Common Decency By Susan Jacoby Summary

A Summary and Critical Response

Susan Jacoby’s essay titled Common Decency is her critical response to Camille Paglia’s Sexual Personae and anti-feminists that follow the same views as Paglia. Jacoby’s beginnings started as a newspaper reporter, leading to multiple published essays, biographies and non-fiction literature. Common Decency was published in the New York Times in April 1991(Nadell, Langan, and Comodromos 571), where Jacoby states “date rapes do not happen because a man honestly mistakes a woman’s “no” for “yes”…They occur because a minority of men…can’t stand to take “no” for an answer” (Jacoby 572) as her thesis statement.

Susan Jacoby begins with the recalling of a personal experience correlating to the controversial topic of

“date rape”. In her fragile and emotional state of getting her heart broken by a current lover, she invites an ex-boyfriend over to her home for dinner, and if things went well she was open to something more physical. She goes on to explain that as things escalated sexually, she decided to stop. Although her ex-boyfriend was annoyed at the moment, he understood she was unable to participate in something she was not fully committed to.
Jacoby believes that rape should be regarded equally, whether it is committed by an acquaintance or by a stranger. She mentions that apologists for date rape imply that misunderstanding gender sexual cues or mixed signals are the underlying cause of date rapes. This argument portrays men in general as missing the intellectual capability to control their sexual impulses when sexually pursuing a woman. Jacoby argues that as a civilized society, women and men are able to demonstrate respect towards individual sexual boundaries regardless of sexual cues. She argues that a small percentage of men, those that rape, simply can’t take no for an answer (572).
Jacoby explains that cultural stereotypes such as “boys will be boys” enables justification for certain behavior. More importantly, it can lead to blaming the victim for not taking necessary precautions to men’s endemic behavior (572). Jacoby questions Camille Paglia’s views and her published book, of correlating male sexual violence as the fuel to masterminds (572-573).
Additionally, Susanne Jacoby believes that the sexual tension between two people during courtship reveals the ability for men to differentiate between a woman’s refusal and panic to his imposed sexual advances (573).

Jacoby questions Paglia’s view on sexual cues, where she suggests that gang rape is not applicable to the mixed signals excuse. She mentions that in a gang rape, the defendants usually claim confusion over mixed signals, suggesting that the victim willingly accompanied them to a party and believed that if the victim displayed interest in one, how are they to know she isn’t interest in having sex with all (573). Jacoby explains that the date rape controversy adheres to the general notion that women can stop the leading acts of sexual intercourse at any time and that men will reciprocate since men will face necessary consequences if they are unwilling to respect a woman’s

choice.
In conclusion, Jacoby reminds us that “real men don’t rape” and that apologists for date rape disrespect men and their ability to respect a woman’s decision regarding sexual intercourse and their capability towards controlling their sexual urges (574).

