Rape: A Bigger Danger Than Feminist Know Analysis

Rape: A Bigger Danger Than Feminist Know

Camille Paglia a thrilling humanities professor at Philadelphia University of the Arts. Known for her controversial books and essays wrote a selection for the New York News Day in 1991 titled, Rape: A Bigger Danger Than Feminist Know (578). In this selection Pagila takes a stance on rape and who is really to blame for it. Paglia’s thesis, which states “ Feminism keeps saying the sexes are the same. It keeps telling women they can do anything, go anywhere, say anything, wear anything. No, they cant. Women will always be in danger” (579).

Paglia opens her article with the line “Rape is an outrage that cannot be tolerated in civilized society”(578). She talks about how feminists have forced rape to be

a more prominent topic that has caused for the dangers of rape to be hidden from women. They have allowed women to believe, that before she has sex with man she must give consent to him and if she doesn’t give consent it is considered rape. (578) Paglia continues with how on certain college campuses in the North East and West Coast women have begun to write the name of the men who raped them on bathroom stalls. (578)
Pagila goes on to talk about how rape is not something new but something that has been happening through out all of history. Rapes use to have a large penalty death and in some countries would result in the person being “knifed, castrated and hung out to dry” (Paglia 579). But over time rape has been seen as a lesser crime and women are not ready for that world. Feminist played a hand in this as well, with telling women they could wear, go, say, or do anything they please which women cant because they’re in sexual danger.(579)
A student of Paglia’s once went to Egypt and spent the night camped out in the passageway of the Great Pyramid (579) Which a women could never do because this would result in her being raped even if feminist say women can do everything that men do Paglia believes different (579). They’re just sexual indifferences that men and women have, because of their chemical makeup. A man needs sex to thrive, they will do anything, while women were not made like that and we can sustain our selves from needing sex. College men are the worst at this considering they’re at their sexual peak. (579)
Paglia then goes on to talk about women in this century and how they lead men on with the games they play and it leads to their rapes (580). Media has put into women’s heads that they can have whatever they want and lead a man on however they please but they’re wrong (580). Paglia talks about how “you must study the past” (581). Women should know what they’re getting themselves in to and not cry to their parents when something happens or to lie to their parents about being raped. (581)
Paglia finishes her article talking about men and how they will never change and “the only solution to date rape is female self-awareness and self control,” (Paglia 582). The only way a women can stop date rape is for her to defend and control herself, and if a problem of date rape ever does happen to go to the police and not tell everyone about it. (582)
To conclude, Paglia a professor of humanities in her article for the New York Newsday talks about date rape and who really is to blame for it (578). Men cannot control themselves, women should learn to cover up, to never go anywhere alone and to not listen to what the feminist have to say about date rape.
In reply to Paglia’s essay on date rape and who really is to blame, I formed that her arguments had few strengths.

The first strength that I saw in this was her credentials. Credentials, specified by the Longman Reader is “…experiences you’ve had that make you knowledgeable about the issue being discussed”(493) Paglia’s credentials is that she is a professor of humanities at Philadelphia University of the Arts. (578) Humanities is the study of humans and their cultures. Paglia’s credentials allow her to be an expert on date rape and the reason we do the things we do. An example from her essay that shows that she has the credentials to talk about these things is when she talks about women and how they don’t know what they want. She says “Today’s young woman don’t know what they want… feminism has not brought sexual happiness” (580). Here you can see that Paglia uses her credentials and her study of woman to come to a conclusion, that women do not know what they want in this world. This is Paglia’s strength because this is ethos. Ethos, specified by the Longman Reader means “credibility” (493). Credibility in this sense has to deal with being knowledgeable in what you’re talking about. Paglia does this by not being over creditable in her essay, she hints at her credibility at times in the paper but does not bombard the reader with

