This post at sociological images points to a pretty fucked up trend in the news media of pundits using terms of sexual violence to describe politics that they disagree with: http://contexts.org/socimages/2009/12/18/politics-and-the-rape-metaphor/

I warn you that the posted clip may be triggering, but you don't need to watch it to participate in the conversation.

I'm going to copy and paste their discussion prompt, because I think it's useful:

"Why it this such a popular way of talking about the world?

How does it work? Does the metaphor, given that we think of rape as a crime that men do to women, feminize and masculinize? Or is it about a gendering of the very notion of violation and vulnerability? So are these pundits trying to transfer listener’s beliefs about protecting women and girls to other categories (e.g., the rich and the people of New York)?

Does using it as a metaphor give more power to, or trivialize and make invisible, actual rape?

Is there not some irony in how frequently we use it to describe something horribly violating, given the high rates of rape in the U.S., the frequency of non-reporting, our dismal treatment of victims, and the wildly low incidence of trials and convictions?"

I would also direct your attention to the first commenter, who says, "Oh it certainly trivializes rape. Especially when you have someone complaining about the news coverage of a individual who has actually been violated so they can hear more about their ridiculous metaphor.

For these individuals, it is all about the power of the white male. A black male usurping (in their opinion) the highest position of power in America is emasculating to them, so they simply call on the most emasculating image they can think of. Which to them is rape, because hey, “Real Men” don’t get raped. That’s something that happens to the feeble female gender."

I think this poster was right to point to an intersection of misogyny, violence, and racism in the way that the term is being used.

What do you all think?