King Kong Theory

King Kong Theory

King Kong Theory is the English adaptation of Virginie Despentes’ King Kong Théorie, published in her native France in 2006. Despentes presents the book as a spirited account of her own views on gender/feminism. She makes a fresh and honest analysis of what women (and men) struggle within their destructive gender roles. She uses research combined with her own gritty experiences to prove her points: silence rots and speaking heals, men exist and women are the negative to the male positive, and what we (both men and women) really feel and need have been smothered by the society that doesn't let us open up.

In this book, Despentes seems to claim that she does not believe in femininity, it is a term that historically has stigmatized women, relegating its social function to a woman's unconditional submission to male power and human rights. But she also seems not to believe either in masculinity. For her, the great problem of our times is this absurd effort to assign a role for both men and women, so all we do is alienate the true personality of the individual, preventing it from being truly free. Herein lies the argument of the King Kong theory.

The title alone alludes to the objectification of woman in the King Kong film. The beauty of King Kong is attracted to the gorilla, but not in a sexual way, because King Kong has no genitals. It is a pure friendship. However, men can not stand that women do not depend on them, so they destroys the gorilla. After doing so, they blame the woman for what happened. And finally, she returns to the male arms. Apparently, Despentes believes that this is what happens to women in our society, without being arosen at any time, the possibility of a truly independent woman, who does not need to depend on the gorilla and the men. However, the main purpose of Despentes to write this book is to face the tabus of liberal feminism: rape, prostitution, and pornography.

The book offers us a completely different view on rape. A vision that comes from first hand, as Despentes was raped when she was young. According to the author, people need to stop blaming the women who have been raped and who manage to overcome this humiliation. The violation must not become a scar for women. She writes of the damage it did to her but also of her refusal to let it define her subsequent existence .

Rape, especially in the underclass is probably a mayor problem of a lot more common than any person likes to admit. It probably cannot be policed without threatening the very basis of liberal commitment to standards of proof. One solution is that women scuttle back into their holes - Despentes rejects that and so should all of us: " ... as soon as you name your rape as a rape, the women-controlling mechanisms sudenly swing into action: do you want everyone to know what happened to you? Do you want everyone to see you as a woman who has been subject to that?"

So another solution is that violated women remove the shame surrounding rape (the vicious 'she-had-it-coming' argument of ancient crusty judges in the past) and start talking about it. Her robust determination is that the subject be faced head-on and be used as a tool for strengthening the rights of woman to demand freedom.

This approach might be equally applied to those abused as children or abused in any way, male or female. Victims need to be allowed not only to speak of their experiences but to do so so that 'good' men start to act against the rapists in their midst. At a certain point, a balance will set in - a man will say, "I am not a rapist, so stop preaching at me but I know it is wrong and I will collaborate in stamping it out through my male networks'.

How many group rapes would have been stopped if just one in a group stood up and said that it was wrong or if a single rapist was faced by the prospect of long

...