
1995, 51).
794 1 Helliwell
unmarked statements should
automatically
be read in this
way
is itself
sug-
gestive
of a form of racism. This is a
point
to which Western
feminists,
of
all
people,
should be
particularly
sensitive,
having
ourselves been
engaged
in a
protracted
battle to fracture
universalizing
masculinist discourses.
A
second,
equally deep-seated
reason for the feminist
tendency
to uni-
versalize
rape
stems from Western feminism's
emphasis
on difference be-
tween men and women and from its
consequent linking
of
rape
and
difference. Two
types
of difference are involved here. The first of these is
difference in social status and
power;
thus
rape
is linked
quite explicitly,
in
contemporary
feminist
accounts,
to
patriarchal
social forms.
Indeed,
this
focus on
rape
as
stemming
from difference in social
position
is what distin-
guishes
feminist from other kinds of accounts of
rape (see
Ellis
1989, 10).
In this
view,
inequality
between men and women is linked to men's desire
to
possess, subjugate,
and control
women,
with
rape constituting
a central
means
by
which the freedom of women is limited and their continued
submission to men ensured. For this
reason,
rape
has assumed a
significant
role within
many
feminist
narratives,
with Carole Pateman's account of the
social contract as based on an
originary rape
of a woman
by
a man
pro-
viding perhaps
the best-known
example (1988).
Since
many
feminists con-
tinue to believe that
patriarchy
is
universal--or,
at the
very
least,
to feel
deeply
ambivalent on this
point-
there is a
tendency among
us to believe
that
rape,
too,
is universal.7
However,
the view of women as
everywhere oppressed by
men has been
extensively critiqued
within the
anthropological
literature. A number of
anthropologists
have
argued
that in some
societies,
while men and women
may perform
different roles and
occupy
different
spaces, they
are neverthe-
less
equal
in
value, status,
and
power.8
In
addition,
Marilyn
Strathern,
for
one,
has
pointed
out that notions such as
"inequality"
and
"domination"
cannot
necessarily
be
applied
in societies with
very
different
conceptions
of
agency
and
personhood:
"To
argue
that what
happens
to women
qua
women is a function of what
happens
to men
qua
men is not to
postulate
that women's concerns are relative to or subsumed
by
those of men but
that neither can be understood without
comprehending
the
relationship
between them"
(1988, 34;
see also Strathern
1987).
As Strathern sees
it,
the Western
tendency
to
distinguish
between
subject
and
object
makes it
impossible
for Westerners to
recognize
that in some societies
(in
this
case,
7
Among
"radical" feminists such as Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon this be-
lief reaches its most extreme
version,
in which all sexual intercourse between a man and a
woman is viewed as akin to
rape (Dworkin 1987;
MacKinnon
1989a, 1989b).
8
Leacock 1978 and Bell 1983 are well-known
examples. Sanday
1990a and Marcus 1992
are more recent
examples,
on
Minangkabau
and Turkish
society, respectively.
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 795
Melanesian
ones)
a
person (whether
male or
female) is,
at the same
time,
both
subject
and
object.
Feminist distinctions between male
subjects
and
female
objects
-and
corresponding
notions of
asymmetry--thus
do not
make sense in these contexts
(Strathern 1988).
Viewed in this
light,
femi-
nist claims
concerning
the
universality
of
rape begin
to look even more
problematic.9
But there is a second
type
of difference between men and women that
also,
albeit
largely implicitly,
underlies the
assumption
that
rape
is univer-
sal,
and it is the
linkage
between this
type
of difference and the treatment
of
rape
in feminist accounts with which I am
largely
concerned in this
article. I refer to the
assumption by
most Western feminists
writing
on
rape
that men and women have different bodies
and,
more
specifically,
different
genitalia:
that
they
are,
in other
words,
differently
sexed. Further-
more,
it is taken for
granted
in most feminist accounts that these differ-
ences render the former
biologically,
or
"naturally,"
capable
of
penetrating
and therefore
brutalizing
the latter and render the latter
"naturally"
able to
be brutalized. While this
assumption
was
quite explicit
in earlier feminist
accounts of
rape
-in
particular,
in Susan Brownmiller's
(1975) argument
that men
rape primarily
because
they
are
biologically
equipped
with the
"tools"
(penises)
to do so
-
it is
largely implicit
in more recent feminist
work,
where the concern is to eschew
biological explanations
and to stress
instead the social bases of
rape.'0 Rape
of women
by
men is thus assumed
to be universal because the same
"biological" bodily
differences between
men and women are believed to exist
everywhere.
Unfortunately,
the
assumption
that
preexisting bodily
difference be-
tween men and women underlies
rape
has blinded feminists
writing
on the
subject
to the
ways
the
practice
of
rape
itself creates and inscribes such
difference. This seems
particularly
true in
contemporary
Western societies
9
MacKinnon
suggests,
for
instance,
that Khalka
Mongol
men's assertion
(as
quoted by
Sanday)
that "our women never resist" evokes a
society
in which sex can be
equated
with
rape (1989a, 322).
This
suggestion clearly
assumes that the individuated
"subject"
of Western
experience
is found also
among
the Khalka
Mongol,
such that the observer can
separate
out
the "autonomous" interests of husband and wife and thus describe sexual relations between
them in the familiar Western terms of "consent" and "resistance." While
any categorization
of Khalka
Mongol society
as
"rape
free" cannot be based
simply
on male claims of this
type,
categorization
of it as
"rape prone" purely
on this basis is
equally
absurd,
since it assumes
that these kinds of male claims serve the same function here as
they
often do in the United
States:
namely,
to
legitimate
male
objectification
of women. Work such as Strathern's throws
into
question precisely
this kind of
assumption.
10
Some
contemporary
feminist
accounts, however,
are more
explicit
in their
adoption
of
this kind of
position.
Aileen
McColgan, e.g.,
states that most
rapists
"are not armed with ...
anything
other than their
fists,
their
penises
and their
superior strength" (1996, 9).
796 I Helliwell
where the
relationship
between
rape
and
bodily/genital dimorphism ap-
pears
to be an
extremely
intimate one. Judith Butler
(1990, 1993)
has
argued (following
Foucault
1978)
that the Western
emphasis
on sexual
difference is a
product
of the heterosexualization of desire within Western
societies over the
past
few
centuries,
which
"requires
and institutes the
pro-
duction of discrete and
asymmetrical oppositions
between 'feminine' and
'masculine,'
where these are understood as
expressive
attributes of 'male'
and 'female"'
(1990, 17)."
The
practice
of
rape
in Western contexts can
only properly
be understood with reference to this heterosexual
matrix,
to
the division of humankind into two
distinct--and
in
many respects op-
posed- types
of
body (and
hence
types
of
person).12
While it is
certainly
the
case that
rape
is linked in
contemporary
Western societies to
disparities
of
power
and status between men and
women,
it is the
particular
discursive
form that those
disparities
take
-
their elaboration in terms of the discourse
of sex
-
that
gives rape
its
particular meaning
and
power
in these contexts.
Sharon Marcus has
already argued convincingly
that the act of
rape
"feminizes" women in Western
settings,
so that "the entire female
body
comes to be
symbolized by
the
vagina,
itself conceived of as a
delicate,
perhaps inevitably damaged
and
pained
inner
space" (1992, 398).
I would
argue
further that the
practice
of
rape
in these
settings
-
both its
possibility
and its actualization - not
only
feminizes women but masculinizes men as
well.13 This
masculinizing
character of
rape
is
very
clear
in,
for
instance,
Sanday's ethnography
of
fraternity gang rape
in North American universi-
ties
(1990b) and,
in
particular,
in material on
rape among
male
prison
inmates. In the
eyes
of these
rapists
the act of
rape
marks them as "real
men" and marks their victims as not
men,
that
is,
as feminine.14 In this
iconography,
the "masculine"
body (along
with the "masculine"
psyche),
is
11
See
Laqueur
1990 for a historical account of this
process.
12
On the
equation
of
body
and
person
within Western
(especially feminist) thought,
see
Moore 1994.
13
See Plaza 1980:
"[Rape]
is
very
sexual in the sense that
[it]
is
frequently
a sexual
activity,
but
especially
in the sense that it
opposes
men and women: it is social
sexing
which is latent
in
rape.... Rape
is sexual
essentially
because it rests on the
very
social difference between
the sexes"
(31).
14
The material on male
prison
inmates is
particularly revealing
in this
respect.
