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 for them.

--
Anne Marie

I'm not even a US citizen but I had to send an email anyway.

Dear Sen. Henry,

I must say that I am appalled, outraged, and mortified by your blatant ignorance on the subject of rape. Whether the victim is a Christian virgin saving herself for marriage or a prostitute once a person is forced to have sex against their will it is rape and there is no gray area in that matter. Whether or not the person is married once sexual intercourse is forced it is still rape. To think that someone who is supposed to be intelligent can say such nonsense is beyond me. If you had a daughter who came to you and said that she was raped by her husband would you send her back saying that she was no longer a virgin and it doesn’t count? OR if your wife was brutally sodomized and raped would you still say it would not count? You have insulted the 1 in 3 American women who have suffered at the hands of attackers and have to live with that every single day. I’m not an American citizen but if people like you are left in charge I would hate to see how the lives of women in that “great country� you call America would turn out.

"Today it’s simply, ‘Let’s don’t go forward with this act."?????

NO MEANS NO, ASSHOLE!!! Learn it.

That breaks my heart and scares me so very much.

:(

Er. So if I say, "Let's don't go forward with this act," I am committing rape? I just don't get whatever analogy he is painfully attempting to make.

Dear Senator Henry,

I am appalled by the statements made by you about rape and how it is “different� than it used to be.

Yes, rape is different than it used to be. Rape is actually reported today, but only by an estimated 30% of women who are raped. Rape has been occurring within marriages since the institution of marriage began because were (and still are!) considered to be the PROPERTY of the husband. The statistics vary, but it is estimated that every 5 to 6 minutes a woman is raped in America. Women in America are also 8 times as likely to be raped than her European counterpart. For more stats on rape in America please do some research. The Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape is a good starting point.

Abortion is an issue closely tied to rape because many rapes (committed most often by a friend, family member, spouse or acquaintance of the woman) contribute to high number of unintended pregnancies in America. About 50% of all pregnancies in America are unintended. By banning abortion and supporting laws intended to strip women of their constitutional rights to privacy over their own bodies, you are contributing to the high number of unintended pregnancies in America.

The impacts of this high number of unintended pregnancies in America is increased death and illness to women undergoing unsafe abortions as well as a growing number of children going up for adoption who most often end up in foster care or abusive homes. Since the social programs for foster children are so under funded, these children often suffer depression and anxiety, fall behind in school, and run into trouble with the law because they lack the proper emotional and material support necessary for children to grow and succeed in today’s competitive, and often discriminatory, American society.

Thank you for your time,

Natalia Fior

Males like Senator Henry are morally bankrupt. They are basically rapists by proxy who use thugs and forced birth as a means to keep women in line. Passing a law making sex outside of marriage a crime punishable by rape would be more honest.

By the way my email to Sen Henry simply stated "Shame on you!" Nothing more needed to be said.

I got a response:
"Thank you for your e-mail and for sharing your comments.

As you may or may not know, I have apologized for the use of the derogatory term that prompted your e-mail. My comment was ill-chosen and inappropriate and I fully realize that. My true message about personal responsibility, and educating young people in regard to the responsibility of parenthood, has been overshadowed by a poor choice of one word.

As a father, I want my child to get a good education, first and foremost, before undertaking the responsibility of parenthood. Adolescents may be capable of having babies, but most are ill prepared for the difficult duties ahead that come with being successful, competent parents. Unknowingly, they may relegate themselves and their children to a lifetime of poverty and hardship. This applies to young men as well. I understand that we all can make mistakes. My objection is with encouraging and perpetuating those mistakes.

Though I realize you may disagree not only with my choice of wording, but also with that message, I respect your views. If anything positive has come of this incident, it is that more people have joined this debate over teen pregnancy, personal responsibility, and parental involvement.

Respectfully,

State Representative Larry Liston"

Get him the fuck out of office!!

Oh wait.. oops.. that was my response to my email to smiling penis head! You know, the one who was slut-shaming. I get these jerks mixed up...

Weird how Henry is unintentionally making a good argument for adopting stronger, "No means No" type rape laws. If it wasn't for the telltale good-old-days nostalgia, I could mistake him for a feminist.

I find this man incredibly appalling but I guess he is consistent in his own sick and twisted way – there’s nothing stopping him from dismissing a man’s violation of a woman when he believes in a fetus’ right to do the same.

Is there no chance this guy could mean, "Back when I was learning these things, rape was narrow in scope, and didn't cover all the possible scenarios. Now it does. This is good"?

