un. be. lievable.

this is what i wrote:
Senator Henry:

In response to your despicable insult to all women "chaste" and otherwise, I can think of nothing to say but to call for your resignation.

You clearly have no concept of human rights, reproductive health, and sexual assault -- which is a crime under the laws you pretend to respect. Your misogynistic, ignorant statements embarrass everyone in Tennessee and endanger half of its population by creating an environment that revokes their right to refuse sex. Imagine if it were your wife, daughter, or mother, who was forced to have sex after refusing. Would it matter what choices she had made before or after? And are you really in the position to judge anyway?

Please take your out-dated, offensive, anti-Christian hate-speech out of our government. We do not need a leader who will condone rape and crime. We need leaders who respect our dignity and our health, and will protect us from people like you.

When he was learning these things, society hadn't wrapped its head much around the idea of women being people in their own right rather than just accessories to some man. People didn't consider or care that rape hurts whether you're chaste or not, or that one's consciousness stays firmly attached to one's body even when one gets married---the husband doesn't experience getting raped when he rapes his wife, she does. The concept of one human being becoming property of another cannot erase the fact that the first person is still the one to experience the things done to her. All these various justifications and excuses for rape are born of a fundamental apathy for the fact that rape hurts women---or they are designed to profit from it. Either way, they don't care, in any fashion, that women are human.

Well, we are. And our country's elected officials ought to understand that, as a prerequesite to representing us.

It is truly frightening and depressing living in "the greatest country in the world."

I'm sending him an email. I'm not a constituent, so it won't have the same impact, but I have to do it anyway. It's sickening.

I'm also email his fellow senators urging them to censure him for his behavior - if you're in Tennessee, please do the same!

Dear Senator,

I am writing you because it has come to my attention that you don't think sexual assault on women is as grievous and harming as do those of us who've suffered from its affects.

When I was 25, I was assaulted and seriously beaten on my way home from work. I am convinced that I am only alive today because a neighbor of mine cared enough to get involved when he heard me begging for my life. Unless you have been in a situation where your life is threatened, your body, mind and spirit violated, you cannot possibly know how it colors every single second of every single day you have left. I live every day in fear. I cannot walk from work to my car without a heightened sense of awareness. I can never relax.

I am glad my father was a wiser person than you seem to be. Rape is rape. A woman who is forced to comply with a sexual act has been raped no matter what her history, or her history with the assailant. Please understand that those of us who have experienced this violent and degrading experience know better than to view it as sex - it is a soul-killing experience and can only be perpetrated by men who view women as less than human creatures to be feared and put violently "in their place."

Obviously the women in your life don't think enough of you to enlighten you, because at least one in four (and that is thought to be a very conservative estimate) of the women you know has been sexually abused at some time in her life. For this you have only yourself to blame. I am sorry you cannot bring them any comfort,

me

Yet another jackass with a silly ass-clown smile on his face. Grr.

now back the fuck up!

was he learning these things back in "pleasantville" or something? give me a break...rape is rape is rape...regardless of how "chaste" or otherwise a woman is. yeah, that was how the crime was...only it wasn't really rape, then was it? merely destruction of property, whereas nowadays i guess it's just "theft of services" if you happen to not be a virgin.

when i calm down, i am posting this at my place...and sending him a (hopefully) more eloquent letter than i could right now.

*headdesk*

Oh, yeah, I too long for the days when rape was a property crime.

barf.

It's utterly reprehensible that an elected official in 2008 could believe that rape=contaminating a woman's vagina with icky boy cooties.

Damn. It's freaking frustrating to see someone who's supposed to be intellectual and a leader say stupid shit like this.

I think his ideas of what rape consists of has a lot to do with the so-called "gray rape" (thanks, Laura Session Stepps!) culture that we currently see. Even the women I speak with, who are survivors of "gray rape" tell me the line isn't always clear.