As an article
by Stephen
Donaldson,
a former
prisoner
and the
president
of the U.S.
advocacy group Stop
Prisoner
Rape,
makes
clear,
"hooking up"
with another
prisoner
is the best
way
for a
prisoner
to avoid sexual
assaults,
particularly gang rapes. Hooking up
involves
entering
a sexual liaison
with a senior
partner ("jocker,"
"man"
"pitcher," "daddy")
in
exchange
for
protection.
In this
arrangement,
the rules are clear: the
junior partner gives up
his
autonomy
and comes under
the
authority
of the senior
partner;
he is often
expected by
the senior
partner
"to be as femi-
nine in
appearance
and behaviour as
possible," including shaving
his
legs, growing long
hair,
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 797
viewed as
hard,
penetrative,
and
aggressive,
in contrast to the
soft,
vulnera-
ble,
and violable "feminine"
sexuality
and
psyche. Rape
both
reproduces
and marks the
pronounced
sexual
polarity
found in these societies.
Western
understandings
of
gender
difference have almost
invariably
started from the
presumption
of a
presocial bodily
difference between men
and women
("male"
and
"female")
that is then somehow acted on
by
soci-
ety
to
produce gender.
In
particular,
the
possession
of either male
genitals
or female
genitals
is understood
by
most Westerners to be not
only
the
primary
marker of
gender identity
but, indeed,
the
underlying
cause of
that
identity.
Most feminist models of
gender,
while
wishing
to draw atten-
tion to the
socially
constructed character of
difference,
have nevertheless
assumed--however reluctantly-
that
gender ultimately
relates "back" to
sex,
that
is,
to the differences between "male" and "female" bodies. Yet this
assumption
is
problematic
in
light
of both feminist
challenges
to the no-
tion that "sex" is
given
(and
therefore
universal) (Butler 1990, 1993)
and
historical research
suggesting
that
dimorphic "sexing"
of bodies is a rela-
tively
recent
phenomenon
in West
European history (Trumbach 1989,
1993;
Laqueur
1990;
van der Meer
1993).
This kind of model is
especially
problematic
for
using
with cross-cultural
material,
such as that described
below.15
I seek to do two
things
in this artice.
First,
in
providing
an account of
a
community
in which
rape
does not
occur,
I aim to
give
the lie to the
widespread assumption
that
rape
is universal and thus to invite Western
feminists to
interrogate
the basis of our own
tendency
to take its universal-
ity
for
granted.
6
The fundamental
question
is this:
Why
does a woman of
Gerai see a
penis
as
lacking
the
power
to harm
her,
while
I,
a white Austra-
lian/New
Zealand
woman,
am so
ready
to see it as
having
the
capacity
to
defile, to
humiliate,
to
subjugate
and,
ultimately,
to
destroy
me?
Second,
by exploring understandings
of sex and
gender
in a
community
using
a feminine
nickname,
and
performing
work
perceived
as feminine
(laundry,
cell clean-
ing, giving
backrubs, etc.) (Donaldson 1996, 17, 20).
See also the extract from
Jack
Abbott's
prison
letters in
Halperin
1993
(424-25).
15
Henrietta Moore has
pointed
out some of the
problems
with the conventional
sex/
gender
model. These include its
assumption
that difference lies between bodies
(whereas
in
many
societies
gender
differences are understood to reside within individual
bodies)
and its
stress on the
body
as the ultimate
repository
of
identity,
which relates to the Western belief
in the
unified,
continuous
person
located in an individual
body (a
belief that is
by
no means
universal) (Moore 1994,
chaps.
1 and
2).
16
While I am
primarily
concerned here with the feminist literature
(believing
that it con-
tains
by
far the most useful and
insightful
work on
rape),
it needs to be noted that
many
other
(nonfeminist)
writers also believe
rape
to be universal.
See,
e.g.,
Ellis
1989;
Palmer 1989.
798 I Helliwell
that stresses
identity,
rather than
difference,
between men and women
(in-
cluding
men's and women's
bodies),
I aim to demonstrate that Western
beliefs in the "sexed" character of bodies are not "natural" in basis
but,
rather,
are a
component
of
specifically
Western
gendering
and sexual re-
gimes.
And since the
practice
of
rape
in Western societies is
profoundly
linked to these
beliefs,
I will
suggest
that it is an
inseparable part
of such
regimes.
This is not to
say
that the
practice
of
rape
is
always
linked to the
kind of heterosexual
regime
found in the
West;
even the most
cursory
glance
at
any
list of societies in which the
practice
occurs indicates that this
is not
so.'7
But it is to
point
out that we will be able to understand
rape
only
ever in a
purely
localized
sense,
in the context of the local discourses
and
practices
that are both constitutive of and constituted
by
it. In
drawing
out the
implications
of the Gerai stress on
identity
between men and
women for Gerai
gender
and sexual
relations,
I
hope
to
point
out some of
the
possible implications
of the Western
emphasis
on
gender
difference for
Western
gender
and sexual relations -
including
the
practice
of
rape.
Gender, sex,
and
procreation
in Gerai
Gerai is a
Dayak community
of some seven hundred
people
in the Indone-
sian
province
of Kalimantan Barat
(West Borneo).18
In the
twenty
months
I
spent
in the
community,
I heard of no cases of either sexual assault or
attempted
sexual assault
(and
since this is a
community
in which
privacy
as we understand it in the West is almost nonexistent--in which surveil-
lance
by neighbors
is at a
very
high
level
[see
Helliwell
1996]
-I would
certainly
have heard of
any
such cases had
they occurred).
In
addition,
when I
questioned
men and women about sexual
assault,
responses ranged
from
puzzlement
to
outright incredulity
to horror.
While relations between men and women in Gerai can be classified as
17
For
listings
of
"rape-prone"
societies,
see
Minturn, Grosse,
and Haider
1969;
Sanday
1981.
181 carried out
anthropological
fieldwork in Gerai from March 1985 to
February
1986
and from
June
1986 to
January
1987. The fieldwork was funded
by
an Australian National
University
Ph.D.
scholarship
and carried out under the
sponsorship ofLembaga
Ilmu
Penget-
ahuan Indonesia. At the time that I was
conducting my
research a number of
phenomena
were
beginning
to have an
impact
on the
community
-these had the
potential
to effect mas-
sive
changes
in the areas of life discussed in this article. These
phenomena
included the arrival
of a
Malaysian
timber
company
in the Gerai
region
and the
increasing frequency
of visits
by
Malay, Bugis,
Chinese,
and Batak timber workers to the
community;
the arrival of two Ameri-
can fundamentalist Protestant
missionary
families to live and
proselytize
in the
community;
and the establishment of a Catholic
primary
school in
Gerai, resulting
in a
growing tendency
among parents
to send their children
(both
male and
female)
to attend Catholic
secondary
school in a
large
coastal town several
days' journey away.
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 799
relatively egalitarian
in
many respects,
both men and women nevertheless
say
that men are
"higher"
than women
(Helliwell 1995, 364).
This is
espe-
cially
the case in the context of formal
community-wide
functions such as
village meetings
and moots to settle
legal disputes.
While women are not
required
to remain silent on such
occasions,
their voices
carry
less
authority
than those of
men, and, indeed,
legal experts
in the
community
(all
men)
told me that a woman's evidence in a moot is worth seven-tenths of a man's
(see
also
Tsing 1990).
In
addition,
a husband is
granted
a
degree
of formal
authority
over his wife that she does not have over
him;
thus a wife's dis-
obedience of her husband is
theoretically
a
punishable
offense under
adat,
or local law. I have noted elsewhere that Gerai
people
stress the ideal of
diri,
literally meaning "standing"
or "to
stand,"
according
to which each
rice
group
should take
primary responsibility
for itself in all
spheres
of life
and make its own decisions on matters
concerning
its members
(Helliwell
1995).
It is on the basis of their
capacity
to stand that rice
groups
within
the
community
are ranked
against
one another. The
capacity
to stand is
predicated primarily
on the
ability
to
produce
rice
surpluses: yet, signifi-
cantly, although
men and women work
equally
at rice-field
work,
it is
only
men who
occasionally
are
individually
described as
standing.
As in some
other societies in the same
region (Ilongot, Wana),
Gerai
people
link men's
higher
status to their
greater bravery.19
This
greater bravery
is demon-
strated,
they say, by
the fact that it is men who
mampat (cut
down the
large
trees to make a rice
field),
who burn off the rice field to
prepare
for
plant-
ing,
and who enter
deep primary jungle
in search of
game
and
jungle prod-
ucts such as aloe wood
-
all
notoriously dangerous
forms of work.
