Feminine Defense Or A Worship of Masculinity?

I have conflicting views in regards to Cahill's article about self-defense. In theoretical terms I understand her argument and see how her desire to reverse the coding of feminine bodies as being passive and rapeable and masculine bodies as being active and aggressive. On a certain level her arguments do make sense to me, and I agree that rape culture has, "shaped the ways in which typically feminine bodies move and act" (366). However, I see a few problems with the ways in which she proposes to liberate these bodies, and one is embedded in her wording. Cahill refers to bodies that are, "typically feminine," and I wonder if feminine bodies who break these, "feminine" norms become coded as masculine. For example, when we see women portrayed in the media who are violent or aggressive do they lose their femininity? I think that this is a complicated question because I want to say no, but I think that this is often the case when you look at violent women. Furthermore, these violent women are seen as powerful as our culture values masculinity and rewards women who act like men.

Also, if I extend this analysis to male victims of sexual assault it becomes even more complicated. If we live in a world where female self-defense codes their bodies as less rapeable, then what does this mean for men who are raped? Does the fact that they are raped make them perceived as feminine? Self-defense classes are still rewarding dominant and aggressive behaviour, which doesn't really seem to be going to the root of the problem to me. I feel as though part of the issue is that we have the idea of femininity associated with being penetrable and passive, and that these behaviours can not be embodied by men without making them feminine. Furthermore, we think that these behaviours display weakness, when perhaps it is aggression and the lack of empathy shown by perpetrators that should be seen as weak or undesirable traits.

I admit that I do idolize women who seem strong and are able to defend themselves in many ways. However, as someone who is strongly against physical violence I am inclined to argue that fighting violence with more violence is never the answer. Despite Cahill's arguments, I am still unable to understand how self-defense fully complicates rape culture, as I still don't think that it is the survivor's job to protect themselves. In other words, you wouldn't need to walk around wearing a bullet proof vest if there were no guns, and I would rather control the use of guns than distribute bullet proof vests. In my opinion, Cahill's ideas are interesting but they don't offer any radical changes that rape culture needs.