For my essay, I will be researching men’s evolving definition of rape, even in present day, and how currently, women are taking over control of the definition. Hammurabi’s Code is the first known account that holds what it means for a woman to be raped, which dates around 1780 B.C. Since then, new laws have defined what it means for a women to get raped and the consequences of the rape. Laws, such as Hammurabi’s Code and King Edward I’s Statutes of Westminster, however, have been made by men, and not those who are actually getting raped: women.
In 2011, Republicans in the House of Representatives attracted opposition and criticism when they attempted to redefine rape by passing new legislation, in hopes to limit the exceptions to the ban on federal funding for abortions. Before this uproar in the House, the definition of rape was “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Included are rapes by force and attempts or assaults to rape. Statutory offenses (no force used–victim under age of consent) are excluded.” This definition had held since 1929, and many Feminist supporters felt it outdated, and called on the FBI to reform the definition. My essay will explore whether the United States is progressing forward in defining rape and how women are the driving force behind this evolution.
1. Men Define Rape: A History-http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/men-defining-rape-history
Background: This article illustrates the timeline, beginning in 1780 B.C. until present day, of men’s definition of rape, that women are their fathers’ property and any damage, such as rape, is property damage. Todd Akin, a Representative, believes women are responsible for the rape if they get pregnant. This article equates the ancient beliefs of rape and the GOP and Akin’s views.
How I Intend to Use It: It has taken a lot of time for individuals and governments to evolve the definition of rape in a forward thinking way. Many previous and ancient definitions have blamed women for getting raped and pregnant, or how if a women does not fight off the attack, it is not rape. Only recently has there been forward progression. The first definition of rape in Hammurabi’s code states rape of a virgin is property damage to her father and she is the one responsible for it. The present definition of rape is “the penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”
2. Should the FBI Redefine Rape- http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/04/should-fbi-redefine-rape
Background: The FBI has functioned under the definition of rape as being, “The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Included are rapes by force and attempts or assaults to rape. Statutory offenses (no force used–victim under age of consent) are excluded.” The Feminist Majority Foundation is seeking the FBI Director and Attorney General to change the outdated definition. Much of what it means to be raped, according to the activists, is missing from the previously stated definition.
How I Intend to Use It: Feminist supporters are making moves to change, as a whole, the government’s definition of rape. They are now taking control of what it really means to be raped.
3. The House GOP’s Plan to Redefine Rape- http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
Background: For many years, federal laws have banned funding for abortions, including pregnancies that have resulted from rape or incest. Under a new bill, “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” funding for abortions would only be given to pregnancies resulting from forced rape, thereby ruling out funding for a vast amount of abortions. Enacting this law could cause victims to prove they were forcibly raped instead of, for example, being coerced into having sex. Feminist groups, abortion-rights groups, and other government officials protest this idea, and believe rape does not always mean physical force against a woman.
How I Intend to Use It: Steph Sterling, a lawyer and senior advisor to the National Women’s Law center, said, “This bill takes us backwards to a time when just saying no wasn’t enough to qualify as rape.” Presently, having the absence of permission is what constitutes as rape. In past centuries, rape was more complicated, but has evolved into simply saying no.
4. Todd Akin, Paul Ryan, and Redefining Rape- http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/todd-akin-paul-ryan-redefining-rape
Background: Representative Todd Akin defended his belief that victims of “legitimate rape” can’t get pregnant due to female “biological defenses” that prevent rape victims from getting pregnant. This essentially means a woman that became pregnant, must have welcomed the sex. welcomed it if she became pregnant. “Forcible” rape is another term that leaves out many other terms people consider rape, such as statutory rape and date rape. Stating a rape as “forcible,” denies victims who were not physically forced to have sex, such as statutory rape or coerced into sex, their right to a federally funded abortion.
How I Intend to Use It: Some government officials are blaming victims of rape for getting pregnant. It is an attitude that mirrors earlier opinions from ancient times, illustrating some officials are regressing back to earlier definitions of rape.
5. An Updated Definition of Rape- http://blogs.justice.gov/main/archives/1801
Background: The Attorney General announced, independent of Republicans attempting to prevent funding for abortions for rape victims, in 2012, a revised definition of rape, in hopes to more accurately report rapes nationwide. The new definition is “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”
How I Intend to Use It: I will support that definition of rape has progressed.
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
McCormick Karner
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
Professor Hodges, would you mind taking a quick look over this just to see if I am on the right track? Thank you very much.
Feedback provided. —DSH
You’re doing fine, Taylor, but I’m glad you submitted an early draft because I can certainly help you avoid some ambiguities that make your argument hard to follow.
If you think of your list as a 6-paragraph argument with an introduction and 5 body paragraphs offering support for a thesis, you’ll see the advantage of identifying the whole argument before you get to the specifics. In your case, while you devote many words to saying the definition of rape has evolved over eons, you don’t actually give even a hint in your introduction of how that definition has changed. In fact, until the 5th example, we don’t get a clue about what the new definition might be.