This
greater
status and
authority
does
not, however,
find
expression
in
the
practice
of
rape,
as
many
feminist
writings
on the
subject
seem to
sug-
gest
that it should. This is because the Gerai view of men as
"higher"
than
women,
although equated
with certain kinds of increased
potency
vis-a-vis
the world at
large,
does not translate into a
conception
of that
potency
as
attached to and manifest
through
the
penis
-of men's
genitals
as able to
brutalize women's
genitals.
Shelly Errington
has
pointed
out that a feature of
many
of the societies
of insular Southeast Asia is a stress on
sameness,
even
identity,
between
men and women
(1990,
35,
39),
in contrast to the Western stress on
difference between the
passive
"feminine"
object
and the
active,
aggressive
"masculine"
subject.20
Gerai
understandings
of
gender
fit
Errington's
19
On the
Ilongot,
see Rosaldo
1980a;
on the
Wana,
see Atkinson 1990.
20
The
Wana,
as described
by
Jane
Atkinson
(1990), provide
an excellent
example
of a
society
that
emphasizes
sameness.
Emily
Martin
points
out that the
explicit
Western
opposi-
tion between the "natures" of men and women is assumed to occur even at the level of the
cell,
with
biologists commonly speaking
of the
egg
as
passive
and immobile and the
sperm
as
800 I Helliwell
model
very
well. In
Gerai,
men and women are not understood as funda-
mentally
different
types
of
persons:
there is no sense of a dichotomized
masculinity
and
femininity.
Rather,
men and women are seen to have the
same kinds of
capacities
and
proclivities,
but with
respect
to
some,
men
are seen as "more so" and with
respect
to
others,
women are seen as "more
so."
Men are said to be braver and more
knowledgeable
about local law
(adat),
while women are said to be more
persistent
and more
enduring.
All of these
qualities
are valued.
Crucially,
in terms of the central
quality
of nurturance
(perhaps
the most valued
quality
in
Gerai),
which is
very
strongly
marked as feminine
among
Westerners,
Gerai
people
see no
difference between men and women. As one
(female)
member of the com-
munity put
it to me: "We all must nurture because we all need.'21 The
capacity
both to nurture and to
need,
particularly
as
expressed through
the
cultivation of rice as a member of a rice
group,
is central to Gerai
concep-
tions of
personhood:
rice is the source of
life,
and its
(shared) production
humanizes and socializes individuals
(Helliwell, forthcoming).
Women
and men have identical claims to
personhood
based on their
equal
contri-
butions to rice
production (there
is no notion that women are somehow
diminished as
persons
even
though they may
be seen as less
"high").
As in
Strathern's account of
Hagen (1988),
the
perceived mutuality
of rice-field
work in Gerai renders
inoperable any
notion of either men or women as
autonomous individual
subjects.
It is also
important
to note that while men's
bravery
is linked to a notion
of their
greater physical strength,
it is not
equated
with
aggression
-
ag-
gression
is not valued in most Gerai contexts.22 As a Gerai man
put
it to
me, the wise man is the one "who
fights
when he has
to,
and runs
away
when he
can";
such avoidance of violence does not mark a man as
lacking
in
bravery.
This does not mean that in certain contexts male
warriorship
-
the
ability
to
fight
and even to take heads -is not
valorized;
on the con-
active and
aggressive
even
though
recent research indicates that these
descriptions
are errone-
ous and that
they
have led
biologists
to misunderstand the fertilization
process (1991).
See
also
Lloyd
1984 for an excellent account of how
(often latent) conceptions
of men and
women as
having opposed
characteristics are entrenched in the
history
of Western
philosophi-
cal
thought.
21 The nurture-need
dynamic (that
I elsewhere refer to as the "need-share
dynamic")
is
central to Gerai
sociality.
Need for others is
expressed through nurturing
them;
such
expres-
sion is the
primary
mark of a
"good"
as
opposed
to a "bad"
person.
See Helliwell
(forthcom-
ing)
for a detailed discussion.
22 In this
respect,
Gerai is
very
different
from,
e.g.,
Australia or the United
States, where,
as Michelle Rosaldo has
pointed
out,
aggression
is linked to
success,
and women's constitu-
tion as
lacking aggression
is thus an
important
element of their subordination
(1980b, 416;
see also
Myers
1988, 600).
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 801
trary,
the most
popular myths
in Gerai are those that tell of the
legendary
warrior hero
(and
headhunter without
peer) Koling.
However,
Gerai
people
make a clear distinction between the fantastic world of the heroes
of the
past
and the mundane world in which the
present
man of Gerai
must make his
way.23
While it is
recognized
that a man will sometimes
need to
fight-and
skill and
courage
in
fighting
are
valued-aggression
and hotheadedness are ridiculed as the hallmarks of a
lazy
and
incompetent
man. In
fact,
physical
violence between adults is uncommon in
Gerai,
and
all of the cases that I did witness or hear about were
extremely
mild.24
Doubtless the absence of
rape
in the
community
is linked to this
devaluing
of
aggression
in
general.
However,
unlike a
range
of other forms of vio-
lence
(slapping, beating
with a
fist,
beating
with an
implement, knifing,
premeditated killing, etc.), rape
is not named as an offense and accorded a
set
punishment
under traditional Gerai law. In
addition,
unlike these other
forms of
violence,
rape
is
something
that
people
in the
community
find
almost
impossible
to
comprehend ("How
would he be able to do such a
thing?"
one woman asked when I
struggled
to
explain
the
concept
of a
man
attempting
to
put
his
penis
into her
against
her
will). Clearly,
then,
more is involved in the absence of
rape
in Gerai than a
simple
absence of
violence in
general.
Central to all of the narratives that Gerai
people
tell about themselves
and their
community
is the notion of a "comfortable life": the achievement
of this kind of life marks the
person
and the household as
being
of value
and constitutes the norm to which all Gerai
people aspire. Significantly,
the content of such a life is seen as identical for both men and women: it
23
The
practice
of
headhunting
-
seeking
out enemies in order to sever their
heads,
which
were then
brought
back to one's own
village
and treated with ritual
reverence--was,
in the
past, widely
found
among
Borneo
Dayak groups.
Gerai
people
claim that their not-too-
distant ancestors
practiced headhunting,
but
my
own sense is that
they
are more
likely
to
have been the hunted than the hunters. While in
many respects
Gerai resembles some of the
"nonviolent" societies found
throughout
the
region--including
the Semai
(Dentan 1968,
1978)
and
Chewong (Howell 1989)
of Peninsular
Malaysia
and the Buid
(Gibson 1986)
of
Mindoro in the
Philippines
- its celebration of violence in certain
specified
contexts marks it
as rather different from
many
of them.
Howell,
for
instance,
claims that none of the
indige-
nous
peoples
of Peninsular
Malaysia
"has
any history
of
warfare,
either recorded
by
the out-
side world or
represented
in
myths
and
legends" (1989, 35),
while Gibson notes that the
Buid
language
"lacks words
expressing
a
positive
evaluation of
courage
or the
reciprocation
of violence"
(1986, 107-8).
Gerai
people
are,
in
fact,
very
similar in this
respect
to another
Borneo
Dayak people,
the
Bidayuh,
who also valorize male violence in
myth
but tend to
devalue and avoid it in
everyday
life and who also have a tradition of
headhunting
but are
likely
to have been hunted rather than hunters
(Geddes 1957).
24
See Helliwell
1996, 142-43,
for an
example
of a "violent" altercation between husband
and wife.
802 I Helliwell
is marked
by
the
production
of bountiful rice harvests each
year
and the
successful
raising
of a number of
healthy
children to
maturity.
The core
values and
aspirations
of men and women are thus
identical;
of the
many
life histories that I collected while in the
community-
all of which are or-
ganized
around this central
image
-
it is
virtually impossible
to tell those of
men from those of women. Two
points
are
significant
in this
respect.
First,
a
"comfortable life" is
predicated
on the notion of a
partnership
between a
man and a woman
(a conjugal pair).
This is because while men and women
are seen to have the same basic skills and
capacities,
men are seen to be
"better" at certain kinds of work and women to be "better" at other kinds.
Second,
and
closely
related to
this,
the Gerai notion of men's and women's
work does not constitute a
rigid
division of labor: both men and women
say
that
theoretically
women can
perform
all of the work
routinely
carried
out
by
men,
and men can
perform
all of the work
routinely
carried out
by
women.
However,
men are much better at men's
work,
and women are
much better at women's work.
Again,
what we have here is a stress on
identity
between men and women at the
expense
of radical difference.
This stress on
identity
extends into Gerai
bodily
and sexual discourses.
