By: Elisabeth Krimmer, Published: 2013
As class we explored how Elisabeth Krimmer brings light to the traumatic period during WWII when wartime rape was relevant although silenced; she discusses the shame associated to German women being raped, how rape was considered consentual by some during war , and describes how women remain silent after these sexual assualts, and also the political stand point of rape on just too fight, which is not true. When it comes to fighting they are fighting for a purpose.
Several hundred thousand German women and girls were forced into sexual acts that haunted them for the rest of their lives; some women would exclusively have a sexual relationship with one soldier in exchange for protection. “Many women did not survive the ordeal. Some succumed to injuries inccurred during the rape; some were killed after the rape; many committed suicide” (Krimmer 83). There is a particular absence of rape within German narrative caused by the shame associated with being raped. Although rape is a topic in many narratives, the way it is written envokes the author’s situation rather than presenting and describing an author’s personal experiences; this is done in order to minimize the victimization of German women and to favor liberation of the country. The second section begins by looking for the reasons rape was used so much in the war. It is said that hateful propaganda encouraged soldiers to violently act on women this way. The essay goes on to say that some soldiers believe there were no rapes to happen during the war. They claim the women consented to the intercourse. The essay also suggest that the definition of prostitution and consentual sex was blurred during the war. There are many personal accounts of sexual violence from many points of views mentioned in the section. It is obvious that people perceive rape differently and will do anything to justify their actions. Many rape victims from the WWII era are silenced by their ordeal and this silence occurs in many ways. Most women who experience rape and decide to talk about it leave out the actual act. This can be seen in “A Woman in Berlin '' as she describes before and after she is raped in her journal but doesn’t explicitly write about the encounter. In interviews after the war women use euphemisms such as “take” or “fetch” to describe their experience with rape. Verbalization of rape does not help the healing process and may even inhibit it. Much of written history does not include the rape of these women which silences the fact that it did happen. Rape is one of the most frightening things that can hapen to a person but outsiders looking in who read these memiors cannot grasp the horrendousness that these women have gone through . To conclude the article, Ingo Munch is the main focus of literature and talks about the political side of rape in different countries going through war. In the beginning of this section she states a thought about rape; “Rape is not only a crime but also a powerful trope that lends itself to political appropriation”(95). She mentions the majority of the time Germany and what the Nazi’s were doing to women, but also she talks about how other places within the world that had war going on that were doing this wrongful action towards women. She states, “Rape and warfare frequently go hand in hand” (96). She starts to let the readers see that basically rape is following the war because of the men in the society and the circumstances in that community. As she continues to argue about different policies that were going on in this time period - she explains to the audience a better understanding on how these soldiers and how society looks at women and their bodies. At the end of this section she gives the audience a clear understanding on how the truth is and always will be a memory, and they shape the person and their thoughts the rest of their life.
As a reader, it is important to differentiate the feelings of discomfort with the feelings of wanting justice for the women being violated in these narratives. “If we as readers fail to do justice to the dual challenge of these texts, that is, if we fail to acknowledge the suffering of the victims or the political complexitites and moral quandaries inherent in these stories - we are likely to reactivate the trauma of rape or to replicate the silence that obstructs the representation of rape in the first place” (Krimmer 85). Elisabeth Krimmer describes wartime rape not being seen as rape. In Gelfand’s personal account he is portrayed as a ladies man. It states that he does not have to so much pursue women because women pursue him. There is one point where he invites a woman into his room and she complies at first, but ultimately wants to leave. It is explained as “In, an encounter that appears consensual in the beginning becomes coercive as Gelfand refuses to let her go” (88). Gelfand offers her food which she accepts, but he also continues to rape her. Yet, to him it’s not rape. Gelfand fails to understand his actions by manipulating them to favor himself. Some things are not meant to be perceived any other way than exactly how it happened. Rape is rape. Gelfand’s manipulating tactics are still used today by men to make women feel inferior. Elisabeth Krimmer thoroughly describes how victims of sexual assault struggle to directly speak up about their ordeals and how readers of journals or interviewers cannot truly understand their experience through looking at specific interviews and writings of rape victims during this time. Many women are fearful about speaking out about rape as it is very difficult to discuss and can be psychologically harmful to think about this horrible act. Krimmer shows this when she describes how the author of “ A Woman in Berlin” does not explicitly describe her rape when journaling. She describes the events leading up to it and how she feels about it afterwards. Krimmer suspects this is because it is damaging for the writer to specifically explain the encounter as this makes her face the fact that she was raped. Krimmer also discusses how women who were interviewed used euphemisms in order to explain what had happened to them such as describing their rape as being “taken” or “fetched”. In this way they are able to discuss what has happened to them without having to face it themselves.This helps them cope with it, but may also hinder readers and viewers of their accounts as they are not able to fully grasp what has happened to them and may assume that it wasn’t as serious as it actually is. Rape should be recongnized by all as a tramuatizing experience and all victims should be given the support they need in order to get past it. Looking further into this writing, I would like to point out different things in the writing that may catch the reader’s eyes. Krimmer states her attitude and opinion on the women that are getting this terrible action done to them. “Of course the number of victims is crucially important, but so is the suffering of every individual woman” (96) Yes, the number of victims is important, but one has to have this happen to them for the suffering to apply to them. Not that this statement is true, because it is true that the women are important but you have to have the woman have the suffering from this to seek help. If the women who have this action happened to them, and do not seek help or tell people that this terrible action happened to them - then no one will ever know that this is how they feel and this is the suffering going on in their head.
Comments