Notes 1 Introduction – Feminism, Governmentality and ‘Male’ Rape 1. This book is based on a sole-author paper I presented at the 2007 British Society of Criminology conference (18–20 September, London School of Economics, London, UK), entitled ‘Feminism, Governmentality and the Political Economy of Male Rape: Why Male Rape is a Feminist Issue’. 2. See Bevacqua (2000), Sielke (2002) and Bourke (2007), amongst others, for a detailed examination of the history of feminism and rape. 3.. Issues around the construct of male rape and the male rape victim have been raised by other authors. Graham’s (2006) article discusses the construction of the male rape victim, and ostensibly adopts a critical stance in seeking to engage with the emerging knowledge as discourse, but hers is a notion of social constructionism and discourse in the thinnest sense (rather than the Foucauldian usage I adopt). It is also important to recognize that her work contains a number of flaws, many of which are readily noted by Rumney and Jamel (2009). However, their criticism seems predicated on a cynical rejection of what they appear to dismiss as ‘blue-sky’ theorizing, whilst I would argue conversely that Graham’s analysis remains far too enmeshed in a pragmatically mired administrative and ‘rights’-based agenda. 4. Updated in the 2003 Act to include oral penile-penetration as rape, and create a new offence of Assault by Penetration, which can be committed by either a male or female using any body part or object. 5. Andrew Richards, who was 26 years old, was sentenced to 10 years imprison- ment on the 9 June 1995 for the attempted rape, indecent assault and actual bodily harm of an 18-year-old male. 6. Despite including reference to the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, Barnett (1997) neglects the provision therein regarding the male victim, preferring instead to focus on the aspects relating to marital rape in respect of female spouses. 7. For example, Home Office data reveal that in 2008/2009 police-recorded rapes of a female increased by 5 per cent (on the previous year) to 12,165 offences, whilst sexual assaults on a female fell by 4 per cent to 19,740 offences. Rape of a male decreased by 4 per cent to 968 offences, whilst sexual assaults on a male fell by 12 per cent to 2,323 offences (Walker et al., 2009). 8. Notions of ‘common sense’ include: the ‘stereotypes of everyday life’ (Becker, 1974, cited in Tierney, 2006, p. 8); the ‘philosophy of nonphiloso- phers’ (Gramsci, 1971, cited in Jewkes, 2004, p. 12); and ‘public image’ (Hall, cited in Jewkes and Letherby, 2002, p. 117). 9. Foucault specifically explicates this for us in his works; for example, see his introductory chapter in The Use of Pleasure (1984), pp. 8–13. 10. For example, in the 2008 British Crime Survey the self-completion module on intimate violence reveals that approximately 3 per cent of women aged 172 Notes 173 16 to 59 and less than 1 per cent of men (of the same age) had experienced a sexual assault (including attempts) in the previous 12 months. The majority of these are accounted for by less serious sexual assaults. Significantly, fewer than 1 per cent of both women and men reported having experienced a seri- ous sexual assault, which would include rape (Walker et al., 2009). 11. Discussed at length in ‘Questions of Method’ in Faubion (2001). 12. This is not to say that resistance is ineffective, but rather that it is necessary. Freedom after all is a precondition for power and is itself held within power relations, the transactional nature of which means that breach or disruption – rather than revolution – should be the goal of what Couzens Hoy (cited in Kelly, 2009) terms ‘emancipatory resistance’. 13. ‘Irony’ is the term coined by Jock Young to characterize what is commonly regarded as the ‘post-modern turn’ in criminology; see Young (n.d.). 14. ‘Writing back’ is a term I’v e borrowed from post-colonial studies, and in my usage it is more akin to what Sielke (2002, p. 5) describes as ‘refiguration’. However, whilst it shares Seilke’s (2002) concern with ‘rhetorical processes’ it also bears post-colonialism’s concern with counter-discourse’s potential for unintentional affirmation of the canonic discourse (for a detailed discussion of this, see Thieme, 2001). 15. ‘Rape myths’ refers to misconceptions around rape, and thus what constitutes a genuine or ‘real’ rape and likewise a ‘real’ victim. Their function is to shift culpability from offender to victim. For a detailed discussion of male rape myths and perceptions thereof, see Chapleau, Oswald and Russell (2008). 16. Example of which relate to attrition in general but low conviction rates in particular – thus it is noteworthy that the conviction rate has reduced from 1 in 3 in the 1970s to 1 in 18 at present, see Kelly, Lovett and Regan (2005). Myths are recognized as constraints on reporting and recording, and on prosecution and conviction practices; see, for example, Du Mont, Miller and Myhr (2003), and the classic feminist research by Warshaw (1994). 