Bells, please try to read carefully and respond to what people actually write. Someone says "usually" or "often" and you respond to them as if they said "always." Someone says "rarely" and you respond as if they said "absolutely never."
I don't know really. I would have said it was my clothes, but my female friends who don't dress like me complain of the same problem. Trust me, I'm not pretty, unless you have odd tastes.
No, I do not work at a newspaper. My previous employ was as a prosecutor and I dealt primarily with sexual abuse of men, women and children. I now work in a government department and get to hear of horror stories of what people do to their children and their parents on a daily basis. I find your responses in this thread to be nauseating to be honest. No. You highlighted something quite important. You are claiming that "self respecting people" "rarely" get raped, implying that most people who are raped are therefore not really "self respecting" people, since it is only the "self respecting" people who are "rarely raped". You provided examples? Really? Ah yes, you provided Saudi Arabia as a prime example of how to prevent rape. Yes, pregnant women do get raped, as do elderly people, children, men. I guess for you a pregnant woman is somehow self respecting and therefore her rape can be wholly blamed on her rapist. What about the non-pregnant woman who is dressed in a skimpy outfit? Did she take that "itsy bitsy tiny" step into provoking her rapist? You have said yourself and quoted again: As if saying it the first time wasn't bad enough, you decided to repeat it again. Most of them take that step eh? You have said that it is rare for a woman to be raped if she hasn't somehow taken that "itsy bitsy tiny step towards her raper first". Now tell me, how is that not somehow blaming the victim? And then, to top off your beliefs, you then go on to say that "most of them take that step (which isn't always so itsy)". And you accuse me of taking your words out of context? I did not quote you out of context. I quoted you exactly as you posted. If you feel it was out of context, I would suggest you revise what you have said in this thread because it would seem that you simply do not understand your own words. Let me get this straight. You attribute blame to rape victims and then you believe that you actually 'owned' me in this thread? If you are going to use the correct gaming lingo, it should actually be 'pwn', but hey, I get that you simply do not get it. Ridiculed you? No. I haven't ridiculed you. Ridicule would imply that I was merely making fun of you. I am actually appalled that in this day and age that cavemen like you can still roam the earth. I shouldn't be surprised though since I have spent the better part of my professional life dealing with individuals such as yourself.
alright, i decided to discontinue my posting on this thread for many reasons, one of which is that we're a bit off topic.. apologies to VI for derailing it as it is, and to bells too for being rude (although i'm sure she'll use this to jump at me some morePlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!..)
The purpose of intercourse; it's USE, is procreation. If one is not aiming for conception then it it AB-USE, just as there is normal or ab-normal.
Men are much less picky than women. If you are of childbearing age, apparently healthy with no obvious deformities, not grossly overweight, and practice good hygene: many (if not most) men will find you to be "hot". Furthermore, haven't you made mention of being "well endowed" in the past? That's certain to attact some attention. In humans the "purpose" of intercouse goes well beyond procreation. Otherwise, why do human females have hidden ovulation? Why don't they go into "heat" so that we could be sure to mate at the correct time? Why is the human female theoretically recepttive to sex at any time? Sex is used by human females to help keep men around to help with the children because human children are so helpless for so long and impose too much of a burden upon a single parent.
rape is completely natural and taught to little boys and girls by their parents and society to be the natural way of a male getting sex. the only reason people object to rape is because they end up getting raped by someone they don't want to rape them in spite of all the years of teaching their children that men must rape women to get sex and to be a real man. out of the hundreds of people i have mentioned this reality to only 1 person has understood it for what it is. that does not surprise me because a vast majority of people are quite ignorant when it comes to psychology and how they teach their children and the consequential society it builds around them. anywho... conservative society raises boys to be rapists and girls to be the victims. soo... keep up the good work folks because your fulfilling your own prophecies taught to you by your churches.
Well, every day or two I get horny and either have sex (if my wife is in the mood) or masturbate. Not sure how "power" plays into that.
Fair enough, but it still sounds unsound to me. Maybe I just suck at reading behaviour, but it frequently seems to be about power to me. Why persist in bothering someone who clearly doesn't like being touched, when you can go after one of the other 50 or so females in the room who might be more willing? By the way, if it's about sex, why do guys who are like 5'0 and skinny harass women bigger than them? I find that it's nearly always the weeds who seem to have something to prove that behave like that. Not all, but a goodly proportion of them. Do they seriously think they're capable of overpowering someone a head taller than they are? Surely it's more about asserting themselves (in a dysfunctional way)? On another note: do you actually know that this is why females have sex, or is it just a theory of yours? Most women like sex for its own sake or for emotional reasons, not just when they have children. Ok, I've made my point, I'll shut up now as I'm derailing a bit.
