From the "statements that sound like parodies, but truth is stranger
than fiction" file:

	"Public rape also encompasses a recent review in _The Nation_ of a
scholarly book arguing against pornography. The review opens with a
rape of the author, in this case, me."

	Catherine MacKinnon, speech to National Press Club
	broadcast on WBUR 90.9 FM 8pm 12/6/93


From: rlcarr@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard L. Carreiro)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: MacKinnon raped-by-book-review comment background
Followup-To: alt.society.civil-liberty
Date: 6 Jan 1994 15:24:09 GMT
Organization: Home of the Politically Incorrect
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <2ghaep$s82@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>

Check out today's (1/6) _Boston Globe_ for some background on MacKinnon's 
comment (Living/Arts front page).

Apparently, _The Nation_'s reviewer began his review "Suppose I decided to
rape Catherine MacKinnon before reviewing this book ... as research for 
my critique."  He then goes on to consider the hypothetical, then decides not
to rape but instead imagines raping her and writes about that.  He then
creates a character, Dworkin Henthoff, who does rape MacKinnon.  He then says
that DH and himself are both charged with rape.  He than says that he would
view the two acts as different, but "Catherine MacKinnon, if we were to
believe `Only Words,' would disagree."

MacKinnon was was/is steamed, firing off a letter to Nat Henthoff asking him
to "disavow this rape of me in your name."

Henthoff did so, writing in Village Voice that "The rape -- hypothetical or 
fantasy or whatever -- was a rape.  An invitation to the reader to imagine
the actual Catherine MacKinnon being overpowered and stripped of her physical
dignity."

MacKinnon told the Washington Post that the reviewer (Carlin Romano) 
should be "held accountable for what he did.  There are a lot of people 
out there and a lot of ways that can be done."

The editor of _The Nation_ stands by the review, calling it "an ingenious
and incendiary way to dramatize the problem with MacKinnon's position."

Romano says he isn't giving an inch.  "I find it intriguing that MacKinnon
and Masson, the great oppoenets of violence towards women and children,
respeond to a book review with threats rather than arguments.  Anyone with
philosophical sophistication can see that everything that follows the 
first word ["Suppose"] is hypothetical."

I'd have to agree with Romano and his editor.  While the review may have
been tasteless and crude, it does (IMHO) demonstrate the problem with
MacKinnon's views, and even managed to bait her into (IMHO) proving
Romano's point.

I'm also a bit disappointed that Henthoff seems to buy into MacKinnon's
view that what happened was "rape" (though I can certainly understand
Henthoff being POed at the piece).

-- 
Rich Carreiro
ARPA: rlcarr@mit.edu
UUCP: ...!mit-eddie!mit-athena!rlcarr
BITNET: rlcarr@athena.mit.edu