spacestationtrustfund's review against another edition
1.0
The belief that sexual violence, specifically rape in this context, stems from a biological drive to reproduce compounded by a lack of available women, is disgusting. It is also factually incorrect.
There are moments of good scholarship in this book, but the argument is fundamentally flawed. Even if it were true that men rape out of an innate need to perpetuate their genetics (spoiler: it's not, and they don't), it still wouldn't be the best, easiest, or most reliable way to do so, which is purportedly the desire, right? The ancient Greeks were not unaware of the various alternatives a woman has to carrying a child to term and birthing it, whether they be self-induced abortion, medical intervention, infanticide, suicide, or some combination of the above. If the goal were truly to reproduce, forcibly impregnating a woman is not the most evolutionarily desirable method. Even non-human animals prefer courtship over force in almost every instance, and for good reason. An unwanted pregnancy, even if carried to term without intervention, will cause a great deal of stress for the woman forced to have it, which will in turn negatively affect the fetus on a genetic level. Speaking purely from the perspective that the goal is to produce healthy offspring to carry on your genetic legacy, why would sexual violence be the chosen strategy? It would have the exact opposite effect.
It's a shame that Gottschall doesn't further pursue the angle that rape occurs due to a desire for power (which is most often the case), rather than a desire for... sexual reproduction, I guess... because I think some interesting material could arise from a scholarly dissection of sexual violence and its ties to power in Homeric canon. The attempted rape of Chryseis, who is a priestess of Apollo, for example; the rapes of Hécube (queen of Troy), Kassandra (cursed by Apollo when she refused him), Andromakhe (wife of Hektor), Helen (both by Paris and, arguably, Menelaus), Briseis (by Achilles), and practically every other woman in Troy are undertaken due to a desire for power over these women. Ajax's rape of Kassandra in the temple of Athena parallels the Achaean "rape" of the city itself; Ajax has no interest in fathering a child with Kassandra, and Kassandra's screams for help go unheard or ignored. (Ajax is later killed by Athena as revenge for defiling both Kassandra, who was a supplicant in a holy temple, and the temple itself, a place of purity and chastity.) Achilles does not desire Briseis because he wants to have sex with her so she can bear his child (he already has a child, although it's unknown if he knows this; notably, Neoptolemus's conception is, as far as the audience is made aware, entirely consensual on both ends)—he wants her because she is an object to him. He wants to possess her and have power over her, and it makes him feel impotent that another man, Agamemnon, has "stolen" his plaything. I feel like I'm living in crazytown by having to explain this, but there was not actually a "shortage" of women at the time, in reality or in literature. And even if there were, that's not why rape happens! If there truly were a "shortage" of women, and men only raped people because they wanted to have their own children, then there wouldn't be such pushback against abortifacients.
Rape does not happen because of a desire for sex. Rape happens because of a desire for power. If sex were the only outcome desired, there are always alternative options: Achilles has several other women captive at his camp, for example, any of which could be convinced to have sex with him (and at least one of which does at one point sleep in his bed). There would almost certainly be camp prostitutes nearby. Also an option is sex with other men. Or simple masturbation. But none of these alternative options would satisfy the actual desire on display, which is power. Human beings do not have a biological need for power over other human beings. Claiming that sexual violence is a result of some innate biology is rape apologism, and I do not care for it.
There are moments of good scholarship in this book, but the argument is fundamentally flawed. Even if it were true that men rape out of an innate need to perpetuate their genetics (spoiler: it's not, and they don't), it still wouldn't be the best, easiest, or most reliable way to do so, which is purportedly the desire, right? The ancient Greeks were not unaware of the various alternatives a woman has to carrying a child to term and birthing it, whether they be self-induced abortion, medical intervention, infanticide, suicide, or some combination of the above. If the goal were truly to reproduce, forcibly impregnating a woman is not the most evolutionarily desirable method. Even non-human animals prefer courtship over force in almost every instance, and for good reason. An unwanted pregnancy, even if carried to term without intervention, will cause a great deal of stress for the woman forced to have it, which will in turn negatively affect the fetus on a genetic level. Speaking purely from the perspective that the goal is to produce healthy offspring to carry on your genetic legacy, why would sexual violence be the chosen strategy? It would have the exact opposite effect.
It's a shame that Gottschall doesn't further pursue the angle that rape occurs due to a desire for power (which is most often the case), rather than a desire for... sexual reproduction, I guess... because I think some interesting material could arise from a scholarly dissection of sexual violence and its ties to power in Homeric canon. The attempted rape of Chryseis, who is a priestess of Apollo, for example; the rapes of Hécube (queen of Troy), Kassandra (cursed by Apollo when she refused him), Andromakhe (wife of Hektor), Helen (both by Paris and, arguably, Menelaus), Briseis (by Achilles), and practically every other woman in Troy are undertaken due to a desire for power over these women. Ajax's rape of Kassandra in the temple of Athena parallels the Achaean "rape" of the city itself; Ajax has no interest in fathering a child with Kassandra, and Kassandra's screams for help go unheard or ignored. (Ajax is later killed by Athena as revenge for defiling both Kassandra, who was a supplicant in a holy temple, and the temple itself, a place of purity and chastity.) Achilles does not desire Briseis because he wants to have sex with her so she can bear his child (he already has a child, although it's unknown if he knows this; notably, Neoptolemus's conception is, as far as the audience is made aware, entirely consensual on both ends)—he wants her because she is an object to him. He wants to possess her and have power over her, and it makes him feel impotent that another man, Agamemnon, has "stolen" his plaything. I feel like I'm living in crazytown by having to explain this, but there was not actually a "shortage" of women at the time, in reality or in literature. And even if there were, that's not why rape happens! If there truly were a "shortage" of women, and men only raped people because they wanted to have their own children, then there wouldn't be such pushback against abortifacients.
Rape does not happen because of a desire for sex. Rape happens because of a desire for power. If sex were the only outcome desired, there are always alternative options: Achilles has several other women captive at his camp, for example, any of which could be convinced to have sex with him (and at least one of which does at one point sleep in his bed). There would almost certainly be camp prostitutes nearby. Also an option is sex with other men. Or simple masturbation. But none of these alternative options would satisfy the actual desire on display, which is power. Human beings do not have a biological need for power over other human beings. Claiming that sexual violence is a result of some innate biology is rape apologism, and I do not care for it.
More...