CAN YOU KICK IT?


In a pair of Ally McBeal episodes late last season, Renee (leading lawyer Ally's roommate and best friend, played by Lisa Nicole Carson) kickboxed her date, Rivers, because he did not stop his sexual advances when she told him to. He ended up with broken bones; she ended up with assault charges. Renee won her court case, with her attorney asserting unequivocally that no means no: "Did she encourage him to make a sexual advance? Perhaps. Did she get him all worked up? I bet she did. Does she then forfeit her right to say 'stop'?"

Date rape has been addressed repeatedly on the tube. At best (which still pretty much sucks) it has been approached from a woman-as-victim perspective (Sisters). At worst, it has been treated as cute and entertaining (Melrose Place). Female characters who have have fought their rapists through legal battles have often been punished or made to look like fools (Beverly Hills, 90210). But with these two episodes, Ally McBeal pioneered a unique twist on televised date rape: The incident never progressed past attempted rape, because the date/assailant was faced with a powerful, competent woman committed to protecting her boundaries. And-wow-not only did this woman beat the shit out of her date/assailant, she won her court battle as well.

Of course, the writers made the situation as controversial as possible by scripting Renee to behave in a sexually aggressive manner-a female behavior that our society still perceives as cause for blame. While dancing in a nightclub, for example, Renee squeezed Rivers's butt cheek and asked, "Are you easily stimulated?" Given Renee's behavior throughout the date, it was not way out in left Þeld for Rivers to think she eventually would want to get butt naked and fuck like a wild bunny.

But, at the end of the night, as Renee and Rivers made out on her living room couch and he moved them toward the grand bebop, Renee repeatedly made it clear that she did not want to go there. Rivers ignored her and kept going, seeming to believe she owed him something more than what she was giving. She slapped him. He slapped her. She ordered him out of her house. "Oh, no," Rivers said insidiously, "you're not going to play that game with me." That's when Renee knocked him out.

In my view, Rivers deserved it. He should have listened the Þrst time Renee gently told him to slow down. He should have listened when she said it more Þrmly. He certainly should have gotten the point when Renee slapped him, and he should have left when she told him to get out. Renee (and every other woman in the world) is in charge of her own body, will, and home. It is time for women to dish out serious consequences for the behavior of men who don't get that fact-which is exactly what Renee did.

Alas, on tv as in real life, not only do men overstep their bounds every day, but women fail to support the few who hold those men accountable. "Your life was not in danger!" Ally practically yelled at Renee in the next episode. "It wasn't self defense. When are you going to admit that? You weren't protecting yourself-you hit him out of anger, you beat him up, you almost killed him. This wasn't self-defense for a second. Renee, you have a problem." Um, what? Why didn't we see a scene where a close friend confronted Rivers about his problem? Such a friend might have said, "You weren't a victim, Rivers-you were asking for it! You keep assuming one thing will lead to another, without checking what your sexual partner wants or listening when she tells you. You've gotta expect you're gonna get shit if you don't deal with your problem."

When date rape is addressed in both news and popular media, its subtleties and complexities are often glossed over-as if there were easily drawn lines between sex and rape. Some-times there are, but there is also a gray area where energy shifts from intimacy to violence. A woman and man may be kissing and cuddling, for example, caressing each other everywhere with clothes on. The man may begin reaching under the woman's shirt-not a violent act until she clearly tells him to stop, perhaps multiple times, but he keeps on groping at her flesh. At that moment, the interaction has ceased to be consensual: The man has stopped being with the woman and started doing something to her, against her will. At that shifting point, I feel a woman has the right to hit if she so desires. After all, why should women wait for situations to escalate to a point where our lives are in danger before we respond defensively? What's more, why should we let dates/assailants determine the parameters of assault? Most of my sexual experiences with men have involved some level of violence-men have initiated sexual acts by using my body in some way, without my consent. And when I have said no, many have stopped momentarily, only to engage in the same behavior minutes later. It's confusing the way a man can go from being a lover to a violator in one single moment, with one single movement. A woman is left with the burden of deciding whether to continue treating her sexual "partner" as a trusted person, saying, "He needs to learn," "He just doesn't get it," or "It's not such a big deal"; whether to give her lover slack and discuss her feelings with him; how many chances to give him; and where to draw the line and say, "No, this behavior is unacceptable." A woman is left with the burden of deciding if and when she will physically Þght. What criteria should she use in assessing her response? And what is our reference point for legally and socially evaluating that response?