A number of
people (both
men and
women)
assured me that men some-
times
menstruate;
in
addition,
menstrual blood is not understood to be
polluting,
in contrast to how it is seen in
many
societies that stress more
strongly
the difference between men and women. While
pregnancy
and
childbirth are
spoken
of as "women's
work,"
many
Gerai
people
claim that
under certain circumstances men are also able to
carry
out this work -
but,
they say,
women are "better" at it and so
normally
undertake it. In line
with this
claim,
I collected a Gerai
myth concerning
a
lazy
woman who
was reluctant to take on the work of
pregnancy
and childbirth. Her hus-
band instead made for himself a lidded container out of
bark, wood,
and
rattan
("like
a betel nut
container"),
which he attached around his waist
beneath his loincloth and in which he carried the
growing
fetus until it was
ready
to be born. On one occasion when I was
watching
a
group
of Gerai
men cut
up
a
boar, one,
remembering
an earlier conversation about the
capacity
of men to
give
birth,
pointed
to a
growth
in the boar's
body cavity
and said with much
disapproving shaking
of the head: "Look at this. He
wants to
carry
his child. He's
stupid."
In
addition,
several times I saw fa-
thers
push
their
nipples
into the mouths of
young
children to
quieten
them;
while none of these fathers claimed to be able to
produce
milk,
people
nevertheless claimed that some men in the
community
were able to
lactate,
a
phenomenon
also attested to in
myth.
Men and women are
thought
to
produce
the same
genital
fluid,
and this is linked in
complex
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 803
ways
to the
capacity
of both to menstruate. All of these
examples
demon-
strate the
community's
stress on
bodily identity
between men and women.
Furthermore,
in
Gerai,
men's and women's sexual
organs
are
explicitly
conceptualized
as the same. This sexual
identity
became
particularly
clear
when I asked several
people
who had been to school
(and
hence were used
to
putting pencil
to
paper)
to draw men's and women's
respective organs
for me: in all
cases,
the basic structure and form of each were the same.
One
informant,
endeavoring
to convince me of this
sameness,
likened both
to wooden and bark containers for
holding
valuables
(these vary
in size
but have the same basic conical
shape,
narrower at the base and wider at the
top).
In all of these
discussions,
it was reiterated that the
major
difference
between men's and women's
organs
is their location: inside the
body
(women)
and outside the
body (men).25
In
fact,
when I
pressed people
on
this
point, they invariably explained
that it makes no sense to
distinguish
between men's and women's
genitalia
themselves; rather,
it is location that
distinguishes
between
penis
and vulva.26
Heterosexuality
constitutes the normative sexual
activity
in the commu-
nity
and, indeed,
I was unable to obtain
any
information about homo-
sexual
practices during my
time there. In line with the stress on
sameness,
sexual intercourse between a man and a woman in Gerai is understood as
an
equal coming together
of
fluids,
pleasures,
and life forces. The same
stress also underlies beliefs about
conception.
Gerai
people
believe that
repeated
acts of intercourse between the same two
people
are
necessary
for
conception,
since this
"prepares"
the womb for
pregnancy.
The fetus is
deemed to be created
through
the
mingling
of
equal quantities
of fluids
and forces from both
partners. Again,
what is seen as
important
here is not
the fusion of two different
types
of bodies
(male
and
female)
as in Western
understandings;
rather,
Gerai
people say,
it is the
similarity
of the two bod-
ies that allows
procreation
to occur. As someone
put
it to me
bluntly:
"If
they
were not the
same,
how could the fluids blend? It's like coconut oil
and water:
they
can't mix!"
25
I have noted elsewhere that the inside-outside distinction is a central one within this
culture
(Helliwell 1996).
26
While the Gerai stress on the sameness of men's and women's sexual
organs
seems,
on
the face of
it,
to be
very
similar to the situation in Renaissance
Europe
as described
by
La-
queur
1990,
it is
profoundly
different in at least one
respect:
in
Gerai,
women's
organs
are
not seen as emasculated versions of men's
-
"female
penises"
-
as
they
were in Renaissance
Europe.
This is
clearly
linked to the fact
that,
in
Gerai,
as we have
already
seen,
people
is not
synonymous
with
men,
and women are not
relegated
to
positions
of emasculation or
abjec-
tion,
as was the case in Renaissance
Europe.
804 I Helliwell
What needs to be stressed here is that both sexual intercourse and con-
ception
are viewed as
involving
a
mingling
of similar
bodily
fluids, forces,
and so
on,
rather than as the
penetration
of one
body by
another with a
parallel propulsion
of substances from one
(male) body only
into the
other,
very
different
(female)
one. Nor is there
anything
in Gerai
understandings
that
equates
with the Western notion of
conception
as
involving
an
aggres-
sive active male cell
(the sperm) seeking
out and
penetrating
a
passive,
immobile female cell
(the egg) (Martin 1991).
What Gerai accounts of
both sexual intercourse and
conception
stress are
tropes
of
identity,
min-
gling,
balance,
and
reciprocity.
In this context it is worth
noting
that
many
Gerai
people
were
puzzled by
the idea of
gender-specific
"medicine" to
prevent contraception--such
as the
injectable
or oral
contraceptives pro-
moted
by
state-run health clinics in the area.
Many
believed
that,
because
both
partners play
the same role in
conception,
it should not matter
whether husband or wife received such medicine
(and indeed,
I knew of
cases where husbands had taken oral
contraceptives
meant for their
wives).
This
suggests
that such
contraceptive regimes
also serve
(like
the
practice
of
rape)
to reinscribe sex difference between men and women
(see
also
Tsing
1993, 104-20).
When I asked
why,
if
conception
is
predicated
on the
mingling
of two
similar
bodies,
two men or two women could not also come
together
to
create a
child,
the
response
was that a man and a woman "fit" with one
another
(sedang).
But while there is some sense of
physical compatibility
being suggested
here,
Gerai
people
were adamant that what is more
impor-
tant in
constituting
"fit" is the role of each individual's "life force"
(semon-
gan')
and its intimate connection to
particular
forms of work. The semon-
gan'
is the
spiritual
essence or force that animates the
person,
that
gives
the
person
his or her individual life. Without his or her
semongan'
a human
being
cannot live
(this
is true of all other elements in the universe as
well),
and thus when a
person
dies,
the
semongan'
is understood to have left the
body
and
journeyed away.
In
turn,
an individual's
semongan'
is
centrally
linked to the kind of work he or she
routinely performs
-
particularly
dur-
ing
the rice-cultivation
cycle,
which is understood as the source of life itself
in Gerai.
While Gerai
people
stress sameness over difference between men and
women,
they
do, nevertheless,
see them as
being
different in one
important
respect:
their life forces
are,
they say,
oriented
differently ("they
face
different
ways,"
it was
explained
to
me).
This different orientation means
that women are "better" at certain kinds of work and men are "better" at
other kinds of
work--particularly
with
respect
to rice-field work. Gerai
people
conceive of the work of
clearing large
trees for a new rice field as
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 805
the definitive man's work and
regard
the work of
selecting
and
storing
the
rice seed for the
following year's planting--which
is correlated in funda-
mental
ways
with the
process
of
giving
birth--as the definitive woman's
work. Because women are
perceived
to lack
appropriate
skills with
respect
to the
first,
and men are
perceived
to lack
appropriate
skills with
respect
to the
second,
Gerai
people say
that to be viable a household must con-
tain both adult males and adult females. And since a "comfortable life" is
marked
by
success in
production
not
only
of rice but also of
children,
the
truly
viable household must contain at least one
conjugal pair.
The work
of both husband and wife is seen as
necessary
for the
adequate
nurturance
of the child and successful
rearing
to adulthood
(both
of which
depend
on
the successful cultivation of
rice).
Two women or two men would not be
able to
provide adequately
for a child since
they
would not be able to
pro-
duce
consistently
successful rice
harvests;
while such a household
might
be
able to select
seed,
clear a rice
field,
and so
grow
rice in some
rudimentary
fashion,
its lack of
expertise
at one of these tasks would render it
peren-
nially poor
and its children
perennially unhealthy,
Gerai
people say.
For
this
reason,
households with adults of
only
one
gender
are
greatly pitied
by
Gerai
people,
and
single parents
seek to
marry
or
remarry
as
quickly
as
they
can. It is the
mingling
of the
respective
life forces of a man and a
woman,
then -
linked,
as
they
are,
to the work skills of each - that
primar-
ily
enables
conception.
It is
this,
Gerai
people say,
that allows the child's
semongan'
to come into
being. Mingling
of the
parental bodily
fluids,
in
turn,
creates the child's
bodily
substance,
but this substance must be ani-
mated in some
prior
sense
by
a life
force,
or the child will die.