sources.
Another, sometimes strength in Paglia’s essay was her use of relevant evidence. Relevant evidence explained by the Longman Reader is “evidence that relates to the readers’ needs, values, and experience” (501). Paglia uses relevant evidence a couple of times through out the essay, One piece relevant evidence is when she talks about a 1960’s comic film titled Where the Boys Are. This film is about men chasing women using different strategies to get the women into bed, and women making bad decisions that in the end lead to their rape. Paglia choosing this movie as evidence of what can lead you to get raped is a great example of factual evidence. It shows the experience of four different girls and their vacation in Florida, which later results in the rape of one of them. People relate well and learn from the experience of others. The reason this is strength is because people can relate and learn a lesson from this. From other peoples experience in driving and getting into accidents in Killeen Texas, I have become a very cautious driver. I always keep my eyes focused on the road and keep a good distance between me and other cars. I never gotten into accident but just from hearing from others what happened I learned a lesson and drive safely.
Paglia’s essay on date rape and who really is to blame, I found that her arguments had many weaknesses.

The first weakness I found was her Tone. Tone, specified by the Simon and Schuster Handbook for Writers is, “not what you say, but how you say it” (Troyka 151). Paglia’s tone is this essay is a very extreme and emotional tone. In her essay she states “A girl who lets herself get dead drunk… fraternity party is an idiot” (580). She is very harsh in what she is saying in this essay, usually with an essay like this you would want to create a language that would allow the reader to agree with you and to understand what you’re saying. But, she is just bashing any types of girls that go to a fraternity party and that tone should not be used to convey her point. The reason the tone in this kind of essay is a weakness is because of ethos. Ethos like described earlier is credibility of the writer. (troyka 148). Paglia is not able to be trusted because of her tone. She used a very strong an extreme emotional tone and pushes the reader away and makes them disagree with her even more and makes her lose her

credibility.
Furthermore, a weakness in that she commits logical fallacies more certainly either or fallacies. Simon and Schuster Handbook for Writes states “called false dilemma, offers only two alterations when more exist.” Paglia commits this fallacy through the essay a good couple of times but this point stood out to me the most when she said, “the only solution to date rape is female self-awareness and self –control”(582). In Paglia’s statement she is giving females only two options when it comes to what they should do so they don’t get raped when really there are thousands of different things. This causes it to be a weakness in her essay it lacks ethos and makes her credibility seem none existent. The use of the world only and stating two ways to resolve this problem, will make the reader disagree with her now at the end of the essay. A way she could fix this is by saying “self-awareness and self-control are SOME solutions to date rape.”
Lastly, a weakness in Paglia’s essay is her use of Fictitious examples. Fictitious, according to the Dictionary.com is “of, relating to, or consisting of fiction; imaginatively produced or set forth; created by the imagination.” Paglia’s examples through out the essay were based off of movies and people that people in this generation have never heard of. One example of this from her essay that shows this is when she talks about womens cosmic social power. She states that “ Clara Bow it was rumored, took on the USC football team … screaming sailors and straddles a pink-lit cannon” This statement we see Paglia using any examples she can think of to prove her point. She doesn’t not use and example that you and I can easily relate to but instead something that is very obscured and cannot be proven. The reason this is a weakness is because it weakens her logos. Logos according to the Simon & Schuster Handbook for Writers mean “trustworthy” in regard to the writer (144). Trustworthiness plays a hand with creditability, using fictious examples pushes the reader away because they have nothing to relate too. Paglia is a humanities professor in her life time she should have studied real life examples of rape an have real life examples to base her essay off of. Instead, Paglia should have used logical examples like Monica Lewinsky who seduced Bill Clinton with her cosmic sexual power to have a relationship with her. To fix this she should have applied logical examples of women using their powers to get men.
In conclusion, I feel as though Paglia has written a very weak essay. She doesn’t really persuade the reader to change their view on date rape and who really is to blame for it. Her tone and fictitious examples cause this to be a very weak essay. Her tone is very hostile and doesn’t try to persuade you to change your view on date rape but more keep the opinion you have, and her examples cannot be backed by anything except the credentials she holds as a humanities professor. The weaknesses out weigh the essays strength in my opinion. Her strengths were sporadic and small; if it weren’t for her credentials she would only have one strength throughout the essay. I would give this essay a C, she doesn’t provide any logical facts and it really causes her to lose her ethos and pathos.