I am writing a paper in my feminist research class on "gray rape," the issue of consent, its lasting effect and how a culture that fosters "masculinity" has a lot to do with it. Already, I am finding out how prevelant the whole "slut" vs. "good girls" mentality is, as well as how a woman's sexual past plays a great deal in this.

Following is the letter I sent to the Tennessee Senators:

Dear Tennessee Senators,
I sent the letter below to Senator Douglas Henry. For an elected official to make these kind of comments is completely reprehensible and irresponsible. It is a slap in the face to survivors and shows his disrespect towards women. I urge you to censure him for his remarks and to encourage him to educate himself of the concepts of rape, sexual assault and consent.

Thank you,
Erin Doherty
Seattle, WA

To Douglas Henry:

I am disgusted and appalled at your recent comments on rape. As an elected official, one would hope that you would have the schooling to at least understand the concept of consent. When someone (woman or man) says stop, that's it. You either respect the inviolable bodily integrity of another being or you don't. If you don't, it's RAPE. Here's a definition for you: "rape: any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person." Here's another: "consent: to give assent or approval". It doesn't matter that someone was enjoying the kissing or the foreplay. If someone changes their mind, it is THEIR body and THEIR prerogative. It doesn't matter if you're married to the person or if you just met them or if they're wearing something provocative - it's still rape if they say no. It's a very simple concept and for a lawmaker to not grasp it is chilling and sickening indeed. How would you feel if your daughter or mother or wife were raped? Because the statistics are that 1 in 4 women has been sexually assaulted. You know someone who has. Think about that for a moment.

You should be ashamed of yourself. Please take the time to reflect on your thinking and to educate yourself - you owe it your constituents.

Here are all of their email addresses:
sen.mae.beavers@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.andy.berke@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.diane.black@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.dewayne.bunch@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.tim.burchett@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.charlotte.burks@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.rusty.crowe@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.lowe.finney@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.raymond.finney@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.ophelia.ford@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.thelma.harper@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.joe.haynes@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.roy.herron@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.doug.jackson@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.jack.johnson@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.bill.ketron@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.tommy.kilby@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.rosalind.kurita@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.jim.kyle@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.beverly.marrero@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.randy.mcnally@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.mark.norris@legislature.state.tn.us, lt.gov.ron.ramsey@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.steve.roller@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.steve.southerland@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.paul.stanley@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.reginald.tate@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.jim.tracy@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.bo.watson@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.john.wilder@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.micheal.williams@legislature.state.tn.us, sen.jamie.woodson@legislature.state.tn.us

I sent him an email and got this response pretty quickly. Love how the word rape has quotations.

"The discussion which you mention was about whether abortion should be defined in the Constitution or by Statute. It has always been defined by Statute until the Federal Supreme Court decided Roe vs. Wade and I believe it is a proper subject for legislative rather than judicial definition. There were several amendments offered. The one which you mentioned was offered by Senator Jackson, which simply used the term “rape� without further qualification as a Constitutional test. My statement which you quoted was to show the great difference in the concept of rape over the years and was not intended to express my approval of rape, which I adamantly oppose in any situation or in any form."

Well at least I feel safer knowing that since I'm sure I don't meet his definition of "chaste", I can't be raped.

Ugh

Eww eww eww eww eww.

Everytime I see or hear someone say something like this, one of my first thoughts is just "man I feel sorry for the women in his life, especially those who've been in a sexual "relationship" with him"

autismmom:

So in other words, he's saying that abortion was only acceptable if it was in the case of an extra-marital rape resulting in pregnancy, thereby violating a /man's/ right to only raise children that were his biologically. Get it? It's totally a property issue...

It's nice to finally know that what happened to me this summer (cycling down a busy road in broad daylight, man asked for help with his car, then attacked me) wasn't attempted rape because I'm not "chaste". I'm sure all the jurors who sentenced him to jail for the rest of his life would like to know that too.

Fucker....