None at all?

I'm just looking for some hope for humanity here.

Alright, here's my interpretation of it after reading his statement and watching the video.

I don't think it's fair to say he's wishing for the good ol' days when it wasn't rape if they weren't a virgin or if the perpetrator was her husband. His intentions in supporting that definition of rape are entirely unclear from the dialogue.

What IS very clear, and what the source of outrage should be, is that he is posing the current definition of "let's don't go forward with this act" in a very diminutive manner. It used to be this rigid definition...now it's "simply" this other definition. That smacks of insensitivity at best, and at worst it tells of his misunderstanding that the basis of rape is the lack of consent.

As I understand it, he wants a more clear definition of rape for whatever he was tabling? I don't see how "let's don't go forward with this act" isn't crystal clear. It communicates a complete lack of consent. Lack of consent=rape. Period. Really, that little statement couldn't be clearer in demonstrating a lack of consent. So no, I don't think that going by that definition of rape would be vague in the least. Doug Henry, however, does find that to be vague, and THAT is what should scare us.

I sent him a little Valentine...copied too all his colleagues...

Subj: Senator Henry thinks some people just deserve rape

"He has no business in the legislature...or in any setting where he's in contact with PEOPLE.

Senator Henry, your comments on rape offended me so deeply that I hardly know where to begin. I can't imagine a more offensive and moronic stance on A CRIME than your apparent stance on rape. Rape is a CRIME, but your comments suggest that there is some gray area. Is there a gray area to murder? Do some people just deserve to have their throats slit?

I don't care in what context you were speaking about rape. And I don't care what you thought the definition of rape was back in 1873 when you were elected. It is, in fact, an act wherein one person forces sexual intercourse on another. One person says no, and the other person doesn't stop. Period. It's a crime. You can't "have it coming," you can't be "asking for it," and it is NOT limited by the existence of a wedding band. Do you think it's ok for a man to force his wife to have sex with him? Somehow after the wedding vows he can do anything he likes and shouldn't have to be prosecuted for it? Because it REALLY sounds like that's what you think. And by your comments, it kind of sounds like any woman who has ever had sex outside of marriage, even once, shouldn't complain if she's attacked while jogging and forcibly sodomized under a bush. Or would she be double-asking-for-it, running around in spandex?

I think you are a loathesome excuse for a human being and a legislator. I hope your constituents rally to somehow remove you from office. They have my full support if they do. Or you could do them all a favor and remove yourself. That would be GREAT."

The horrendous Bill Napoli interview, done by PBS, is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1hcfqW1mZQ if anyone can stomach it.

He makes his debut about the 3:30 mark.

This is what I sent him-- props to lizadilly as I borrowed hers for a basic outline:

Senator Henry:

I have never in my life been so insulted and repulsed by someone's comments as I am by yours. In response to your despicable insult to all women- those who have survived being raped virgins or not, those raped by their spouses, and anyone who may be raped in the future- the only appropriate action would be that you resign effective immediately.

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 across the country and endanger half of the population by creating an environment that revokes a person's right to refuse sex.

There aren't words strong enough to describe my outrage at your comments. You disgust me.

Sincerely from a Survivor of Sexual Assault, Xxxxx Xxxxx

I posted the quote, a link to the vid, and all contact information on the Knoxville, TN Craigslist Rants and Raves as well as political discussion groups. In cases where a politician is scary and we're not its direct constituent, Craigslist is a quick-n-dirty way to let folks who may not be as up on the blogosphere that something's wrong in their state. Maybe they'll do something about it.

Even though the topic of abortion prompted this spine-chilling example of why abortion on demand should not be a right--shudder--I did stick with my assertion that no matter the context, the phrasing and the implications seemed, at best, thoughtless, moronic and unfeeling, and at worst, like those of a pillar of patriarchy whose time in office, or really, in contact with the public in any capacity, should be over effective immediately.

I think I am confused.

Bear with me.

So..since I have engaged in premarital sex (with more than one man!!!), does this mean if a man sexually assaults me that he...didn't REALLY sexually assault me?

I must be too dumb to figure it out, since I am a dumb hussy and all.