Gender difference in
Gerai, then,
is not
predicated
on the character of
one's
body,
and
especially
of one's
genitalia,
as in
many
Western contexts.
Rather,
it is understood as constituted in the differential
capacity
to
per-
form certain kinds of
work,
a
capacity assigned long
before one's
bodily
being
takes
shape.27
In this
respect
it is
important
to note that Gerai ontol-
ogy
rests on a belief in
predestination,
in
things being
as
they
should
(see
Helliwell
1995).
In this
understanding, any
individual's
semongan'
is linked
in multifarious and unknowable
ways
to the cosmic
order,
to the "life" of
the universe as a whole. Thus the new fetus is
predestined
to become some-
one "fitted" to
carry
out either men's work or women's work as
part
of the
maintenance of a universal balance. Bodies with the
appropriate
character-
istics
-
internal or external
genitalia, presence
or absence of
breasts,
and so
27
In this
respect
Gerai is similar to a number of other
peoples
in this
region (e.g.,
Wana,
Ilongot),
for whom difference between men and women is also seen as
primarily
a matter of
the different kinds of work that each
performs.
806 I Helliwell
on - then
develop
in line with this
prior destiny.
At first
sight
this
may
not
seem
enormously
different from Western
conceptions
of
gender,
but the
difference is in fact
profound.
While,
for
Westerners,
genitalia,
as
signifi-
cant of one's role in the
procreative process,
are
absolutely
fundamental in
determining
one's
identity,
in Gerai the work that one
performs
is seen
as
fundamental,
and
genitalia, along
with other
bodily
characteristics,
are
relegated
to a kind of
secondary,
derivative function.
Gerai
understandings
of
gender
were made
quite
clear
through
circum-
stances
surrounding my
own
gender
classification while in the
community.
Gerai
people
remained
very
uncertain about
my gender
for some time after
I arrived in the
community
because
(as
they
later told
me)
"I did not ...
walk like a
woman,
with arms held out from the
body
and
hips slightly
swaying;
I was
"brave,"
trekking
from
village
to
village through
the
jungle
on
my
own;
I had
bony kneecaps;
I did not know how to tie a
sarong
in
the
appropriate way
for
women;
I could not
distinguish
different varieties
of rice from one
another;
I did not wear
earrings;
I had short
hair;
I was
tall"
(Helliwell 1993, 260).
This was
despite
the fact that
people
in the
community
knew from
my
first few
days
with them both that I had breasts
(this
was obvious when the
sarong
that I wore
clung
to
my body
while I
bathed in the
river)
and that I had a vulva rather than a
penis
and testicles
(this
was obvious from
my trips
to defecate or urinate in the small stream
used for that
purpose,
when
literally
dozens of
people
would line the banks
to observe whether I
performed
these functions
differently
from
them).
As
someone said to me at a later
point,
"Yes,
I saw that
you
had a
vulva,
but
I
thought
that Western men
might
be different."
My
eventual,
more definitive classification as a woman occurred
largely
fortuitously. My
initial research
proposal
focused on the creation of
subjec-
tivity
and
sociality through
work
and,
accordingly,
as soon as I arrived in
the
community,
I
began accompanying people
to work in the rice fields.
Once I had
negotiated
a
longhouse apartment
of
my
own in which to live
(several
weeks after
arrival),
I also found
myself,
in concert with all other
households in the
community, preparing
and
cooking
rice at least twice
daily.
These activities
rapidly
led to a
quest
for information
concerning
rice
itself,
particularly concerning
the different
strains,
how
they
are
cultivated,
and what
they
are used for. As I learned to
distinguish types
of rice and
their
uses,
I became more and more of a woman
(as
I realized
later),
since
this
knowledge
-
including
the
magic
that
goes
with it
-
is understood
by
Gerai
people
as foundational to
femininity.
However,
while
people
eventu-
ally
took to
referring
to me as a
woman,
for
many
in the
community my
gender identity
remained
deeply ambiguous, partly
because so
many
of
my
characteristics and behaviors were more like those of a man than a woman,
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 807
but
also,
and more
importantly,
because I never achieved
anything ap-
proaching
the level of
knowledge concerning
rice-seed selection held
by
even a
girl
child in Gerai.
In
fact,
Gerai
people
talk of two kinds of work as
defining
a woman:
the selection and
storage
of rice seed and the
bearing
of children.28 But the
first of these is viewed as
prior, logically
as well as
chronologically. People
are
quite
clear that in the womb either "someone who can cut down the
large
trees for a ricefield is
made,
or someone who can select and store
rice." When I asked if it was not more
important
whether or not someone
could bear a
child,
it was
pointed
out to me that
many
women do not bear
children
(there
is a
high
rate of
infertility
in the
community),
but all
women have the
knowledge
to select and store rice seed. In
fact,
at the
level of the rice
group
the two activities of
"growing"
rice and
"growing"
children are
inseparable:
a rice
group produces
rice in order to raise
healthy
children,
and it
produces
children so that
they
can in turn
produce
the rice
that will sustain the
group
once their
parents
are old and frail
(Helliwell,
forthcoming).
For this
reason,
any
Gerai
couple
unable to
give
birth to a
child of their own will
adopt
one,
usually
from a
group
related
by kinship.
The two activities of
growing
rice and
growing
children are
constantly
talked about
together,
and the same
imagery
is used to describe the devel-
opment
of a woman's
pregnancy
and the
development
of rice
grains
on
the
plant.
Indeed,
the
process
of
pregnancy
and birth is seen as
intimately
connected to the
process
of rice selection and
storage.
As one woman ex-
plained
to
me,
"It is because we know how to hold the seed in the
storage
baskets that we are able to hold it in our wombs." But
just
as the cultivation
of rice is seen as in some sense
prior
to the cultivation of
children,
so it is said
that
"knowledge
about childbirth comes from
knowledge
about rice
seed'.
Gerai, then,
lacks the stress on
bodily-
and
especially genital--
dimor-
phism
that most feminist accounts of
rape
assume.
Indeed,
the
reproduc-
tive
organs
themselves are not seen as "sexed.? In a sense it is
problematic
even to use the
English categories
woman and man when
writing
of this
community,
since these terms are saturated with
assumptions concerning
the
priority
of
biological
(read,
bodily)
difference. In the Gerai
context,
it
would be more accurate to deal with the
categories
of,
on the one
hand,
"those
responsible
for rice selection and
storage"
and,
on the
other,
"those
responsible
for
cutting
down the
large
trees to make a ricefield." There is no
discursive
space
in Gerai for the distinction between an
active,
aggressive,
28
In
Gerai,
pregnancy
and birth are seen not as
semimystical
"natural"
processes,
as
they
are for
many
Westerners,
but
simply
as forms of
work,
linked
very closely
to the work of
rice
production.
808 I Helliwell
penetrating
male sexual
organ
(and
sexuality)
and a
passive,
vulnerable,
female one.
Indeed,
sexual intercourse in Gerai is understood
by
both men
and women to stem from mutual "need" on the
part
of the two
partners;
without such
need,
people say,
sexual intercourse cannot
occur,
because the
requisite
balance is
lacking.
Since,
as I have described at
length
elsewhere
(Helliwell, forthcoming),
a
relationship
of
"needing"
is
always reciprocal
(it
is almost
inconceivable,
in Gerai
terms,
to need someone who does not
need
you
in
return,
and the
consequences
of
unreciprocated needing
are
dire for both individual and rice
group),
the sexual act is understood as
preeminently
mutual in its
character,
including
in its initiation. The idea
of
having
sex with someone who does not need
you
to have sex with
them
-
and so the idea of
coercing
someone into sex
-
is thus almost un-
thinkable to Gerai
people.
In
addition,
informants asserted that
any
such
action would
destroy
the individual's
spiritual
balance and that of his or
her rice
group
and
bring calamity
to the
group
as a whole.29
In this
context,
a Gerai man's astonished and horrified
question
"How
can a
penis
be taken into a
vagina
if a woman doesn't want it?" has a mean-
ing
very
different from that of the same statement uttered
by
a man in
the West. In the
West,
notions of radical difference between men and
women
-incorporating representations
of normative male
sexuality
as ac-
tive and
aggressive,
normative female
sexuality
as
passive
and
vulnerable,
and human
relationships (including
acts of sexual
intercourse)
as
occurring
between
independent, potentially
hostile,
agents--would
render such a
statement at best
naive,
at worst
misogynist.
In
Gerai, however,
the stress
on
identity
between men and women and on the sexual act as
predicated
on
mutuality
validates such a statement as one of
straightforward
incom-
prehension
(and
it should be noted that I heard similar statements from
women).