Dear Senator Henry,

Though I am not one of your constituents, I was utterly insulted by your remark concerning rape and rape victims. It does not matter whether the victim is a virgin saving herself for marriage, or a prostitute on the streets, if she is assaulted and forced to perform a sexual act against her will, she has been raped. The crime is the same whether or not her hymen is still intact. Another grevious mistake you made was in assuming that a man cannot rape his wife. Just because they are married does not mean that a woman is her husband's property. If she says no, and he forces her to have sex, then he has raped her, and suggesting that it is not is a slap in the face to every woman in the world. I sincerely hope that if your mother, your wife, your sister, or your daughter were forced into sex, you would not actually believe that it was not rape because she has had sex in the past. Though I cannot vote against you in the next election, I can assure you that I will drive to Tennesee and actively campaign against you unless you issue an apology and start standing up for women's rights.

Sincerely,
me

@Ninapendamaishi: I agree, but the trouble is that, since he's a senator and gets to make the rules everyone else has to live by, every woman in Tennessee is to some extent "the women in his life".

So i was looking for some context for this and found an equally horrible defense of Henry's quote by a Democratic spokesman:

"Kleinheider at Volunteer Voters is following up on this, and hears from Senate Democratic Caucus Spokesman Mark Brown that, “Senator Henry’s remarks are not meant to be a dissertation on what acts should or should not be defined as rape. They were a commentary on the importance of having clear and precise language in our constitution.�" (since when are the rape laws in the constitution?)

For further context, Doug Henry is a democrat going against his party by trying to help pass a bill that would enable TN to restrict access to abortion. The legislature wants to oppose a TN Supreme Court decision that said abortion is a fundamental right.

Democrats were trying to add language that would at least attempt to protect victims of rape and incest, and when pregnancy would endanger the life of the woman.

Then comes Doug Henry trying to add language approved by the Tennessee Right to Life organization which doesn't protect women at all, only states that the legislature can decide whether it wants to protect them in the future.

He is claiming that this is clarifying language. And his example of why we need clear language is the disgusting quote about rape.

So we have someone saying that clarity in our laws is important. The example he uses clearly sets up a scenario in which rape is clearly defined vs. rape which is not clearly defined (at least that's how I read it. Why else use the example?). Doesn't take a genius to guess which definition of rape he's suggesting is the better one.

...wow, sorry that was so long. And not easy to review to check for typos.

By some party not her SPOUSE? Let's go THERE...

It's nice to finally know that what happened to me this summer (cycling down a busy road in broad daylight, man asked for help with his car, then attacked me) wasn't attempted rape because I'm not "chaste". I'm sure all the jurors who sentenced him to jail for the rest of his life would like to know that too.
Now excuse me while I go vomit.

Autismmom,

That was quick. But not very helpful. For someone who's talking about clarity he's pretty fucking vague.

Is he saying that they can't make an exception for rape victims if they don't specify what rape is? I guess if you've been raped and want an abortion, your rape better fit neatly into the legal definition.

just to clarify - when i said it was quick i didn't mean that as praise. i meant that clearly the people on this website are not the only ones repulsed by his remarks. This was a form letter that clearly they have sent out to more than just myself. I fully believe in the power of the pen and believe that not only does Douglas Henry's office need to continue to hear from all of us, but that we should follow Demolition Woman's suggestion and contact all the state legislators in TN to let them know how we feel about Douglas Henry's remarks.

Let's not forget that under his definition of rape, it is impossible for a man to ever rape his wife.

Ugh.

I've never understood people who both oppose abortion because they believe it's equivalent to the murder of a baby, and are then willing to go to huge lengths to try to define certain exceptions if it's "bad" enough. I mean, let's be consistent here: I doubt they'd condone the actual killing of an actual born child if the child's father and grandfather were discovered to be the same person, so the fact that they discuss what "kind" of rape is "acceptable" for an abortion at all makes me wonder whether they really believe all this abortion-is-murder stuff.

This man is disgusting. His vile remarks make me think of the Phyllis Schlafly quote (and I'm paraphrasing), "Sexual harassment doesn't happen to virtuous women.