I’ve highlighted in blue the phrases in your work that fall short of being clear about their actual claims. I’ve also offered some notes, also in blue, about what’s missing. You can leave these notes and colors and publish another post, or change everything back to black when you’ve made your revisions.
I really appreciate your early post, Taylor. It gives me a chance not only to help you but also to demonstrate a few key points to your classmates. Thank you very much.
Professor, I revised what you suggested and changed my thesis a bit. This will be my draft that is being graded, however do you mind taking another look over it? I feel that my sources might not fit my new thesis. I want to get this proposal correct, no matter when it is graded. Thank you and thank you very much for your previous feedback as well.
Taylor, we’re meeting for a conference today, and you’ve invited me to comment on this revised draft, so before I grade it I’ll read it again. About the process, I should tell you I don’t go back to read the earlier draft or my notes to compare the versions; I just read the revised draft as new work and comment on it (in this case, I’ll also grade it).
P1. I haven’t said this to anyone yet, but I should probably say it to everyone: you’ll be researching a thesis. Your examination of the first five sources leads you to a preliminary conclusion that becomes the thesis for the rest of your research. You try to decide whether it’s defensible or not. So, in your case, you could say:
After that clear statement, the rest of your paragraph follows very nicely, don’t you think? It sounds factual and objective, but we understand better what you mean by offering us these particular facts.
P2. You’ve given yourself a difficult job here, Taylor, of explaining the connection between rape and pregnancy and abortion and federal funding for abortions, and ban on that funding, and exceptions to that ban, and limitations on those exceptions, all in one sentence. It’s too much for one sentence to accomplish without warmup; we readers get lost.
On the other hand, I applaud you for wanting to be brief and clear. Remember in P1, we made the paragraph clear by identifying your intention in the first sentence? Suppose you started with the motivation here too:
As I said above (late, but finally), you should phrase your proposal as your intention to research your clear if preliminary thesis. So instead of: “My essay will explore whether the United States is progressing forward in defining rape and how women are the driving force behind this evolution,” try:
1. Background
Good work. Language quibbles as always, if you’re interested.
1. Intent
Identifying the history of the definition as “progress” and “forward-thinking” is a good strategy. The last connection is unclear. Your leap from Hammurabi: property damage, to Present Definition: penetration without consent, without connecting the dots.
2. Background
The language of the definition is fairly clear (what is its origin?), but you say it’s “outdated.” You don’t say how. You say the FBI wants to change it. You don’t say how. You say much is missing from the definition. You don’t say what.
2. Intent
“Change, as a whole, the definition” is not a clear statement of your purpose. Do you intend to use the source to identify that (for example) feminists demand that the “physical force” language be removed? or that “duress or coercion” be included?
3. Background
Very nice. Your best yet. Thorough, detailed, and understandable. Important grammar note: You mean “number of abortions,” not “amount of abortions.”
3. Intent
Starts fine, then gets messy. These two sentences are very confusing: Presently, having the absence of permission is what constitutes as rape. In past centuries, rape was more complicated, but has evolved into simply saying no.
You mean: The best current definition of rape is “sex without permission.” Simply put, sex that happens after one party says “no” is rape.
But this may be too simple, don’t you agree? Partners who have passed out drunk might not say no, but sex with them could still be rape, right?
4. Background
This is very nice, Taylor, but you’re having trouble saying one thing clearly. You don’t mean: “Forcible” rape leaves out other terms. And you don’t mean: Stating a rape as forcible denies rights.
What you DO mean is that: Limiting rape to forcible rape leaves out other types of rape.
And what you DO mean is that: Limiting rape to forcible rape denies rights to victims of other types of rape.
4. Intent
So how do you intend to use it? One way would be to explain the money motive behind the definition. They want to blame victims for their pregnancy so that they don’t have to pay for abortions they wouldn’t need if they hadn’t been raped.
5. Background
I really like your inclusion of the AG’s “purpose” here, Taylor: “to more accurately report rapes nationwide.” That’s gold.
5. Intent
Progressed how? Progressed why? And, if possible, what’s the connection between the progress and the desire “to more accurately report rapes nationwide”?
Without looking back at the original, I know from memory this is vastly better than your first draft, Taylor. I hope you agree the effort and frustration of working through the revision process is worth the results. I also hope your every first draft from now on will be better than the one before.
I stumbled across a source for you this morning, Taylor. I think you’ll find it very useful for a particular angle: trustworthiness of the victim.
http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/02/28/rape-has-been-decriminalised-for-the-most-vulnerable-says-senior-met-adviser/
Thank you so much!
You’re welcome. I try to stay on the lookout for anything my students might be able to use.
Please categorize this and rename it “Annotated Bibliography” to meet the requirements of your Portfolio, Taylor. If you can add more sources to it, great; if not, I’ll count it toward your portfolio requirements. Tick, tick, tick.