In the Gerai
context,
the
penis,
or male
genitalia
in
general,
is
not
admired, feared,
or
envied,
nor is the
phallus
a central
signifier
in the
way postulated by
Lacanians. In
fact,
Gerai
people
see men's sexual
organs
as more vulnerable than women's for the
simple
reason that
they
are out-
side the
body,
while women's are inside. This reflects Gerai
understandings
of "inside" as
representing safety
and
belonging,
while "outside" is a
place
of
strangers
and
danger,
and it is linked to the notion of men as braver
than women.30 In
addition,
Gerai
people say,
because the
penis
is "taken
29
Sanday
1986 makes a similar
point
about the absence of
rape among
the
Minangkabau.
See Helliwell
(forthcoming)
for a discussion of the different kinds of bad fate that can afflict
a
group through
the actions of its individual members.
30
In
Gerai,
as in
nearby
Minangkabau
(Sanday 1986), vulnerability
is
respected
and val-
ued rather than
despised.
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 809
into" another
body,
it is
theoretically
at
greater
risk
during
the sexual act
than the
vagina.
This
contrasts,
again, quite markedly
with Western under-
standings,
where women's sexual
organs
are
constantly depicted
as more
vulnerable
during
the sexual act
-
as liable to be
hurt,
despoiled,
and so on
(some
men's anxieties about
vagina
dentata not
withstanding).
In Gerai a
penis
is
"only
a
penis":
neither a marker of
dimorphism
between men and
women in
general
nor,
in its
essence,
any
different from a
vagina.
Conclusions
The Gerai case
suggests
that,
in some contexts at
least,
the
practice
of
rape
is linked to sexual
dimorphism
and, indeed,
that in these contexts dis-
courses of
rape (including
the act of
rape itself)
reinscribe such dimor-
phism.
While the normative sexual
practice
in Gerai is heterosexual
(between
men and
women),
it is not
accompanied by
a heterosexual
regu-
latory regime
in the sense meant
by
Foucault
(1978)
in his discussion of
the creation of sex as
part
of the heterosexualization of desire in the
West,
nor is it
part
of what Butler terms "the heterosexual matrix"
(Butler 1990,
1993).
The notion of"heterosexualization" as used
by
these thinkers refers
to far more than the
simple
establishment of sexual relations between men
and women as the normative
ideal;
it denotes the entire
governmental
re-
gime
that
accompanies
this normative ideal in Western contexts. Gerai
stresses sameness between men and women more than
difference,
and such
difference as occurs is based on the kinds of work
people perform.
Al-
though
this
process certainly
naturalizes a division between certain kinds
of tasks- and the
capacity
to
perform
those tasks
effectively- clearly,
it
does not involve sex or sexed bodies in the
way
Westerners
normally
un-
derstand those terms - as a naturalized difference between bodies
(located
primarily
in the
genitals)
that translates into two
profoundly
different
types
of
person.
In this
context,
sexual assault
by
a man on a woman is almost
unthinkable
(both by
women and
by men).
With this
background,
I return now to the case with which I
began
this
article-and,
particularly,
to the
great
differences between
my response
to
this case and that of the Gerai woman concerned. On the basis of
my
own
cultural
assumptions concerning
the
differences--and particularly
the
different sexual characters
-
of men and
women,
I am inclined
(as
this case
showed
me)
to read
any attempt by
a man to climb into a woman's bed in
the
night
without her
explicit
consent as
necessarily carrying
the threat of
sexual coercion and brutalization. This constant threat has been inscribed
onto
my body
as
part
of the Western cultural
process whereby
I was
810 I Helliwell
"girled" (to
use Butler's felicitous term
[1993, 7]),
or created as a
gendered
being
in a context where male and female sexualities are
perceived
as
pene-
trative and
aggressive
and as vulnerable and
self-protective, respectively.
The Gerai
woman,
in
contrast,
has no fear of coerced sexual intercourse
when awakened in the dark
by
a man. She has no such fear because in the
Gerai context
"girling"
involves the
inscription
of sexual
sameness,
of a
belief that women's
sexuality
and bodies are no less
aggressive
and no more
vulnerable than men's.
In
fact,
in the case in
question,
the
intruding
man did
expect
to have
intercourse with the woman.31 He claimed that the woman had
already
agreed
to this
through
her
acceptance
of his
initiatory gifts
of
soap.32
The
woman, however,
while
privately agreeing
that she had
accepted
such
gifts,
claimed that no formal
agreement
had
yet
been reached. Her
anger,
then,
did not stem from
any
belief that the man had
attempted
to
sexually
coerce her
("How
would he be able to do such a
thing?").
Because the
term "to be
quiet"
is often used as a
euphemism
for sexual intercourse in
Gerai,
she saw the man's exhortation that she "be
quiet"
as
simply
an invita-
tion to
engage
in sex with
him,
rather than the
implicit
threat that I read
it to be.33
Instead,
her
anger
stemmed from her conviction that the correct
protocols
had not been
followed,
that the man
ought
to have
spoken
with
31
The man left the
community
on the
night
that this event occurred and went to
stay
for
several months at a
nearby
timber
camp. Community
consensus -
including
the view of the
woman
concerned--was
that he left because he was ashamed and
distressed,
not
only
as a
result of
having
been
sexually rejected by
someone with whom he
thought
he had established
a
relationship
but also because his adulterous behavior had become
public,
and he wished to
avoid an
airing
of the details in a
community
moot.
Consequently,
I was unable to
speak
to
him about the case.
However,
I did
speak
to several of his close male kin
(including
his
married
son),
who
put
his
point
of view to me.
32
The woman in this
particular
case was
considerably younger
than the man
(in fact,
a
member of the next
generation).
In such cases of considerable
age disparity
between sexual
partners,
the older
partner (whether
male or
female)
is
expected
to
pay
a fine in the form of
small
gifts
to the
younger partner,
both to initiate the liaison and to enable its continuance.
Such a fine rectifies
any spiritual
imbalance that
may
result from the
age
imbalance and hence
makes it safe for the
relationship
to
proceed. Contrary
to standard Western
assumptions,
older women
appear
to
pay
such fines to
younger
men as often as older men
pay
them to
younger
women
(although
it was
very
difficult to obtain reliable data on this
question,
since
most such liaisons are adulterous and therefore
highly secretive).
While not
significant
in
terms of value
(women usually
receive such
things
as
soap
and
shampoo,
while men receive
tobacco or
cigarettes),
these
gifts
are crucial in their role of
"rebalancing"
the
relationship.
It
would be
entirely
erroneous to subsume this
practice
under the rubric
of"prostitution."
33
Because Gerai adults
usually sleep
surrounded
by
their
children,
and with other adults
less than a meter or two
away (although
the latter are
usually
inside different
mosquito nets),
sexual intercourse is almost
always
carried out
very quietly.
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 811
her rather than
taking
her
acceptance
of the
soap
as an
unequivocal expres-
sion of assent. She
was,
as she
put
it,
letting
him know that
"you
have
sexual relations
together
when
you
talk
together.
Sexual relations cannot
be
quiet."34
Yet,
this should not be taken to mean that the
practice
of
rape
is
simply
a
product
of discourse: that
brutality
toward women is restricted to societies
containing particular, dimorphic representations
of male and female sexu-
ality
and that we
simply
need to
change
the discourse in order to eradicate
such
practices.35
Nor is it to
suggest
that a
society
in which
rape
is unthink-
able is for that reason to be
preferred
to Western societies. To
adopt
such
a
position
would be still to view the entire world
through
a sexualized
Western lens. There are, in
fact,
horrific
things
that
may
be done to women
in
places
such as Gerai -
things
that are no less
appalling
in their
implica-
tions for the fact that
they
do not involve the sexualized
brutality
of
rape.
In
Gerai,
for
instance,
while a woman does not fear
rape,
she does fear an
enemy's
bewitchment of her rice seed
(the
core of her
gendered identity
in
this
context)
and the
subsequent
failure of the seed to
sprout, resulting
in
hunger
and illness for herself and her rice
group.
In extreme
cases,
be-
witchment of rice seed can lead to
malignancy
of the
growing
fetus inside
the
woman;
her
subsequent
death in
childbirth,
killed
by
her own
"seed";
and her resultant transformation into a
particularly
vile kind of demon.
Gerai women live
constantly
with the fear of this bewitchment
(much
as
Western women live with the fear of
rape),
and even
talking
of it
(always
in
whispers)
reduces them to a state of terror.36 The fact that this kind of
attack can be carried out on a woman
by
either a woman or a
man,
and
that it strikes not at her alone but at her rice
group
as a
whole,
marks it as
belonging
to a
very
different
gendering regime
from that which
operates
in the West. But it is no less horrific in its
implications
for that.