I'm sick and tired of these anti-choice assholes and their belittlement of rape and the horrible psychological affects, either immediate or persistent, that follow. Has this guy ever heard of Post-traumatic stress disorder? Depression? Anything bad happening to anybody through no fault of their own? That's what happens when you're forced to do something, like have sex or give birth. It's so convenient for these anti-choice assholes to pretend that mental health is an insiginficant portion of overall well-being and functioning, because then they can ignore their cognitive distortions (if not pathology) while telling rape victims of all people that the pain they go through after the rape is invalid. I actually believe, and I'm being 100% honest here -- this isn't even me in conspiracy theorist mode, that anti-choicers aren't trying to make rape a defined term in our legal system. They want to judge rape on a case-by-case basis. That way, when someone like me asks "Well, if it's dehumanizing to force someone to get pregnant, isn't it equally dehumanizing to force someone to remain pregnant?" they can tell me that dehumanization is subjective, and we can't make exceptions for the weaker rape victims who can't take a bit of fucking and a measly 9 months of pregnancy and an insignificant 24-hour birth. Other women do it --
why can't you? They already make the aftermath of rape into a subjective experience (which it is in a sense), so the next logical step is to make the definition of the act of rape subjective as well.

FEMily,

The anti-choicers totally care about mental health. Why, haven't you heard about the horrible psychological affects women "commonly" experience after abortion? How can you think of comparing the psychological trauma of a little unwanted sex with the psychological trauma of knowing you have destroyed the life of another innocent humanoid mass-of-cells thing?

Anyway,
I understand how their argument is about as logical as ours, in their own way. It just so happens their basic premise is that suffering and shame and sometimes being raped is part of female existence, as opposed to a product of the patriarchy, and also that fertilized cells have souls...

The anti-choicers totally care about mental health. Why, haven't you heard about the horrible psychological affects women "commonly" experience after abortion? How can you think of comparing the psychological trauma of a little unwanted sex with the psychological trauma of knowing you have destroyed the life of another innocent humanoid mass-of-cells thing?

Damnit, and I thought I was on with that post! I totally forgot about anti-choicers' love of mental disorders that nobody but they believe exist!

have you guys seen the "instruments of torture" pages on some anti-choice sites? They are just gyno exam tools.
All fucking dramatic about it and whatnot. It adds to the whole "mental health disorders associated with abortion" scare tactics.

o
my
god.

i can't believe ppl still think this way in 2008. really.

flickr member

"Today it’s simply, ‘Let’s don’t go forward with this act.'"

Um, yeah, retard, that's what rape is. When one person says no and the other goes through with it anyway IT'S RAPE.

And not to detract from the dispicable nature of his comment, but I say we take a poll.

Does he look more like a wrinkly, shrivley testicle or a pervy Charlie Brown?

steffiegyrl and everyone

No, what is most shocking, is these people get ELECTED into positions of authority, by possibly tens of millions (Bush) who support them, quite possibly knowing they have these views. I used to like McCain (as a person and veteran), but am liking him less and less because of what I am reading on Feministing this week. I hope he loses.

Persephone,
I'm casting my vote for shrivley testicle.

How is it that these assholes get elected? Do women have some sort of inferiority complex where they can allow their state government to say crap like this? I can't imagine someone saying something like this 30 years ago, and not getting some innovative protest smacked into their ass.

Hes obviously pandering to the far-right rapist, US Taliban, family fucking Deliverance touters who want to take away womens rights. If women continue to act complacently about these kinds of assholes that they ELECT into their state government, what will this set the stage for in the future?

Personally, I think his photo makes him look like a white hood belongs over it.

GopherII,

Just because some asshole is a misogynist jerk who thinks his elected political role is to spout women-hate, this does NOT mean it is women's fault.

I do not blame women voters, but it is certainly a shame that so many eligible voters (40% in 2004) stay away from the polls, allowing just about 30% of all people who could have voted, to elect people like Bush. 70% of eligible voters, did not vote for Bush. In Australia, voters are *required* to vote by law, and one hopes they make responsible choices which really do reflect the wishes of the citizens.

That's one of the things I hate about the United States: our voting methods. Does Australia open the polls on the weekend? Or provide paid time off so that their citizens are able to vote? Let's face it, the majority of people who need to vote in the U.S. cannot, simply because they can't take time off work. Anyhow, I believe that if our government made elections a national holiday or something, then those stats would have been a lot lower.

"Just because some asshole is a misogynist jerk who thinks his elected political role is to spout women-hate, this does NOT mean it is women's fault."