17. ‘Hegemonic masculinities’ was coined by Connell (1987) to refer to the cul- turally idealized patterns (norms, forms and practices) of masculinity that privilege men and support patriarchal society – in essence, it is the model or ideal of masculinity. For a concise overview of this concept, see Spade and Valentine (2008). 18. For a discussion and clarification of ‘the subject’ in Foucault’s works, see ‘The Subject and Power’ in Foucault (2001). 19. In this instance, and as a regime of truth, one must note the interrelation- ship between knowledge and the creation of objects and subjectivities in the social body. 20. ‘Regime of truth’ is understood here as an asymmetrical power-effect tied to the existing apparatus of sexuality and predicated on gender. 21. ‘Victimology’ is a subset of criminology; for a critical introduction, see Elias (1996). 22. See Soyland and Kendall (1997) for a discussion of the use and abuse of Foucault. 23. See L.G. Graham (2005) and Kendell and Wickham (2003). 24. See Foucault, 2001, p. 338. 25. In other words, to make real. Similar, therefore, to what Durkheim termed ‘social facts’. 174 Notes 2 Problematization – A Critical Ontology of the Present 1. For the tracing and situating of ‘scholarly knowledge and disqualified knowl- edges’, see Foucault, (1997, pp. 8–11). 2. I performed a rudimentary critical discourse analysis (CDA). This methodol- ogy is explained in greater detail in the following chapter. 3. For a discussion of this concept, see Connell and Messerschmidt (2005). 4. Feminist explications thus seek to rationalize masculine vulnerabilities, and in doing so such discourse makes male victims ‘feminine’. 5. I use rape-able to indicate his being sexually violable – able to be raped. This is converse to the usage by feminist authors who use this to mean his proclivity for rape – able to rape. My perversion of this is deliberate and intended to be disruptive. 6. The ideal victim is also known as the symbolic victim, credible victim, legiti- mate victim, blameless victim, the key to the binaries of deserving versus undeserving victim. This will be explicated in Chapter 3. 7. Feminist models are overviewed in Martin et al. (2006). 8. See Newburn and Stanko (2002); Nathanson and Young (2006). 9. See Cressey (1992); Elias (1994). 10. See Farrell (1993); Thomas (1993); Synnott (2009). 11. See Paglia (1991, 1992); Roiphe (1994); Hoff Sommers (1994, 2001). 12. For example, Gillespie (1996); Dworkin (1997); MacKinnon (2006). 13. See Scacco (1982); McMullen (1990); Scarce (1997). 14. Landrum (1993) identified six texts of significance at that time from the major publishers’ lists, and from books used in his own courses. The texts listed here were all recommended reading on my own modules and/or mod- ules within my former department (Department of Law and Criminal Justice Studies, Canterbury Christ Church University). 15. See Hannon and Dufour (1998). 16. For example, Hogben and Waterman (1997). 17. Specialist texts include: Scacco (1982); McMullen (1990); Scarce (1997); Mezey and King (1992, 2000); Abdullah-Khan (2008). 18. I searched for the specialist texts that have been published in this field – availability/accessibility being necessary for dissemination. World Catalogue (http://www.worldcat.org/) was used to check holdings in the UK as at 3 November 2010. I found: Abdullah-Khan (2008) held by five UK universities, indicated by region (Cambridge, Essex, Glasgow, Leicester, Oxford); Scarce (1997) held by three (Manchester, Essex, Leicester); McMullen (1990) not held in the UK – closest holding listed in Germany; Scacco (1982), held by two (Essex and London); Mezey and King (2000) held by 12 (Cambridge, Cardiff, London, Swansea, Manchester, Glasgow, Leicester, Newcastle, Nottingham, Oxford, Bangor, Wolverhampton). 19. I followed Rentoul and Applebloom’s (1997) literature search, which used various databases and the Internet to demonstrate clearly the limited avail- able number of studies at the time. 20. As is the case with McMullen (1990) – only three second-hand copies avail- able worldwide via Amazon (as at April 2009). 21. Scacco (1982). Notes 175 22. In particular, some authors go to great lengths to rebut the notion ‘ homosexual rape’, see Struckman-Johnson (1988); Canter and Hodge (1998); Chapleau et al. (2008). 23. For correlations in victim sexual orientation and attribution of blame, see Daugherty and Esper (1998) and Davies and McCartney (2003). 24. Who states that ‘since most of this research entails feminist assumptions, attitudinal correlates of blame have never been previously discussed in rela- tion to male victims’ (ibid., p. 210). 25. Foucauldian feminism is perhaps something of a misnomer as this stance does not adopt a Foucauldian positioning as might be implied.