In order to understand the
practice
of
rape
in countries like Australia
34
In
claiming
that "sexual relations cannot be
quiet,"
the woman was
playing
on the ex-
pression
"be
quiet" (meaning
to have sexual
intercourse)
to make the
point
that while adulter-
ous sex
may
need to be even
"quieter"
than
legitimate
sex,
it should not be so
"quiet"
as to
preclude dialogue
between the two
partners. Implicit
here is the notion that in the absence
of such
dialogue,
sex will lack the
requisite mutuality.
35
Foucualt,
e.g.,
once
suggested
(in
a debate in French
reprinted
in La Folie Encerclee
[see
Plaza
1980])
that an effective
way
to deal with
rape
would be to decriminalize it in order to
"desexualize" it. For feminist
critiques
of his
suggestion,
see Plaza
1980;
de Lauretis
1987;
Woodhull 1988.
36
Men fear a
parallel
form of bewitchment that causes death while
engaged
in the defini-
tive "men's work" of
cutting
down
large
trees to make a rice field. Like women's death in
childbirth,
this is referred to as an "evil death"
(matijat)
and is believed to involve the trans-
formation of the man into an evil
spirit.
812 I Helliwell
and the United
States,
then - and so to work
effectively
for its eradication
there -feminists in these countries must
begin
to
relinquish
some of our
most
ingrained presumptions concerning
difference between men and
women
and,
particularly, concerning
men's
genitalia
and
sexuality
as inher-
ently
brutalizing
and
penetrative
and women's
genitalia
and
sexuality
as
inherently
vulnerable and
subject
to brutalization.
Instead,
we must
begin
to
explore
the
ways rape itselfproduces
such
experiences
of
masculinity
and
femininity
and so inscribes sexual difference onto our bodies. In a recent
article,
Moira Gatens asks of other
feminists,
"Why
concede to the
penis
the
power
to
push
us
around,
destroy
our
integrity,
'scribble on us' invade
our borders and
boundaries,
and ...
occupy
us in our
(always already)
conquered 'privacy'?" (1996, 43).
This article echoes her lament. The ten-
dency among many
Western feminists
writing
on
rape
to
accept
as a seem-
ing
fact of nature the normative Western
iconography
of sexual difference
leads them to
reproduce (albeit unwittingly)
the
very
discursive framework
of Western
rapists
themselves,
with their talk of "tools" and
"holes,"
the
very
discursive framework in which
rape
is
possible
and which it
reinscribes. For
rape imposes
difference as much as it is
produced by
difference. In
fact,
the
highly
racialized character of
rape
in
many
Western
contexts
suggests
that the
practice
serves to
police
not
simply
sexual
boundaries but racial ones as well. This is
hardly surprising, given
the his-
tory
of the
present
"heterosexual matrix" in the West: as Stoler
(1989,
1995)
has
demonstrated,
the
process
of heterosexualization went hand-in-
hand with that of colonialism. As a
result,
in
contemporary
Western set-
tings
sexual
othering
is
inextricably entangled
with racial
othering.
Unfor-
tunately,
in
universalizing rape, many
Western feminists risk
naturalizing
these
othering processes
and so
contributing
to a
perpetuation
of the
very
practices they
seek to eradicate.
Department ofArchaeology andAnthropology
Australian National
University
References
Atkinson, Jane
Monnig.
1990. "How Gender Makes a Difference in Wana Soci-
ety."
In Power and
Dfference:
Gender in Island
SoutheastAsia,
ed.
Jane
Monnig
Atkinson and
Shelly Errington,
59-93.
Stanford,
Calif.: Stanford
University
Press.
Barry,
Kathleen. 1995. The Prostitution
of Sexuality.
New York and London: New
York
University
Press.
Bart,
Pauline
B.,
and Patricia H. O'Brien. 1985.
Stopping Rape: Successful
Survival
Strategies.
New York:
Pergamon.
Bell,
Diane. 1983.
Daughters
of
the
Dreaming.
Melbourne: McPhee Gribble.
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 813
Bourque,
Linda B. 1989.
Defning
Rape.
Durham, N.C.,
and London: Duke Uni-
versity
Press.
Brison,
Susan
J.
1993.
"Surviving
Sexual Violence: A
Philosophical Perspective."
Journal
of
Social
Philosophy 24(1):5-22.
Brownmiller,
Susan. 1975.
Against
Our Will:
Men, Women,
and
Rape.
New York:
Simon & Schuster.
Butler, Judith.
1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion
of Identity.
New
York and London:
Routledge.
. 1993. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits
of
"Sex." New York and
London:
Routledge.
Clark, Anna. 1987. Women's
Silence,Men's
Violence: SexualAssault in
England,
1770-
1845. London and New York: Pandora.
de
Lauretis,
Teresa. 1987. "The Violence of Rhetoric: Considerations on
Represen-
tation and Gender." In her
Technologies of
Gender:
Essays
on
Theory,
Film and Fic-
tion,
31-50.
Bloomington
and
Indianapolis:
Indiana
University
Press.
Dentan,
Robert Knox. 1968. The Semai: A Nonviolent
People ofMalaya.
New York:
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
. 1978. "Notes on Childhood in a Nonviolent Context: The Semai Case
(Malaysia)."
In
Learning Non-Aggression:
The
Experience of
Non-Literate
Societies,
ed.
Ashley Montagu,
94-143. New York: Oxford
University
Press.
Donaldson,
Stephen.
1996. "The Deal behind Bars."
Harper's (August):
17-20.
Dubinsky,
Karen. 1993.
ImproperAdvances: Rape
and Heterosexual
Conflict
in On-
tario,
1880-1929.
Chicago
and London:
University
of
Chicago
Press.
Dworkin,
Andrea. 1987. Intercourse. London: Secker &
Warburg.
Ellis,
Lee. 1989. Theories
of Rape: Inquiries
into the Causes
of
Sexual
Aggression.
New
York:
Hemisphere.
Errington, Shelly.
1990.
"Recasting
Sex, Gender,
and Power: A Theoretical and
Regional
Overview." In Power and
Diference:
Gender in Island
SoutheastAsia,
ed.
Jane
Monnig
Atkinson and
Shelly Errington,
1-58.
Stanford,
Calif.: Stanford
University
Press.
Foucault,
Michel. 1978. The
History
of Sexuality.
Vol.
1,
An Introduction. Harmond-
sworth:
Penguin.
Gatens,
Moira. 1996.
"Sex, Contract,
and
Genealogy." Journal of
Political Philoso-
phy 4(1):29-44.
Geddes,
W. R. 1957. Nine
Dayak
Nights.
Melbourne and New York: Oxford Uni-
versity
Press.
Gibson,
Thomas. 1986.
Sacrifice
and
Sharing
in the
Philippine Highlands:
Religion
and
Society among
the Buid
ofMindoro.
London and Dover: Athlone.
Gilman,
Sander L. 1985. "Black
Bodies,
White Bodies: Toward an
Iconography
of
Female
Sexuality
in Late
Nineteenth-Century
Art, Medicine,
and Literature."
In
"Race," Writing,
and
Difference,
ed.
Henry
Louis
Gates, Jr.,
223-40.
Chicago
and London:
University
of
Chicago
Press.
Gordon,
Margaret
T.,
and
Stephanie Riger.
1989. The Female Fear New York:
Free Press.
814 I Helliwell
Gregor,
Thomas. 1990. "Male Dominance and Sexual Coercion." In Cultural
Psy-
chology: Essays
on
Comparative
Human
Development,
ed. James W.
Stigler,
Richard
A.
Shweder,
and Gilbert
Herdt,
477-95.
Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Griffin,
Susan. 1986.
Rape:
The Politics
of
Consciousness. San Francisco:
Harper
&
Row.
Halperin,
David M. 1993. "Is There a
History
of
Sexuality?"
In The Lesbian and
Gay
Studies
Reader,
ed.
Henry
Abelove,
Michele
Barale,
and David M.
Halperin,
416-31. New York and London:
Routledge.
Helliwell,
Christine 1993. "Women in Asia:
Anthropology
and the
Study
of
Women." InAsia's
CultureMosaic,
ed. Grant
Evans,
260-86.
Singapore:
Pren-
tice Hall.
. 1995.
"Autonomy
as Natural
Equality: Inequality
in
'Egalitarian'
Socie-
ties."
Journal
of
the
RoyalAnthropological
Institute
1(2):359-75.
.1996.
"Space
and
Sociality
in a
Dayak Longhouse."
