Let Men Agree: Consent Isn’t There in a ‘Gang-Bang’
As a teen-ager in the 1940s, I used to hear tales of girls who “put out” for groups of boys. Hormones raging, I was ambivalent about the whole idea of what was indelicately described as a “gang-bang.” I didn’t think of it as a rape, because the girl presumably consented. Maybe she wasn’t an adult, but, then, neither was I. Being of the “Portnoy” generation, fantasies about these girls were scarcely ever out of mind.
But I also was put off. I found the idea of a girl who gave freely of her favors exciting. But the thought of being in a queue, as it were, seemed less inviting, even intimidating. I didn’t favor sex as a competitive team sport.
So why is a middle-aged man thinking about this now? I teach at UC Berkeley, and a local gang-bang is the talk of the campus. The facts are cloudy, but the story is said to be something like this: In September there was a dormitory party. There was drinking. A young woman, who had been dating one of the men--most were freshmen--had sex with him in a stairwell. But when he invited his varsity football teammate for her to orally copulate him, the woman says that she objected. When a third and fourth teammate were invited, she says that she drew the line. The facts are cloudy. What is clear is this: The woman says that she was raped. The men deny that they raped her; they say that she consented.
The district attorney has declined to prosecute. One of the ironies of group “acquaintance rape” is that the defense witnesses outnumber the complainant-victim.
The university is, however, faced with a different problem: What punishment, if any, should it impose? Years ago, universities acted as surrogate parents, but that time has long passed, particularly at a big public university such as UC Berkeley. Under today’s standards, the girl’s sexual conduct is her business, and perhaps her parents’, but not the school’s. But the university is concerned about the welfare of its students, and as a result of this incident it has appointed a committee to examine the best methods for dealing with such issues.
But what should the university do about the men? Should they be punished, and, if so, how severely? After lengthy discussions, the girl, her parents, the young men and their lawyer negotiated an agreement that has not been made public. I am told, however, that it contains the following provisions: The names of all involved were to be kept secret, the boys were to offer written apologies, to change their residence hall--all those involved lived in the same dormitory as the woman did--to accept counseling and to perform some form of “community service.” The university also sent “a letter of warning” to the boys, apparently to inform them that if something like this occurred again they would be punished more severely.
But several faculty women--particularly Nancy Scheper-Hughes, an anthropologist and dean of freshman and sophomore studies--have expressed outrage over the incident. Scheper-Hughes says that this incident was “not group sex, not kinky sex.” In her opinion this sort of situation is fundamentally so coercive that it amounts to rape.
The furor over this case raises two major issues. One is the question of so-called “acquaintance rape,” in which a woman is forced or bullied into having unwanted sex with someone whom she knows or has dated, or with whom she previously has wanted sex. Acquaintance rape is hard to prove. Feminist lawyers are suggesting innovative ways to make it easier, but such cases often come down to one person’s word against another’s.
The “gang-bang” is a related but distinct issue. Is it group sex? Is it kinky sex? I think that Scheper-Hughes is right. There is something both degrading and fundamentally coercive about the gang-bang, even when there is apparent consent. Some women may enjoy this sort of thing. Presumably, those women do not file complaints.
Yet even those who do not complain may not have appreciated what they were getting themselves into. The gang-bang degrades women. If it is degrading to treat women as objects, the gang-bang is the ultimate degradation. Men always will fantasize about sex with women whom they find attractive--at least I hope so. But the gang-bang is less sex with a woman than a male bonding ritual. A man invites his buddies to have sex with his “date” to satisfy them , not her, to impress them with his power over her--to bond with the boys, not with the woman.
The gang-bang is indeed coercive, and inherently so. A woman who is faced with three or four large football players may well have acceded. Not really consented, but acceded.
This case has been settled, and probably it is too late, and maybe unwise, to try to break the settlement.
But there is something that students and faculty members at Berkeley and other campuses can do about this problem. Universities can advocate a new standard of conduct. We can say that the gang-bang is immoral and unacceptable. And we can show how serious we are by saying that any male who is involved in multiple sex is presumptively guilty of violating the campus norm and will be suspended or expelled.
We already have rules like this in criminal law. We think that it is untenable for a grown man to have sex with a 12-year-old girl, even if she accedes. As a society, we say that she cannot consent.
Males well understand rules like that. It’s time that we accustomed ourselves to another one.
