"
And this is the entire history of feminism and anti-rape activism: the history of people introducing ideas that are seen as prudish and crazy and extreme until they are understood as common sense. Or, in some cases, law.
Here’s a history of some of the crazy ideas advocated by the feminist fringe: that rape is still rape if you were dating or married to your attacker, since knowing or even loving someone does not necessarily make it impossible for that person to hurt you. That a woman’s prior sexual history should not be used as evidence against her in a rape trial, since having consented to sex in the past does not mean that you have implicitly consented to all sex thereafter. That rape is still rape if a woman does not or cannot physically resist her attacker, since it is generally unwise to require that all rapes come with an accompanying beating. That some rapists use no physical force whatsoever, and employ intimidation, coercion or intoxication as weapons, and that it is still rape if compliance is forced through these measures.
All of these ideas were once radical. Indeed, there are still many people who regard some or all of them with deep hostility. But most of them have become central to our understanding of sexual assault, and that understanding is often reflected in the changing rape laws of the last 40 years.
"— Sady Doyle (via gauntlet)