Wow! I never said it was womens fault. I expressed astonishment that women would somehow elect this asshole. Dont women make up the najority of voters? I express distress because what does this say about how women view themselves in the US? Is his anti-women stance not even considered when they cast their votes? I'm sure they know enough to know about his anti-choice views. How come this fucker doesn't have protests outside his office. These old croggies need to go.

persephone,
In summary; does misogyny block a women from seeing policies that affect her as something beyond herself? Is there a different sociological circumstance in Tennessee where women are taught to be more indifferent to these kinds of assholes? When I've sked women about soemthing misogynistic a politician has said, (I live in Colorado) I've witnessed some women brush it off, and accused me of making something out of nothing. Its like theyre in denial.

You can call Senator Henry's office at 615-741-3291.

I can't improve on what's already been said here...just adding my voice to the outrage and disbelief.

Gopher II---
I think you were meaning to address Marissa.

How much time is there to vote in America? Here we have from morning until 9pm I think so people should be able to find a chance to vote.

Here is what I wrote to the good senator (copying everyone else):
Dear Senator Henry,
I want you to understand why the definition of rape has changed from "the violation of a chaste woman, against her will by some party not her spouse." I went to law school also, but, unlike you, I seem to have questioned red letter as I was absorbing the detail in my classes, and not learned just to parrot it.

The reason why the "chaste woman" requirement is no longer in force is that it is barbaric. I'm sure you are aware that under Islamic law, a woman needs to have four Muslim men (or eight Muslim women) at witnesses against the accused to support a conviction for rape. This is barbaric also. Obviously, a "non-chaste" woman can be raped as can a woman be raped by three Muslim men. Neither should be done without punishment, and both are odious, to God and to society.

Second, if you don't think a spouse can be raped, perhaps you would change your mind if your wife stuck a [use your imagination] up your lower orifice against your will. Such an act would be properly characterized as a "violation." Since neither you nor she is property of the other spouse, (you don't still think women are property do you?), the victim's non-consent is significant. That's what makes it rape.

Perhaps either you or your colleagues could pass a law requiring Continuing Legal Education. And sensitivity training. And toilet training.

Persephone,
Right. I meant to address my last post to Marissa.

Here's my letter, with his address. It sounds like he's gotten plenty, but I think a big response will really send the message home:
Sen. Douglas Henry
2321 Crestmoor Rd.
Nashville, TN 37215

Mr. Henry,
Your comments to the state congress about rape are beyond reprehensible: “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.� I’m frankly amazed that you managed to condense so much misogyny in so few words.
The word “chaste,� for example, is quite telling. Chaste is a vague term, meaning it can be applied based on prejudice rather than fact. It is simply another way to say “bad girl� or “whore.� Although you don’t say so baldly, I assume that a woman’s clothing, profession, or previous sexual identity can be used to determine her chastity. Unchaste women, you imply, do not suffer from rape. To imply that rape has to do with a woman’s sexuality – rather than the perpetrator’s violence – is a way to blame the victim. It’s the same tired “she wanted it� or “she deserved it� excuse.
The inclusion of the spousal clause, which implied that a woman cannot be raped by her husband, also reveals your outdated and sexist ideas about women. Women do not give up their right to bodily integrity when they get married. Nor do not become the property of their husbands, to do with sexually as they please.
A tacit approval of rape (for unchaste or married women, at least) as part a legislative step toward criminalizing abortion compounds the structural violence against women. In addition to condoning rape, you apparently feel it is acceptable for women to die from septic abortions. International data shows that criminalizing abortion does not reduce the abortion rate; it simply increases the number of women who are hospitalized or die from abortions. Women dead of coat-hanger abortions: I can’t imagine that this is what is meant by a “culture of life.�
If you truly wish to reduce the number of abortions in this country – and I do not disagree with this goal – then there are more effective ways to do so than criminalizing abortions and trivializing sexual violence against women. Educate young people on how to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Make contraception affordable and accessible. Support a culture in which rape is unthinkable. These things will reduce the number of abortions.
In the future, I hope you will consider your words more carefully. Women make up fully half of your constituents. We have the right to be secure in our persons, without violence from strangers, spouses, or from our legislators.

In this video Sen. Henry is explaining why he's voting to table a an amendment that would LIMIT abortion rights.

Despite his crude words, he did basically just give a personal history of what he feels rape has meant for much of his long, long life. I think we can write letters informing him why we think his ideas are offensive and wrong without asking for his resignation or insulting him.

