It's interesting. I've done a fair amount of thinking and writing about Roman citizenship (which the American founders drew on heavily.) In my view, the first and most fundamental right of being a Roman citizen is the right not to be raped. (This is true for both men and women, one of the differences between their culture and ours.) (Conversely, and more darkly, there is an implied right to rape non-citizens.) This is notable because, legendarily, all of the major Roman republican revolutions happen when some elite person tries to rape a citizen, and the common people rise up and demand more power and rights in response.
In my mind, that's sort of the counter-side of self-defense; it's an argument that the laws of your nation protect you from a specific kind of violation and harm. It is in no way, however, a statement that you have the right to fight back against rape - that doesn't happen in any of the stories. Rather, the victim appeals _to the people_ to redress her or his wrong.
Which is to say, I'd probably be okay if the legislator had phrased it as "freedom from fear," or "the right to expect that the government will provide a safe environment to live and work in." Coming up on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, what I really wanted in NYC ten years ago was not a gun, - and not to see the 18-year-old Guardsmen on my block corner suddenly packing AK-47s - but for someone to convince me that all our intelligence resources were being used to keep me and my fellow citizens safe, and that, if something got through, our first responders would have the training and the equipment necessary to help as many people as possible.
Sorry to go off on this - just something I've been thinking about. And sadly, I don't think most American women think they have a right not to be raped - not when our culture tells us that the burden rests on us to walk in groups and not go out at night and wear modest clothing and then hope for the best...
In my mind, that's sort of the counter-side of self-defense; it's an argument that the laws of your nation protect you from a specific kind of violation and harm. It is in no way, however, a statement that you have the right to fight back against rape - that doesn't happen in any of the stories. Rather, the victim appeals _to the people_ to redress her or his wrong.
Which is to say, I'd probably be okay if the legislator had phrased it as "freedom from fear," or "the right to expect that the government will provide a safe environment to live and work in." Coming up on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, what I really wanted in NYC ten years ago was not a gun, - and not to see the 18-year-old Guardsmen on my block corner suddenly packing AK-47s - but for someone to convince me that all our intelligence resources were being used to keep me and my fellow citizens safe, and that, if something got through, our first responders would have the training and the equipment necessary to help as many people as possible.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment