MY BODY FAILED ME: A victims WEAPONSISED reaction

 📷: Sipping Thought.

"My body failed me"

Those were her words, those were the words of a rape victim.

It has been over 6 years since I heard those words, yet it remained etched in my memory word for word like a waking nightmare.

"My body failed me"

According to her, while being raped, her rapist saw that she was wet and told her "You're enjoying it right". 

She wasn't. So she blamed her body for failing her. And the rapist in turn interpreted same as consent.

Unfortunately, this comment of hers is the reality of her biological realities of our bodies.

Of the many things the patriarchy,  WEAPONSISES against women, the biological working of our bodies is one of 

Understanding Women's Biological Workings and responses.

Understanding women's bodies and biological workings is crucial to unshrouding myths regarding rape and consent. 

1. Biological response: The body is designed to respond to stimuli. If you send a set of information to the body, the body is programmed to respond in a certain manner. 

For instance, if I prick someone's skin with a needle, the neurons are programmed to respond with pain. This has nothing to do with whether you consented or not. 

In the same way, if you rub the genitalia repeatedly, the body is programmed to increase blood flow to that area and release lubrication to avoid chaffing and injury during penetration.  

This is not peculiar to the the genitalia. Ever notice that one teaches an infant to suck? You touch his mouth and the infant is biologically wired to open their mouth and begin sucking. The stimuli of touching his lips triggers that response. 

What happened to this woman getting wet during rape was merely the function of Biological response.

This is just your body reacting to stimuli. In fact, 5% of rape victims report experiencing orgasm. 

Once again, it is your body responding to signal sent. There is constant stimulation of the vagina canal which filled with nerve endings. The clitoris alone contains more than 8000 nerve endings. And when it is stimulated repeatedly, it is only natural that your brain send back information.

Like 37% of women, myself, I experience sleep orgasm (which is the equivalent of men's wet dreams). Your permission is not required. The moment you're at rest and your genitalia received a significant amounts mm of blood flow, it is wired to react that. 

The point being made is that your body does not need your consent or permission to react in in certain ways.

It will surprise some of us to know that , 0.3 percent of women experience orgasm during child birth! That's because of the blood flow to the genitalia during childbirth and the fact that the passage of the child can stimulate the same neural pathways responsible for orgasm. And this is in fact a grossly under reported case. The 0.3% is report from nurses who witnessed it. There's even a medical name for it- ecstatic birth so it has been studied.

It is same with male victims. When you in repeatedly stroke the penis, blood flows into it and leads to an erection even if he does not consent!

So NO, lubrication, erection or orgasm during rape does not signify consent neither does it make the harm and less gruesome. What matters is- WAS CONSENT OBTAINED? 

Your body did not fail you, it is merely reacting the way it is designed to react.

Another biological weaponsisation stems from the virginity myth. People often assume the hymen is a covering that seals the vagina but that is in fact not so! It merely surrounds the orifice as seen in the picture below. 

📷: Lybrate.

In fact, a completely sealed vagina is a medical anomaly that requires surgery to correct because such a woman cannot menstruate. As seen in the diagram below👇, the hymen comes in different shapes and sizes. 

Understanding this is very crucial in rape trials where counsel, medical expert witness and judges assume that for penetration to occur, the hymen must be perforated.

Women with parous, annular and septate hymen can go ahead and have sex without perforation unless the man was rough. In fact 0.03% (3 in 10,000) of women are born without hymen at all. 

It is worthy of note to state that the hymen is just a feotal residue with no known biological function!

However, we have seen over reliance and conclusive evidence placed on the role of hymen in rape trials. Whereas, the hymen remains an unreliable determinant of a woman's sexual history or sexual assault as seen in this studies.

As this study pointed out on vanity myths "The hymen is a membrane with relatively few blood vessels that – even if torn – may not bleed significantly. Forced penetration and lack of lubrication may cause lacerations to the vaginal wall, both of which are most likely to be responsible for the “blood-stained bed sheets,” rather than trauma to the hymen. In fact, several studies have documented that bleeding is not routinely observed after a woman’s first sexual intercourse"

It is worst if the woman has been sexually active before the rape. Which makes one wonder if legal protection against rape is only for virgins.

Studies published by PubMed on genital injuries following sexual assault of women of ages of all ages shows women alleging sexual that only 9.1% of victims had hymenal perforation.

Just like the penis, the vaginal canal comes in different length and size which. Is further affected by gene, age and other factors affects vagina elasticity. 

Bleeding can occur even for non virgins where the sexual partner or rapist is tough. This does not mean that a hymen is broken but injury caused to the vagina wall. What then does the law has to sabotage about this? Is this bleeding evidence of virginity?

As such, hymen is not a good indicator of sexual history or sexual assault. Nonetheless, our poor understanding of women's bodies have been weaponsised against her in rape cases. 

2. Trauma response:

This is also a biological response. The body is designed to protect itself against the harm. 

Let's take for instance instance, Tears. When a foreign object gets into your eyes, your brain triggers your nervous system which triggers your lacrimal gland to release reflex tears raft is made of water, salt, protein and white blood cells to flush out the foreign, dilute chemicals, coat your eyes in protective membrane and release white blood cells to prevent infections. 

Same happens when you're cut or suffer any body trauma. The body releases white blood cells to fasten healing. 

The point being made is That the body is not passive, THE BODY ACTIVELY RESPONDS TO TRAUMA AND THAT INCLUDES RAPE. The vagina lubricates to reduce the trauma caused by penetration and no, you'd body does not need your consent to react that way the same way you don't consent to tears flushing out foreign objects in your eyes.

Your body protecting you from I created harm at the point of rape does not amount to consent. 

3. Psychological & survival response:

Society has painted an unrealistic picture of what 'true rape' should look like which is- a screaming woman who is bruised, injured and the evidence etched all over her body. This of course does not guarantee that she will be believed, nonetheless, this is the mental picture we are given of a 'true rape victim's.

So when the body or reaction does not conform to this flawed mental picture, the victim is left doubting herself, the victim is left berating her body for lubricating, the victim is left questioning her consent because society has taught women that we are active participants in our harm. 

If she is raped, it is not because she is victim, it is because she wore revealing dress, she led him on, she went out at night, she visited him, she wore sexy bra, she went to the club. 

This social conditioning of women to blame themsleves for wrong done has also leads us into interpreting our natural biological response as consent. 

Can you see the pattern, we are taught to blowback the harm on ourselves, to search for culpability within our selves and our bodies. We have woman saying "my body failed me" even though she never said yes to to act. This is how we were taught to fail ourselves as women. 

I always say "Never hold yourself responsible each time a man ats irresponsibly".

Do not blame your body, it is working the way it is designed to.

The victim's reaction is always heavily scrutinised like her reaction justifies or lends credence to the action.

This also applies to our very survival instincts. 

Previously survival instincts were known as:

1. FIGHT: Physically tackling the assaulter or 

2. FLIGHT: Running away from the attack.

However,  recent studies are broadening survival responses to include others such as 

3. FREEZING: Simply staying in place. No reaction at all. We have heard rape victims talk about detaching from their bodies. 

We have also heard of victims who experienced selective amnesia. Some can't even recall what happened to them because their brain has erased the memory as a way of protecting them. 

This is common for many with avoidant survival response. They rather pretend a problem does not exist than confronting him. 

A study of 62 rape victims showed that 36% experienced memory deficits for parts of the rape were common 2 weeks post-assault although some subsequently regained their memory.

Sometimes the brain shut itself down to protect itself from acute trauma. This might in fact be interpreted as lying or false accusations. 

This brings us to the forth survival response 

4. FAWNING: This entails cooperation to minimise harm

Imagine your brother or son told you that he was accosted at gin point to hand over his phone and he fought them?

You will scream and tell him he should have simply handed it over!

What uob just did is a survival response called FAWNING aka cooperation. 

Studies show that fawning and freezing are actually more complex responses than fighting and freezing and they are in fact more common in women than men. We were only aware of fight or flight because only men's brains were studied. 

At that point when he is robbed and chose to cooperate, he has mentally done the maths and arrive at the conclusion that fighting will cost him greater harm. 

Now take a moment to imagine a rape victim said she fawned or cooperated with her rapist?

Pls take a moment and imagine what the response will be

-

-

-

-

Unlike the victim of arm robbery who will be told that he was smarty for not struggling with an assailant, the victim of rape will be said to have consented. One can see how same scenarios are treated differently depending on the crime. 

This brings us to our next point.

The legal Standpoint: Legal Weaponsisation of women's biological response.

It is important at this point to shed light on the role of the law in perpetuating systemic victimisation of women.

I always say, a victim of rape is victimised 2x, first by the rapist and second, by the institutions that failed to protect her. 

And I am not taking about rape in prints on our lawbooks but the cost of prosecuting such a case. 

The law is crystal clear "RAPE IS COMPLETE UPON PENETRATION!"

The moment penetration is achieved, rape has occured. It doesn't matter if she was lubricated, if she fawned to avoid being injured or killed, if she achieved orgasm, if she even liked it, none of these should matter!

And I used the word 'should' because we have seen rape trials and we know that all of these can and have been used to input consent on victims of rape- the lubrication, the absence of hymen, her previous sexual history. 

In a just world, the act of the PERPETUATOR  prior to the rape counts as attempt, the moment penetration is achieved without consent, rape is complete!

Rape, just like every other crime ought to be action based not reaction based. It is the perpetuators action that makes it rape not the victim's reaction. 

If I am accosted by a robber at gun point and I hand over my phone to them, my reaction (cooperation & fawning) does not make.it consensual. Those are mere survival tactics. So why is it that when it comes to rape, victim's reaction to the harm is taken as consent, indulgence, participation and wilfulness?

It is only in rape trials where the victim's reaction is rated a lot higher than the perpetuators very action.

"Did you shout?"

"Were you forced to go to his house?"

"Did you report to the police or hospital after the act?"

"When you visited him you sat on his bed didn't you?"

How is any of these actions a substitute for CONSENT?

Just to get a better grasp, in 2018 BBC reported a massive public outrage after a rapist was freed because his victim wore a pant with a lace front which was interpreted as consent and seduction. 

It is not just her reaction that is out into question but even her history and lifestyle 

"Are you a virgin?"

"Have you slept with him previously?"

"Are you not married to him?". 

There's no limit to the things that can be put to question that touches on her character and reaction as if her reaction justifies rape.

We've seen enough evidence to note the that in practice, rape & GBVs are the only crimes where culpability lies with victims reaction, and when a victim does not react in particular manner, consent is attributed to her.

In practice, there is an unspoken PRESUMPTION OF CONSENT! When a perpetuator can be left off the hook because his victim wore a sexy pant or removed her shoe when visiting his house and sat on his bed, the law is saying "You don't have to say yes, the law will presume and attribute same to you"

You do not see this line of questioning in any other crimes only in crimes against a woman's body. 

If a victim of arm robbery said "I invited my friends into my house and he stole from me", no one will assume that invitation to the house extends to invitation to steal. 

So why is a woman's consent to follow a man to his house or kiss him OVERSTRETCHED to include consent to sex? Why is her consent to send nude OVERSTRETCHED to include consent to publish same?

Like I said in an earlier article on Consent in the digital age, "CONSENT IS TRUE ONLY & ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE IN WHICH IT WAS GIVEN!" You cannot overstretch person consent to do A to admit to consent to do B, C& D. It is true only for the purpose in which it was given. If you want to go further, you must seek consent for those other acts too. 

If a victim of robbery said "I was scared I didn't shout I just corporated with them and hand over the phone", No one will take that clear act of corporation as consent. In fact, he will be praised for being wise because silence and corporation at that point is SELF PRESERVATION 

Now imagine a rape victim who didn't shout? Imagine a rape victim who fawned?

Even more daunting is that the rape to aggravated assault or murder pipeline is in fact very wild. Rape in its very nature often requires assault. However, where a victim screams or struggles, they put themselves at higher risk of aggravated assault or even murder. 

In fact, there has been documented cases of rapists gouging out the eyes of their rape victims to avoid been identified. In the case of this teenage school girl , she kept struggling and fighting back. He raped her repeatedly and when he realised she might identify him, he took a broken bottle, gouge out her eyes and left her for dead. 

In a very recent case, he tried to use his hand to pluck out her eyes. There are many documentations of killing, blinding or mutilating victims to silence them. 

We keep asking rape victims "Did you shout?". We forget that shouting is not what makes it rape.

Shouting occurs AFTER THE FACT. No one who is safe raises alarm. If she has to shout, he is already doing or attempting to do the act so her shouting or not shouting cannot be what makes the action or rape. In the best case scenario , her shouting can only truncate the action which still makes it a crime of attempted rape not a defence of consent. 

Failure of a victim to defend themselves CANNOT & SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS CONSENT!

Lawyers will tell you what makes a crime a crime is intention (mens real) and action (actus reus) so where does the victims reaction factor in and why are courts allowing victim reactions AFTER THE FACT to count as consent? 

WHY? 

Especially when the very act of fighting back can cost them their life. 

A victim of kidnapping or arm robbery who cooperates is wise but a victim of rape who cooperates is consenting. 

Can you see the difference?

Rape is always a power play. We have a dominant perpetuator and hma weaker victim, tet rape is the only crime where the victim is (LEGALLY) EXPECTED to fight off their perpetuator. 

This brings us back to our point- The weaponsisation of women's biological response. Even her survival instinct is brought to question. Survival (fawning) because proof of consent.

I remember someone advising victims of Rape to gather evidence during rape by scratching. I understand it is coming from a 'good place' but why have we never said so to victims of robbery, assault, murder and other violent crimes?

Why???

At a point, we have to admit to ourselves that legally, RAPE IS TREATED DIFFERENT FROM OTHER CRIMES. 

The burden of proving it is too enormous. 

If a man says "she consented", ordinarily, per the rules of evidence, the person raising a defence should prove. And having raised the defence of consent, burden shifts on him to prove he obtained her consent prior. Mind you, he is not denying that the act took place, he is saying the act is consensual so burden should shift on him to prove his defence of having obtained consent. 

But we know in practice that is not the case, burden lies on her to prove not just her case but disprove his defence that it was not consensual. 

The Way Forward

Rape is never about the victims rections but the perpetuators action. Ijeill.never be caught dead splitting or apportioning the blame between victim and perpetuator. 

Rape is in one of the few non justifiable crime. You can murder to prevent a mutiny, in self defence, to protect property, but what excuse does someone have to respect another???

If there no exceptions or justifications for rape, why are we admitting to all manner of scandalous questions and systematically rev-victimising victims of Rape in the name of victim blaming and cross examinations?

We cannot fully unravel this without appreciating the biological workings of a woman's body. Only then can we shed off these myths attributed to women's bodies.

Feel free to like, comment share. Any topic you want us to talk about, kindly comment.

                            - Dogo Joy Njeb Esq.

DOGO JOY NJEB Esq is a practicing lawyer and founder of SheResonance Awareness. She has worked with Legal Aid Council Nigeria and is a member of Federation of Female lawyers on Nigeria where she renders pro bono services to indigent persons. She is a private practitioner, a writer and an aspiring author. For any questions, contact her on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, tiktok, x, or send a mail to sheresonance@gmail.com.

SheResonance is focused on grassroot activism. We lend our voices to women whose voices are stifled. We break down complex issues of GBV into easily digestible form from a legal perspective. At SheResonance we practices intersectional feminism. If one women is in chains, for her sake the fight should continue. Every story deserves to be heard! 

You can also visit my K-drama review page K-DRAMA UNFILTERED for the fun of it.