Thinking Woman-to-Woman Rape: A Critique of Marcus's Theory and Politics of Rape Prevention

This article uses the empirical fact of woman-to-woman rape as a lens to critique Sharon Marcus’s ‘‘Fighting Bodies, Fighting Words: A Theory and Politics of Rape Prevention.’’ To the extent that any theory forecloses this fact, we can assume it is erroneous. While Marcus’s work is promising in its intention to deconstruct binary views of gender, it largely reiterates the very dualism it seeks to destabilize. I explore two different deconstructive arguments that can be drawn from the piece, each of which has been adopted by some thinkers. The first forecloses woman-to-woman rape while the second makes theoretical room for it. The second argument has the potential to deconstruct the first. Following the logic of Judith Butler’s thoughts on gender transgression, I suggest a synthesis of these two arguments. Finally, I explore ways the self-defense strategies Marcus promotes can be made to accommodate survivors of gender transgressive assaults