Here we go.

This is going to be one of my "written in a fervor of idealism" posts. By now, regular readers have likely realized a few of my Hot Topics - the rights of women and gay dudes. More often than not, I stray away from the personal/political on this blog because a) I get preachy pretty quick and b) it's easier to write about The Hills than the complexities of human sexuality on a regular basis. Today, however, I can't help but toss Heidi and Spencer aside, in favor of a more complicated/less plastic discussion.

To begin, please head over to Jezebel and the read the following two posts about American University sophomore Alex Knepper, and his unfortunate beliefs about date rape. Jezebel tackles the specifics of his argument a lot better than I can, but the gist of his message is that women must bear some responsibility for the occurrence of date rape, particularly in a college party/drinking atmosphere. He writes:

"Let's get this straight: any woman who heads to an EI [an unrecognized fraternity at American University] party as an anonymous onlooker, drinks five cups of the jungle juice, and walks back to a boy's room with him is indicating that she wants sex, OK? To cry 'date rape' after you sober up the next morning and regret the incident is the equivalent of pulling a gun to some one's head and then later claiming that you didn't ever actually intend to pull the trigger.

'Date rape' is an incoherent concept. There's rape and there's not-rape, and we need a line of demarcation. It's not clear enough to merely speak of consent, because the lines of consent in sex - especially anonymous sex - can become very blurry. If that bothers you, then stick with Pat Robertson and his brigade of anti-sex cavemen! Don't jump into the sexual arena if you can't handle the volatility of its practice!"

What I find particularly interesting (and disappointing) about Knepper's stance is his use of his sexuality in defense against his detractors. I'm sure some readers imagined him as a beer-guzzling frat-boy who may have taken advantage of a co-ed or two, but that's small-minded thinking on their part. If Knepper didn't want readers to assume he was an ignorant misogynist, he shouldn't have written an article vocalizing an ignorant, misogynist stance. Claiming "but, I'm gay!" doesn't make it better, it makes it worse.

Knepper also wrote this article in The Eagle (his college newspaper, in which the articles excerpted above were also published) in which he proclaims his mission statement: he just wants to be a person, not a Gay Person. What he has done, however, is exchange one set of stereotypes (the supposed "gay sub-culture" he finds discriminatory and limiting [because "their lives are gay!"]) for another (an "independent existence" free of the gay sub-culture, but one that still defines itself according to the ideals of a larger group [economic conservatives]).

(Also, if you like having sex with dudes, your "life is gay.")

He's essentially traded one box for another. If you find the gay community limiting and stereotypical, then you are being limiting and stereotypical in your thinking. Even if all twenty fags at the gay bar are sporting feather boas, tiaras, and ass-less chaps, how the hell do you know one of them didn't vote for Bush? How do you know all their friends are gay? Or their movie choices? Or that they are all unequivocally pro-choice?

Knepper doesn't want to be a Gay Person, but he's decided to be a Conservative Gay Person instead. I'm sure he's proud of himself for writing something controversial (a gay guy thinks chicks are slutty, and rape is their fault!), but in reality, he's undermined his own ideals. If you want people to see you as a person, you have to stop thinking in sweeping generalizations. You have to stop thinking college girls at frat parties deserve sexual abuse for suggesting sexuality, or that gay men are conventional cardboard cut-outs because they admit to liking Madonna.

Ultimately, everyone can have, and be, both. You can like Madonna, and football. You can vote for a Democrat in one election and a Republican in another. You can be a nineteen year old girl at a college party who just wants to make out, but says no to anything else. You can talk with the thickest lisp imaginable and not like Barack Obama. You're allowed to be different things at the same time (hell, you should). Problems arise when you give yourself that right, but fail to recognize it in anyone else.

In other words, Alex Knepper, maybe you should have a conversation with an actual rape victim before you tell her it was all her fault.