For Dr. Laura Schlessinger, the world is simple notwithstanding all of its complexity. And this proved to be strikingly and majestically so in Dr. Laura’s response to a recent caller. A white woman by the name of Tracy called and expressed concern over the fact that she was experiencing racist sentiments towards blacks in general on account of the fact that she had been recently raped by a black man. For many this would have been a horrendous moral quandary owing to two competing ideologies: the ideology of feminism and the ideology of black suffering owing to racism.
Not so for Dr. Laura, however. She offered a brilliant analysis of the situation; and that analysis would not have been possible but for the fact that Dr. Laura places values above race and ideology.
Now, let me say at the outset that, Dr. Laura unequivocally holds that rape is wrong. But she also thinks that the term “rape” has become something of a term of art, in that women have claimed to have been raped when the coercion or threat that is characteristic of rape is strikingly absent.
What is equally true of Dr. Laura is that she is unequivocally opposed to racism. The question for her is always whether a person is morally decent or not, as opposed to whether the individual is black or not. And she applies this line of reasoning even to her the relationship of her own son: Better that he should interact with a black of enormous moral character, be it for marriage or friendship, than with a white who is a moral scoundrel.
Now, back to Tracy’s call. Tracy had gotten drunk and had asked this black guy to drive her home and then she invited the guy into her apartment. While they were sitting on the couch watching television, she was so drunk that she was going in and out of consciousness. When she woke up her skirt had been pulled up and her “panties were all twisted and everything”.
Dr. Laura’s most poignant observation here is that regardless of skin color this is a notoriously ambiguous situation for the typical guy. It is a simple reality that (straight) guys think about having sex with women; and when a woman invites a man into her apartment one of the thoughts that will invariably cross his mind, regardless of his skin color, is whether or not the occasion will be an opportunity for sex.
What we must remember is that in the typical case people engage in sex without there being an explicit statement on the part of each individual that this is what they are now going to do:
Woman: Listen, Joe Stud, I shall now proceed to engage you sexually
Man: Thank you, Hot Susie, I like that I idea and will respond in kind
Normally, sex is the result of a series of non-verbal physical interactions. For the prevailing view is that sex at its best is the expression of mutual compassion—and not a formalized agreement. Every male on this planet grasps that the right touch from a woman signals the opportunity for a sexual encounter. And every woman knows this.
Now, Dr. Laura does not think for a moment that the male, who happens to black, is entirely free of any moral blame. Rather, her question, and this gets to the heart of the matter, is whether or not Tracy also shoulders some moral blame for what in fact transpired.
After all, by Tracy’s in own account, the man did not lay a hand upon her in driving her home. Then, there is the fact that it was she who invited him into her apartment. That is, he did not insist upon going into her apartment with her. Nor does Tracy claim to have fought him off or to have asked him to stop. What she claims is that she woke up only to discover that he had had sex with her. I shall return to this point below.
There is the further fact that Tracy has a boyfriend. So what the hell was she doing inviting this man in her apartment when they would be together alone. This was inappropriate behavior on her part, whether the guy in question is black or white; short or tall; handsome or ugly.
Without a doubt, the man should have refused the invitation out of respect for the relationship that Tracy claimed that she is in. Just so, it is no less true that Tracy should never have invited the man into her apartment in the first place. This point alone gets us to Dr. Laura’s observation that Tracy might share some of the moral responsibility for what happened.
After all, if we are to give Tracy credit for choosing the right man to drive her home without laying a hand upon her, then we are faced with the reality that she could not have been oblivious to the significance of inviting him into her apartment, given she is in a serious relationship with her boyfriend. We cannot have it both ways.
In a world where intoxication is the backdrop against which so much sex takes place, the issue of moral responsibility is a most treacherous one. It is this truth that is at the heart of Dr. Laura’s observation that Tracy bears some responsibility for what happened to her. We cannot have it both ways: We cannot insist that women are entitled to get drunk in order that they may have sex without inhibitions, and then insist that whatever transpires is entirely the man’s fault if it turns out that the woman looks back with regret upon what happened.
Moreover, what must be added to the above consideration is that being intoxicated invariably seems to serve as an excuse, nowadays on the part of both women and men, for not remembering this or that or the other. As I noted above, Tracy does not claim to have fought the man off or to have asked him to stop. Rather, her claim is that she woke up only to discover that her skirt had been pulled up and that her panties were in disarray. The point here is that she claims not even to remember the sex at all. That is a very strong claim given that we are only talking about being intoxicated and not being a victim of a date-rape drug such as Rohypnol.
At any rate, Dr. Laura’s brilliant analysis is that Tracy’s so-called feelings of racism towards blacks in general, owing to this untoward experience with a black male friend, reflect none other than the fact that Tracy does not want to accept any moral responsibility for her irresponsible behavior towards both herself and her relationship with her boyfriend. It is not that the black male in question bears no culpability at all, as no doubt some would insist. Rather, it is that both are culpable, but in different ways. In both cases, it is about personal moral responsibility and not ideology.
From the standpoint of moral responsibility, the following is true: Some invitations should not be extended. And even if they are extended, they should not be accepted.
