Before I forget: Another reference to a conversation with the mail lady.
Make sure you use the Post office!
Concerning liberals, and rape, and what they – or some of them – really believe about the integrity and inviolability of the human person.
I might have mentioned before that we have this rather outspoken mail carrier. She’s generally cheerful, very left-liberal, not shy about saying so, and armed with all the usual talking points you would expect from someone for whom progressive media sources constitute the information gold standard.
Though it escapes me at the moment how the topic of the exploitation of women came up, it did. Or rather she brought it up.
Probably something about the abuse and physical exploitation which females are commonly acknowledged to suffer in the so-called third world.
I agreed with her by and large. I said so. In fact I went further. I said that rape should be absolutely intolerable. I said that it constituted a crime beyond the pale. “Yes!” she exclaimed.
“You have an absolute and inviolable moral right to your physical integrity,” I said.
“Absolutely! ” she said. “And,” she added, ” many people expect these women to bear the child of a man who has beaten and degraded them! You can’t expect a woman to allow that monster’s offspring to grow in her womb, can you?”
“You have an absolute right to your own body then? We agree on that?” I asked.
“I’m glad you feel that way” I said. “Would you agree that rape should be a capital crime?”
“Oh, our justice system …” she began.
“Well hypothetically then, in a case where there was a brutal physical attack, a forcible act, …”
“There’s always doubt” she said “look at the cases where …”
“Ok, let’s limit ourselves to the question as to whether you believe that you would have the moral right to kill – a justification – in order to stop an ongoing act of violent rape being perpetrated on yourself, if: a, it was the only way to stop it, and b, you had the means, to assuredly do so.”
“If my kids were …”, she started.
“I’m not talking about your kids.”
“Well, do you mean, later?”
“Stop!” I said. “Forget any scenario involving the legal system and mistaken identities. Forget about after the fact self-help acted out in cold blood, if that is what is also disturbing you. “I’m asking you, you personally, as a “progressive female” if you would use lethal force on a brutalizing rapist in process, if that was the only way to get him to cease, and if you were sure to be successful in doing so. Hell, and assume it’s lawful to do so, if that helps you to come up with an answer”
“Uh, well, uh … wellllll, uh I have to think about that. I’ll get back with you later.” she said as she sidled out the door.
Virtually identical to the words she used the last time we had this kind of a conversation. That now makes two of those “I’ll get back with you later”s she’s never gotten back with me on.
Leftists, do have different interpersonal boundaries. And for all their shrillness and squawking about domination and violation and exploitation, they, some of them, seem to think that the last thing they should be required to do, is to take an absolute stand on the only absolute locus of self which they have.
What integrity then, is it that they are trying to preserve, if they will not preserve their own?
And if they will not preserve their own if they can, why should anyone else take the care and trouble to do so for them?
Credit: The image of the two postal workers is from Ilana Cohn’s “thefunclub” parody of a USPS public service announcement featuring Tonya and CiCi, found on Cohn’s YouTube channel. It’s a bit rough for a family style blog, so I won’t link directly. Depending on your sensibilities, it might be said to be hilarious.