ABSTRACT
One important consideration with respect to sexual assault concerns the centrality of social power in the commission of the offense. According to Brownmiller (1975), Darke (1990), and other writers, sexual assault is essentially about power and control and not due to a need for sexual gratification. Brownmiller’s important book, Against our will, is a critique of patriarchy from a radical feminist perspective. Through an examination of the various ways, across both culture and time, that men have committed sexual assault, Brownmiller concludes that sexual assault is a means by which men oppress women. Sexual assault, whether an individual man attacking one woman or a conquering army employing rape systematically to denigrate thousands of women, is simply one means by which men attain and maintain social dominance. There certainly appears to be support for this position; for example, a sizeable minority, if not majority of men who assault women sexually are unable to achieve penile penetration and use other means (e.g., hands, gun barrels) to commit the offense. The issue, however, does not appear quite so clearcut, and questions need to be raised. If sex is really unimportant, why do so many assaults have a clear central sexual component? Would not a sexual component, however effective at adding humiliation and degradation to the assault, impede the use of force or more direct means of domination? Does not the sexual component leave the attacker at risk or more vulnerable than, say, a physical beating would? Unfortunately, very few recent researchers and writers have addressed directly the issues raised by Brownmiller and colleagues about the importance of social power, and this appears necessary.