I have a social worker friend who works directly with Sen. Henry and who assures me he is one of her org.'s greatest allies for issues of immigrant rights, education and a variety of other issues.

In this video Sen. Henry is explaining why he's voting to table a an amendment that would LIMIT abortion rights. Sen. Henry is very much pro-choice.

Despite his crude words, he did basically just give a personal history of what he feels rape has meant for much of his long, long life. I think we can write letters informing him why we think his ideas are offensive and wrong without asking for his resignation or insulting him.

I have a social worker friend who works directly with Sen. Henry and who assures me he is one of her org.'s greatest allies for issues of immigrant rights, education and a variety of other issues.

In this video Sen. Henry is explaining why he's voting to table a an amendment that would LIMIT abortion rights. Sen. Henry is very much pro-choice.

Despite his crude words, he did basically just give a personal history of what he feels rape has meant for much of his long, long life. I think we can write letters informing him why we think his ideas are offensive and wrong without asking for his resignation or insulting him.

I have a social worker friend who works directly with Sen. Henry and who assures me he is one of her org.'s greatest allies for issues of immigrant rights, education and a variety of other issues.

I wish people would stop defending and partially defending him because his dumbass remark was taken out of context. A dumbass remark taken out of context is still a dumbass remark. Does the context of his comment change the fact that he has a disturbingly narrow definition of rape?

What kills me about this guy is that in spite of the volumes of hate mail and calls he's undoubtedly gotten this week, he hasn't yet issued an apology. He probably doesn't think he has anything to apologize for.

I know that conservatives seem to be winning the culture war but its still shocking to see someone have the nerve to say something that disgusting on a legislature floor; especially specifying "against her will, by some party not her spouse", like if it was her spouse then it still wouldn't be rape!

Whats interesting from the perspective of trying to deconstuct their messed up logic is though is that they seem to think that the level of outrage rape ought to cause is inversely proportional to the degree that women are recognized as real adults with their own sexual interests (it only counts for them if you're 'chaste'!)... which just shows that the offense to them isn't the violation of a woman's will but the violation by proxy of a man responsible for her.

Yikes. This guy is my state senator, since I still vote as a Nashvillian (hey, it gives me more clout as a Democrat than voting from Brooklyn would). He's one of those Democrats who's been in office for longer than most of his constituents have been alive, and nobody seems particularly concerned with beating him in a run for his office before his age catches up with him. His district is a swath of largely suburban southern and western Nashville: a lot of older middle-class suburbs near the city center, some immigrant-heavy densely populated mixed residential-commercial neighborhoods, the one really tony old-money neighborhood in the city proper, some older gentrifying neighborhoods outlying the historic black colleges, a few newer far-out areas where subdivisions keep multiplying, and a few really rural developing areas. His constituency doesn't have a lot in common with itself, except that it's sort of sparse and, with the exception of a few southeast Asian and central American pockets, very white.

Here's the note I sent Henry's office:

Dear Rep. Henry,

As a Nashville Democrat, although I am a supporter of women’s reproductive rights, I can understand some of the impulses behind views that oppose them.

But as a supporter of the simple human rights guaranteed by the very constitution you hope now to amend, I can’t say I understand or forgive the comments you made about classifications of rape last month in your speech before the state Senate.

Would that the threat of rape were limited to the chaste few—and would that it excluded assault by her spouse. But contrary to the implication of your comments last month, a woman is no less the victim of a rape if she is promiscuous than if she is virginal. And married men, unfortunately, can still induce sexual acts against their wives’ wills.

I think we both know how easily an assailant might ignore that refusal of consent that you proffered on January 30. (“Today it’s simply, ‘Let’s don’t go forward with this act,’� you said of what you consider the crime’s reigning definition.) How is the absence of a victim’s consent to sex an assailant then pursues any different from “violation… against her will?�

On a fundamental point of your comments, I must disagree: Unfortunately, over the years, rape itself hasn’t changed much. But the discourse about it thankfully has.

Today, a growing number of tools is available to women to aid in their struggle with individual attackers, skeptical juries, byzantine medical policies and disheartening comments like yours. (And I and your other constituents can hold legislators like yourself accountable down to the particulars of your speeches thanks to YouTube.)

I take very seriously any elected lawmaker’s discussions of what constitutes one of the most serious crimes still committed, with unnerving regularity, against women. I hope that you do as well, and I hope that you reconsider your attitudes toward what you’ve called a shifting definition of that crime. This female voter, at least, is counting on you.