Susan Jacoby’s essay Common Decency regarding the controversial issue of date rate and her response to anti-feminists and their views consists of more strengths than weaknesses throughout her essay. She opposes Paglia’s view that a woman’s mixed signals can confuse a man beyond his intellectual capability, leading to non consensual sex because of a man’s inability to resist a woman’s sexual power. Jacoby explains that the alleged confusion does not exist between two civilized participants but instead to, according to Jacoby, “an ugly minority…. [that] cant stand to take “no” for an answer”(572).
In response to Jacoby’s essay on date rape, I found that her most essential and important supportive argument was her personal life account of an incident that is correlative to date rape arguments. In support of her thesis Jacoby believes that “ Most date rapes do not happen because a man honestly mistakes a woman’s “no” for a “yes” or a “maybe” (Jacoby 572). According to her personal incident, Jacoby lead on an old ex-boyfriend into more than she though she could handle. She was vulnerable and confused, in need of reassurance. She explains that after realizing her mistake, she immediately asked her old ex-boyfriend to stop. Jacoby’s factual evidence contributes to her logos appeal, in which according to the Longman reader defines it as “ soundness of your argument”(474). Susan Jacoby’s personal experience provides her with logos appeal that supports her thesis with factual evidence.
In addition, Jacoby’s qualifying claims give her a supportive argument over her credibility using logos with qualifiers. In the St. Martin’s Handbook it states that “you..want to use qualifiers to make it more precise and thus less susceptible to criticism” (Lunsford 191). The use of words such as “few”, “some” and “most” allow Jacoby to state her claims in a way that is irrefutable through her choice of words. According to Jacoby “ most men somehow manage to decode those signals without using superior physical strength to force themselves on their partners” (572), where she the term “most” men to qualify her statement from being beyond doubt. Jacoby strategically uses qualifiers in order that her statements may be valid and reliable.
Moreover, Jacoby’s use of logical extremes point out Paglia’s weaknesses in her arguments. By doing so Jacoby takes claims of opposing views and qualifies her claims to make her position superior (484). Susan Jacoby claims that if Paglia’s views were accurate “few women would get thorough life without being raped, and few men would fail to commit rape” (572). In this way, Jacoby continues to refute Paglia’s view where she generalizes men of being “brutes” and “stupid”(572). This specific example allows Jacoby to take Paglia’s bold statement and approach it in a way that it is extreme but using Paglia’s own words.
Next, the last strength that I will mention is her concern of being truthful despite of the different views Jacoby had with Paglia. According to the Longman Reader seeking to create common ground regardless of the differences in views can be more receptive towards the reader or those being persuaded (Nadell, Langan, and Comodromos 481). Jacoby opens her paragraph with the words “ it is true, of course…and it is true that many…. (Jacoby 573), by agreeing with Paglia’s claim regardless of the overall opposing views of the date rape issue. Because of Jacoby’s concern about the truth reaching out to her readers regardless of agreeing with Paglia, Jacoby’s ethos is supported. Ethos, as it is explained in the Longman Reader accounts for your ethical or integrity appeal (476). By presenting consideration towards the opposing views, just like Jacoby did, in conceding to Paglia’s view on courtship, Jacoby establishes her ethos factor.
However, Jacoby’s response on date rape controversy also consists of a couple weaknesses found throughout the essay. First of all, her credibility as an authority on the subject does not exist. Jacoby’s credentials according to the Longman Reader mentions her affiliation with published pieces on women’s issues and autobiographies. Susan Jacoby started as a newspaper reporter and over the years became a published author (571). Unfortunately her credentials do not support her knowledge in women and men sociology, psychology or biology. According to Jacoby “ this minority behavior-and a culture that excuses it on grounds that boys will be boys-is the target of the movement against date rape that has surfaced on many campuses during the past year”(572), however she does not posses the credentials in order to prove her claim factual. Fact, which is defined by Merriam-Webster as “ something that truly exists or happens: something that has actual existence”. Therefore Jacoby’s claim about culture, society and male biology cannot be credible since her credentials do not support her authority to claim her views as factual or as supported evidence. With the presence of cited information from expert psychologists or in social science, Jacoby’s credibility would be recognized.
Finally, Susan Jacoby’s lack of research on multiple arguments reflects her statements as questionable because she has no supporting material.

Jacoby’s essay consists of persuasive language and logical statements throughout. When Jacoby states that “Real men want an eager sexual partner-not a woman who is quaking with fear or even one who is ambivalent” (574) her statement, although it is very logical, it is basically an opinion without factual or supporting evidence. Without research supporting her views on multiple logical statements her integrity is missing. Although she did include a personal incident, her logos elements are still lacking in this essay. Her ethos and pathos approach is present but falls flat for the logos factor. Jacoby’s response essay can be improved with the addition of cited research that supports her views on the date

rape.
In conclusion, Susan Jacoby’s essay on the date rape controversy is effective when taking all elements into considerations, it is also suggested that research be added in order to satisfy complete argumentation effectiveness. The inclusion of her personal experience contributes to her powerful persuasiveness. Jacoby’ use of logical extremes and qualifiers suggest that she is a strategic writer. Due to her lack of supportive material to back up her views aside from her personal experience, the suggested grade for her essay is an A-.