This is just another of the million reasons why abortion laws which allow allow for safe and legal abortions for women who meet certain criteria are inherently flawed. First of all, the antis want to define rape to their very narrow view. Second of all, even if you find an instance which would meet their definition, you would still, presumably, have to go through the trial... you know, to make good and SURE the slut isn't lying. This would effectively put an end to all abortion anyway since, considering the current state of our legal system, it seems highly unlikely that any legal proceedings would be done in an appropriate time frame. For these reasons and more, restricted abortion rights will NEVER work. Abortion must be legal and on demand in all instances for all women at ALL times. Anything less is inhumane.

"since when are the rape laws in the constitution?" - geek, some TN legislators are trying to pass an amendment to our state constitution to say that nothing in the document protects the right to an abortion. Others have argued for rape and incest exemptions, which is why the topic of rape and the constitution has arisen.

Let's also not forget that under his definition, only WOMEN can be raped. While I am well aware that sexual assault is overwhelmingly perpetrated by men against women, people of other genders experience rape too and their suffering is no less valid or important.

They have stopped replying. I got nuttin honey.

I feel bad for this creep's wife. Apparently he does give a shit about what she thinks or wants/doesn't want.

Oh, I'll be writing some emails today...

This quote reminds me of Bill Napoli, of South Dakota said while defending a proposed COMPLETE abortion ban (even in cases of rape and incest)...

" real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life"

Do these asshats get together for tea or something? How do they come up with this shit?

I don't feel sorry for the creep's wife. The simple fact that she is married to this guy leads me to believe that she is a creep, too.

I do feel sorry for his daughters, if he has any.

"I don't feel sorry for the creep's wife. The simple fact that she is married to this guy leads me to believe that she is a creep, too."

dee, marital rape is an all-too common phenomenon, and there are all sorts of psychological reasons why a woman might not leave her abuser. As someone who has done extensive training to aid survivors of sexual abuse in my community, I find this sentiment terribly misinformed...

(Not saying his wife couldn't be a creep, just saying that if he's sexually controlling, that hardly means it's her own fault for not leaving him)

my email:
Senator Douglas Henry,

I am not one of your constituents but I am disgusted by what you have said about rape: “Rape, ladies and gentlemen, is not today what rape was. Rape, when I was learning these things, was the violation of a chaste woman, against her will, by some party not her spouse. Today it’s simply, ‘Let’s don’t go forward with this act.’ �

This kind of misogynist hate speech against women is appauling and disgusting! You should be ashamed of yourself for designating who does and who does not get to be considered victims of the very same crime, not a crime of sex, but a crime of violence and control perpetrated in the most personal of ways. The experience of rape is likened to being the most damaging of violent crimes with the one exception of murder. Rape survivors live in fear and every single day of their lives after being raped is impacted by this horrifying event, regardless of who did it or what the survivor has experienced prior to the rape.

You have personally degraded one in three American women, as it is one in three American women who are raped. The vast majority of these women are raped by people they know, such as husbands, boyfriends, or acquaintances. The very fact that these survivors know their rapists does NOT lessen the impact of this violent crime. Rather, rapists who are husbands, boyfriends, and acquaintances simply find it easy to rape women they already know, as their violent assertion of complete control over these women’s bodies.

How could you self-righteously claim that only “chaste women� can be raped? What if your own wife were raped by a man she knew? Would it be any less horrifying because she had had sex previously? Rape is so horrifying because it is a violent violation of one’s control over her own body. It is NOT a crime of taking sex. It is a crime of hate, power, control, and violence!

Furthermore, do you simply not care about what your own wife’s thinks or wants/does not want? Because she married you, is she your property? Would someone other than yourself raping her merely be commiting property theft? How dare you express such a hateful view of women!