We need to move toward a world where women's bodily integrity is unquestionable and uncompromisable, where women can accurately expect and assume that our physical space will not be invaded, where men perpetrating any degree of violence against us will be seen as aberrant, and where it will be socially acceptable and understandable that women will Þght physically if we are threatened. Women must be the ones to deÞne acceptable parameters of behavior toward us and the consequences for overstepping our boundaries; we have the right to walk through the world with a sense of autonomy and entitlement to our body space. This power should be reflected, validated, and therefore reinforced all around us in society, whether it's on tv or in everyday interactions. By holding men accountable for their actions and forcing them to face consequences for their behavior, we can create a world where it is men, not women, who must be careful-where violence against women will no longer be an option. By kickboxing Rivers when he ignored her commands to stop, Renee exempliÞed this kind of approach. But did she take it too far?

In legal self-defense, a certain amount of violation must occur before it is considered acceptable to respond with physical force. The most common and persistent forms of violence toward women fall just short of that place-and deliberately so. Given this reality, women are in a legal bind that paralyzes us and prevents us from Þghting against many forms of violent behavior. Most people seem to think only in terms of the way things are today: What are our options under the framework of the current system? How can we as individuals deal with di»cult situations in ways that use the least amount of energy and cause us the least amount of harm? As a result of limited thinking, there is confusion between practical strategies and personal preferences for dealing with sexual violence and how women should be able to behave/what we should be able to expect from others. Based on this confusion, society ends up holding women accountable for the violence perpetrated against us. It is important for women to take today's reality into consideration, so as to evaluate our choices wisely. But it is limited and dangerous to use our current system as the point of reference for deÞning acceptable and unacceptable behavior.

Rather than looking at what women should or should not do, as based on the sexual violence that already exists, society needs to consider how to support women in making the choices we want and deserve. Violent men need to be the ones holding the burden of their actions, not innocent women. Women must no longer be forced into a position where, given current reality, our wisest choice is to avoid, withdraw, leave, give it up, hand it over. By not seriously or adequately addressing the nature of male violence against women, the law effectively protects and endorses it. We need to change the law.

Our goal should be to maximize the consequences for perpetrators of sexual violence and minimize the consequences for women Þghting it. If women know that we will be backed up and not punished-legally or socially-for defending ourselves, our chances of violation will lessen dramatically: More women will Þght to defend our space, on our own terms. As a result, more men will be compelled to hear our "no"s and respond accordingly. After all, if men are aware that they will receive immediate, physically painful consequences for overstepping women's boundaries, they'll respect those boundaries a lot more.

Renee created consequences-she was a righteous warrior babe, a model for all of us outside tv-land. We should all be equipped with such self-defense skills, and we should all have such courage and sense of entitlement to use them as we see Þt. As someone trained in self-defense, I feel powerful and competent in taking care of myself; I feel the right to my space, and I feel entitled to defending it. With current legal and social biases, however, defending myself does not usually feel like an option. I Þnd myself more concerned about police response to my response to assault than about assault itself. Through resisting assault, I may experience more violation by the "justice" system than I would by submitting to the assault.

Women and men need to work together, both as reformers within the current legal system (creating new women's self-defense initiatives for election ballots, for example) and as agitators outside the system (making like Renee and taking matters into our own hands) to make this society safe for women. We need to redeÞne the terms of assault law, taking into consideration the unique character of male-female sexual assault and creating consequences for it. Women must have choices about how to protect ourselves.

We need to go beyond the current minimal recognition of date rape's existence and begin legislating how women can protect ourselves from it before it happens. The basic framework I suggest is this: If a woman says "no" a certain number of times, and a man keeps fondling her breast, unbuttoning her pants, or whatever it is she tells him to stop doing, she has the right to retaliate physically.

Many questions remain, or course, regarding the technical structure for such laws: Should there be speciÞca-tions for which violating behaviors can legally receive a physical response? Should a woman Þrst be required to verbally ward off any behavior on the spectrum of assault before launching into physical defense? If so, what should be considered a su»cient attempt? Simply saying "stop" or "no"? Making the statement, "If you do not stop, I will consider this an assault"? How many times should she be required to say this word or phrase-once, twice, multiple times?

Should there be limitations on the extent of force used? For example, if a man persists after verbal protestation, can she hit him only once, knock him out, use her body but not a weapon, or use any force as long as it's not fatal? What if the woman hits her date/assailant just once and intends to stop there, but the man escalates the situation by coming at her with a weapon? Should she have the right to err on the side of "too much" physical force, so as to preempt that possibility? Finally, what should our criteria be for answering all these and the many other questions involved?

As we work to create new legislation, women need to give ourselves permission to be bold and step beyond the lines of legally acceptable behavior. And everyone who supports female autonomy needs to stand behind the women who dare to take these steps. If a woman is arrested for physically defending herself, activists need to support her self-defense with protests, legal defense funds, and the like. We need to work on both ends of the problem, resisting current laws while working to change them, creating a ruckus while offering a solution.