In
Things
as
TheyAre:
New Directions in
Phenomenological
Anthropology,
ed. Michael
Jackson,
128-48.
Bloomington
and
Indianapolis:
Indiana
University
Press.
.
Forthcoming.
'Never Stand Alone": A
Study of
Borneo
Sociality.
Wil-
liamsburg:
Borneo Research Council.
Howell,
Signe.
1989.
Society
and Cosmos:
Chewong
of
Peninsular
Malaysia. Chicago
and London:
University
of
Chicago
Press.
Kilpatrick,
Dean
G., Benjamin
E.
Saunders,
Lois
J. Veronen,
Connie L.
Best,
and
Judith
M. Von. 1987. "Criminal Victimization: Lifetime
Prevalence,
Reporting
to
Police,
and
Psychological Impact."
Crime and
Delinquency 33(4):479-89.
Koss,
Mary
P.,
and
Mary
R.
Harvey.
1991. The
Rape
Victim: Clinical and Commu-
nity
Interventions. 2d ed.
Newbury
Park,
Calif.:
Sage.
Laqueur,
Thomas. 1990.
Making
Sex:
Body
and Gender
from
the Greeks to Freud.
Cambridge,
Mass.,
and London: Harvard
University
Press.
Leacock,
Eleanor. 1978. "Women's Status in
Egalitarian Society: Implications
for
Social Evolution."
CurrentAnthropology 19(2):247-75.
Lloyd,
Genevieve. 1984. TheMan
ofReason:
"Male"and "Female" in Western Philoso-
phy.
London: Methuen.
MacKinnon,
Catharine A. 1989a.
"Sexuality, Pornography,
and Method: 'Pleasure
under
Patriarchy."'
Ethics 99: 314-46.
. 1989b. Toward a Feminist Theory
of
the State.
Cambridge,
Mass.,
and Lon-
don: Harvard
University
Press.
Madigan,
Lee,
and
Nancy
C. Gamble. 1991. The Second
Rape: Society's
Continued
Betrayal of
the Victim. New York:
Lexington.
Marcus,
Julie.
1992. A World
of Diference:
Islam and Gender
Hierarchy
in
Turkey.
Sydney:
Allen & Unwin.
Marcus,
Sharon. 1992.
"Fighting
Bodies,
Fighting
Words: A
Theory
and Politics
of
Rape
Prevention." In Feminists Theorize the
Political,
ed.
Judith
Butler and
Joan W.
Scott,
385-403. New York and London:
Routledge.
Martin,
Emily
1991. "The
Egg
and the
Sperm:
How Science Has Constructed a
S I G N S
Spring
2000 I 815
Romance Based on
Stereotypical
Male-Female Roles."
Signs:
Journal
of
Women
in Culture and
Society 16(3):485-501.
McColgan,
Aileen. 1996. The Case
for Taking
the Date Out
of Rape.
London:
Pandora.
Minturn,
Leigh,
Martin
Grosse,
and Santoah Haider. 1969. "Cultural
Patterning
of Sexual Beliefs and Behaviour."
Ethnology 8(3):301-18.
Mohanty,
Chandra
Talpade.
1991. "Under Western
Eyes:
Feminist
Scholarship
and
Colonial Discourses." In Third World Women and the Politics
of
Feminism,
ed.
Chandra
Talpade Mohanty,
Ann
Russo,
and Lourdes
Torres,
51-80.
Blooming-
ton and
Indianapolis:
Indiana
University
Press.
Moore,
Henrietta L. 1994. A
Passionfor
Difference:
Essays
in
Anthropology
and Gen-
der.
Cambridge
and Oxford:
Polity.
Myers,
Fred R. 1988. "The
Logic
and
Meaning
of
Anger among Pintupi Aborigi-
nes." Man
23(4):589-610.
Palmer,
Craig.
1989. "Is
Rape
a Cultural Universal? A Re-Examination of the Eth-
nographic
Data."
Ethnology 28(1):1-16.
Pateman,
Carole. 1988. The Sexual Contract.
Cambridge: Polity.
Plaza,
Monique.
1980. "Our Costs and Their
Benefits."
m/f4:28-39.
Rosaldo,
Michelle Z. 1980a.
Knowledge
and Passion:
Ilongot
Notions
of
Self
and Social
Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
. 1980b. "The Use and Abuse of
Anthropology:
Reflections on Feminism
and Cross-cultural
Understanding." Signs 5(3):389-417.
Russell,
Diana E. H. 1984. Sexual
Exploitation: Rape,
Child
Abuse,
and
Workplace
Harassment.
Beverly
Hills,
Calif.:
Sage.
Sanday, Peggy
Reeves. 1981. "The Socio-Cultural Context of
Rape:
A Cross-
Cultural
Study."Journal ofSocial
Issues
37(4):5-27.
. 1986.
"Rape
and the
Silencing
of the Feminine." In
Rape,
ed.
Sylvana
To-
maselli and
Roy
Porter,
84-101. Oxford: Blackwell.
1990a. "Androcentric and Matrifocal Gender
Representations
in
Minang-
kabau
Ideology."
In
Beyond
the Second Sex: New Directions in the
Anthropology of
Gender,
ed.
Peggy
Reeves
Sanday
and Ruth
Gallagher Goodenough,
141-68.
Philadelphia: University
of
Pennsylvania
Press.
1990b.
Fraternity
Gang
Rape:
Sex, Brotherhood, and
Privilege
on
Campus.
New York and London: New York
University
Press.
Stoler,
Ann Laura. 1989. "Carnal
Knowledge
and
Imperial
Power:
Gender, Race,
and
Morality
in Colonial Asia." In Gender at the Crossroads
ofKnowledge:
Feminist
Anthropology
in the Postmodern
Era,
ed. Micaela di
Leonardo,
51-101.
Berkeley
and Los
Angeles: University
of California Press.
. 1995. Race and the Education
ofDesire:
Foucault's
History
of
Sexuality
and
the Colonial Order
of Things.
Durham, N.C.,
and London: Duke
University
Press.
Strathern,
Marilyn
1987. "Conclusion." In
Dealing
with
Inequality: Analysing
Gen-
der Relations in Melanesia and
Beyond,
ed.
Marilyn Strathern,
278-302. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University
Press.
816 I Helliwell
. 1988. The Gender
of
the
Gift:
Problems with Women and Problems with
Society
inMelanesia.
Berkeley
and Los
Angeles: University
of California Press.
Trumbach,
Randolph.
1989. "Gender and the Homosexual Role in Modern West-
ern Culture: The
Eighteenth
and Nineteenth Centuries
Compared."
In Homo-
sexuality,
Which
Homosexuality?
ed. Dennis
Altman,
149-69. Amsterdam: An
Dekker/Schorer;
London: GMP.
. 1993. "London's
Sapphists:
From Three Sexes to Four Genders in the
Making
of Modern Culture." In Third
Sex,
Third Gender:
Beyond
Sexual Dimor-
phism
in Culture and
History,
ed. Gilbert
Herdt,
111-36. New York: Zone.
Tsing,
Anna
Lowenhaupt.
1990. "Gender and Performance in Meratus
Dispute
Settlement." In Power and
Difference:
Gender in Island Southeast
Asia,
ed.
Jane
Monnig
Atkinson and
Shelly Errington,
95-125.
Stanford,
Calif.: Stanford
University
Press.
1993. In the Realm
of
the Diamond
Queen: Marginality
in an
Out-of-the-Way
Place.
Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton
University
Press.
van der
Meer,
Theo. 1993.
"Sodomy
and the Pursuit of a Third Sex in the
Early
Modern Period." In Third
Sex,
Third Gender:
Beyond
Sexual
Dimorphism
in Cul-
ture and
History,
ed. Gilbert
Herdt,
137-212. New York: Zone.
Woodhull,
Winifred. 1988.
"Sexuality,
Power,
and the
Question
of
Rape."
In Femi-
nism and Foucault:
Reflections
on
Resistance,
ed. Irene Diamond and Lee
Quinby,
167-76. Boston: Northeastern
University
Press.
Young,
Iris Marion. 1990.
"Throwing
like a Girl: A
Phenomenology
of Feminine
Body Comportment, Motility,
and
Spatiality."
In her
Throwing
like a Girl and
Other
Essays
in Feminist
Philosophy
and Social
Theory,
141-59.
Bloomington
and
Indianapolis:
Indiana
University
Press.

Its Only A Penis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Its Only A Penis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Its Only A Penis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

"It's Only a Penis": Rape, Feminism, and Difference

Author(s): Christine Helliwell

You might also like