Sen. Doug Henry -

Your comments last week:
“Rape, ladies and gentlemen, is not today what rape was. Rape, when I was learning these things, was the violation of a chaste woman, against her will, by some party not her spouse. Today it’s simply, ‘Let’s don’t go forward with this act.’ �

My comment in response:
“Sen. Douglas Henry, it is because of people like you that I am afraid. This condones rape and rapists of today although it is no more justifiable today then it was way, Way, WAY back in your day. It is a crime. If a woman says no, it means no. This is whether it’s her husband, boyfriend, uncle, cousin, brother, friend, acquaintance or unknown. This is also regardless of her sexual preferences, tastes and behaviors. A woman has the right to decide when she wants to have sex or not. She gets this right by being human, right? I’m sorry…I wasn’t aware that the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness doesn’t apply to women.

I mean, think about it in reverse. Let’s say a man and woman were about to have sex and the man all of a sudden decided he didn’t want to anymore. Wouldn’t he have the right to say no to whomever the woman was? And let’s say she heard no but used force to have sex with him anyway. Is this ok with you too? I doubt it. What is it about the word “no� from a woman that a man cannot and will not understand?

Also, what is it about your comment that pertains to a woman’s right to choose? Whether she was raped or not, it is her body. At the very least, the constitution protects her right to privacy. So, butt out of their lives!

I wish you had as much respect for and engery in protecting women's rights as you do the unborn. And let me point out that amongst all of these lives you are "protecting" a lot of them are female. If you were to carry your sexist and misogynist ideals all the way down to the fetus, then a female fetus would have a different set of rights then a male. But this sounds ridiculous to you, doesn't it? So why do you condone giving adult women a different set of rights?"

Yours in the 21st century,
Anythegr8

does he check his own email, anyway? i assumed it would be someone else.

Hello,

I read today the following comment made by Senator Henry regarding rape: "..."

I strongly hope that what Senator Henry meant by this was he's very glad people are allowed to say "Let's don't go forward with this act" and have that respected. I hope that he's recognizing that it is always wrong to force a person into unwanted sex acts, regardless of whether they're virgins, promiscuous, single or married. I hope that he is recognizing that marriage does not entitle a person to use their spouse's body without their consent. I hope he's illustrating that people have come a long way in recognizing the basic human right to do what they want with their bodies since he was learning these things. I sincerely hope he's demonstrating how profoundly misled he was when he was "learning" these things.

Mostly, I hope that Senator Henry will choose his words more carefully, because this sounds a lot like he thinks it's only rape if the person isn't a whore to begin with. It sounds a lot like he means anyone who isn't chaste deserves to be violated. It sounds a lot like he means the only person who has a right to rape a woman is her husband, unless she's a slut to begin with, then she's fair game for anyone to violate. It sounds a lot like hate speech against women.

I think it would be a good idea for Senator Henry to read up on the psychology of rapists and rape victims, the causes of rape and what he can do to help rape victims today and deter young people from growing up and becoming rapists. It is certainly not by whore-shaming and propagating outdated gender stereotypes that sexual violence will come to an end in this country.

Tobes... I've seen that quote before (might have been here on Feministing, actually) but it's still just as sickening. It's almost like he's getting off on it. (shudder)

I guess I should be shocked and amazed that monsters like this are holding public office. Sadly, I can't even muster mild surprise anymore.

Dear Senator,

You recently stated, "Rape, ladies and gentlemen, is not today what rape was. Rape, when I was learning these things, was the violation of a chaste woman, against her will, by some party not her spouse. Today it's simply, 'Let's don't go forward with this act.'" This kind of attitude is despicable. Back in the day, women could not charge rape against their spouses. Now, people are aware that husbands can attack their wives. In other words, the law evolves to fit the growing understanding of crimes. Back when you were learning about rape, it was far too narrowly defined and left women free to be victimized and then insulted. People have the right to not have sex for whatever reason they choose without having it forced on them. If you cannot see that that is rape, you clearly do not understand what the word means. As someone who has been through rape, I'm seriously offended at your judgmental attitude towards victims and your lack of understanding and sympathy