Although the writers of Ally McBeal supported Renee, plotwise-she defended her actions and won her criminal case-they did not let her walk away with pride and dignity. Sadly enough, Ally succumbed to the classic television cop-out of creating a powerful female character and then undermining her: The morning after Ally chewed out Renee about her so-called problem, Renee 'fessed up: "Everything you said is true. I do use sex [for power over men]... This thing that happened in here with Rivers, I've been waiting my whole life for it. I just thank god at least I'm ashamed of it."

Excuse me? Hold on a minute here. Maybe Renee did use sex in unhealthy ways, maybe not. Regardless, that issue is totally separate from the fact that Rivers did not stop when Renee said stop. Period. Why should Renee feel shame about defending her boundaries? Why didn't Rivers feel shame about violating her boundaries? Renee had no premeditated intent to hurt Rivers; she simply did not want to follow where he wanted to go. But let's say, for the sake of argument, that Renee did have a little power trip going, where she purposely, maliciously, and consistently got guys all worked up over her and then abruptly ended all intimacy right when she had them in the palm of her hand. I would call Renee's behavior problematic, and, were I a character on the show, I would advise her to seek counseling. I would understand her sexual partners being hurt, angry, and confused. I would understand them confronting her about her behavior, and I would understand them never speaking to her again. But under no circumstances would it be acceptable for them to claim she owed them a fuck, and under no circumstances should she feel shame for Þghting a man who tried to force himself on her.

Furthermore, the connection Renee oÛered between her "problem" and her "shame" made the shame even more disturbing and less understandable. Through a series of ßashbacks, she recounted to Ally and the audience how she was the Þrst in her class to develop breasts. The boys at school continuously chased her, cornered her, and grabbed her breasts. Her mother told her it was a good sign, that it meant the boys liked her.

"I clung on to that one," Renee shared with Ally in a heartfelt moment. "I started using it, and then it was easy. Look at me now: I've gone to law school-Harvard, even-and I can't bear it if a guy doesn't want to grab me a little. And then if he does grab me, I'm on that playground again."

Yeah, and...? What this sorry little explanation seems to be saying is that a) when a woman is triggered during sex (when she ßashes back to an old trauma and freaks out or becomes paralyzed), it's her fault if she wants to stop, she doesn't have the right to stop, she has wronged her sexual partner by stopping, and her partner has the right to continue demanding sex from her because if she weren't triggered then he could get some; b) the deep-rooted sexual violence that shapes a woman's life is her problem and hers alone if she adapts to it; c) there was no connection whatsoever between Rivers's not stopping when Renee said she didn't want sex and the boys on the playground not stopping when Renee said she didn't want them grabbing, and neither Rivers nor the boys deserves consequences for their behavior.

Sorry, no dice. Ally McBeal lost the sense and consistency with which this plotline began by making Renee ashamed, by making her second-guess defending herself. The writers fell back on standard old blame-the-woman patterns, failing to address a crucial issue-men's sense of entitlement to women's bodies, energy, and space. As such, the pair of episodes began revolutionary but ended flat. Drama has the ability to present a realistic backdrop, while offering a new perspective on that reality. Rape happens constantly, as does punishment for women who Þght rape. But the way struggles over rape are presented and contextualized in dramas can vary greatly. Thelma and Louise, for example, portrayed systematic punishment for women who Þght back, but in a way that showed that our system is sick, not the women who Þght it.

For a while, Ally McBeal successfully held this tension of a sick society vs. a revolutionary woman: Rivers behaved toward Renee as countless men have behaved toward countless women. But Renee fought back. Characters on the show responded to Renee as one can imagine people would respond to a strong woman in real life-telling her she was wrong-but Renee protested their judgments, successfully. When Renee won the court case against her, the show made it quite clear that her victory was due to her lawyer's distraction and manipulation tactics in the courtroom, not the merits of her case. Renee's attorney and Ally even explicitly told Renee-and thus the audience-that she didn't have a case, period. Renee kept insisting that she had behaved reasonably.

So why suddenly undermine her inspiring determination? Why suddenly make her deflate before our eyes and admit that gee, maybe she shouldn't have been so capable of taking care of herself? Had the show managed to sustain the revolutionary pitch with which it began, Renee would have been the one to give a speech to Ally, and Ally would have been the one to indulge in grand realizations of her own shortcomings when it came to recognizing her autonomy and power. But the minds behind Ally McBeal seem to value our cultural norm of tolerating a signiÞcant degree of violence against women. As such, they were willing to toy with the idea of Renee Þghting against this violence, but unwilling to stay their original course and validate her behavior as being reasonable and justiÞed. Had Ally McBeal really walked it like they talked it, Renee would have had no apologies, right up to the very end.

©1999 by Loolwa Khazzoom. All rights reserved. No portion of this article may be copied without author's permission.

This article was first published in Bitch Magazine

Top of This Page/ZzoomZzoom Homepage/Generation seX