Oi, the Napoleon complex. I think we need to watch our mouths here though. I think a lot of short people post on this site. They're probably fat with tiny penises, too.
My guess would be that they are overcompensating for the fact that they're little runts who women are usually not interested in. The constant rejection causes them to hate women and put on a macho asshole front. It's just a theory, but it does make a lot of sense. Humans are very unusual in that ovulation is almost impossible to detect and that females are receptive to sex at any point in their cycle. In most other species, the female is completely unreceptive to sex except when ovulating. Since there is an obvious advantage to being able to detect ovulation (one can be more sure that mating produces offspring), hidden ovulation must serve some purpose. The fact that human infants are almost completely helpless means that females would have great difficulty raising them alone. So they hide ovulation to give the males a reason to hang around and help out. Or, to put it another way, hidden ovulation promotes pair bonding. You might say that hidden ovulation is responsible for the nuclear family being the basis of human society.
well rape is a sex crime and that is what it should stay. do criminals have psychological problems?....uh, yah.
Alternatively, males want to ensure their offspring survive.. the survival of the bloodline, so to speak. You have children madant. Do you want to protect them and help raise them? I think the simple fact that you have stuck around and are helping raise them and ensure they get the best in life as well as your protection speaks volumes. Or do you hang around because your wife may be hiding her ovulation and you're just in it for the sex? You are discounting the simple fact that males, like females, love their children and will, in most circumstances, stay to do all that they can to ensure their children's survival.
You're speaking of humans as they are, the product of generations of living in nuclear families in which the father and mother each helped raise the children. Of course modern men love their children. But I'm speaking of the mechanism that might have lead to the development of hidden ovulation among our ancestors. A characteristic that is somewhat unique and that suggests that sex is not meant to be solely for procreation among humans but also to help cement the pair bond necesary to raise our children and give them the best chance to succeed.
Yes, but through violence and domination, which is a power issue. If it was strictly sexual gratification then any sane person who couldn't get laid could easily buy sex or use the do-it-yourself method. There are plenty of ways to find sexual release without rape. That's obvious. So why rape? It's not about the sex itself nor about sexual release, but the act of committing rape that allows release. I'm sure rape is both sexual release and power...the argument is circular and has been around for ages... IMO, though, I would have to say that MOST rape is about power. It's the act of rape that brings pleasure. Many people who rape cannot achieve release through consensual sex and therefore rape in order to fufill that need.
Why not? In the end, the rapist is not getting what they want so they take it by force. Many rapists feel humiliated and powerless when denied sex (possibly by an attractive woman they like, to use your date-rape example). I don't see why a rapist of elderly women vs. young attractive women wouldn't have the same motivations or agenda. It's a cruel, selfish, degrading act no matter who, what, when, or where. And, just to look at the other side, what if the person who rapes elderly women is simply attracted to them? Why can't the rape of an elderly woman be about sexual gratification? Because she is older? "Unattractive"?? Says who? This I agree with. I think it is about both, but I do think that the need for control, violence, and power dominates, otherwise most sexually frustrated people would find a consensual source of release instead of turning to rape.
I think you might find that sexual intercourse ensures pair bonding and an investment by both sexes in the raising of their young. As human babies are so helpless (which came first the sex or the helplessness...?) if the male wants his genes to go forth and multiply it is in his interest to help raise his own young.... For those males who literally don't give a fuck I give you the example of tigers, leopards, cheetah, jaguar et al the females of whom who have a fine old isolated time raising their young alone. Pack social, pair bonding (at least until the children are 7 ish).... I give you humans! Rape = procreation/procreation = power (in both genetic and psychological senses).
Don't ask me, Bells was the one who seemed to be making that argument. I was simply pointing out that even if you buy into the idea that a rapist isn't sexually attracted to an old victim and must therefor be doing it for power/domination/whatever rather than sex, there are plenty of people who only seem to rape young and attractive people - so it's silly to look at one specific class of minority victim and try to use it to support a sweeping generalization about all rapists. Well, most sexually frustrated people do find a consensual partner rather than turning to rape. There are a lot of sexually frustrated people out there, and the vast majority of them aren't rapists. Just like there are lots of people who wish they had more money, but the vast majority of them aren't bank robbers.
That's what I have been trying to say. If it was about sex first and not really about power or similar psychological issues, they'd find easier and less harmful ways to sate their sex drive, and ones that don't carry the risk of going to jail. Why rape to soothe an overactive sex drive, when you can go and masturbate?
