Attitudes to rape

[Baron Max]

Some rapists also need to humiliate or do certain things to their victims (eg. acts of violence, etc) to become aroused themselves before they do rape them.

Hmm, I think that would probably be "most", wouldn't it? ...if not "all"?

Baron Max

[James R]

francois:

Rape requires intent on the part of the perpetrator, as well as lack of consent of the victim. You can't rape somebody by accident, because you won't have the relevant intent.

What I am clumsily getting at is that it's not always clear when sex is consenting or not. Here's a better example. Drunk college chicks. Let's say a college chick gets smashed and ends up hitting on a guy whom she would normally never think twice about screwing. She's not thinking rationally, yet, in her drunken state, she is obviously willing (though sober, she might disagree--emphatically saying that he may have even raped her). You and I would probably agree that she is consenting, even though she was in an altered state.

This is a tricky situation. If she is so drunk she really doesn't know what she is doing, and a guy takes advantage of her, then this might amount to rape. But if she was only very drunk and was, as you say, "obviously willing", then that's not rape.

I have actually seen this sort of thing happen a lot, and I've never seen it result in a rape accusation. In these borderline cases, what usually happens is the girl wakes up the next day, kicking herself for sleeping with some guy and vowing never to get that drunk again. But she doesn't call the police. She blames herself.

As I say, though, it is a very fine line. If you're the guy, I'd say you'd better make damn sure the girl knows what she is doing when you decide to have sex with her - just in case.

But it's surprising how many people think it's not consenting. I remember a girlfriend a while back was complaining to me about how her friend got taken advantage of while she was drunk. My girlfriend (at the time) was visibly angry. I was doing my best not to seem indifferent. But I mean. She let it happen.

Why do you put all the responsibility on the girl, and none on the guy? That is a double-standard. If he took advantage of her, he is morally in the wrong, even if not legally, wouldn't you say?

Women shouldn't be "fair game" when they're drunk, although many men seem to think they are. This kind of situation really says more about the morals of the guy than it says about the girl, if you ask me.

Yes, it would be nice if guys wouldn't take advantage of drunk chicks, but that's simply not how things are, and you're stupid if you think it's not gonna happen. She may have not been aware of the inhibition-loosening effects of alcohol, but I guess it's just a learning experience, although I'm sure she had been told numerous times to be careful about those situations at college.

I agree. Girls should be careful. But guys shouldn't take unfair advantage, either.

I think it's ridiculous. What if the guy is drunk as well? If he is still expected to responsibly judge whether or not the girl is intoxicated enough to make a rational decision, then there is an imposed double standard. He's holding the male responsible, EVEN IF HE'S INTOXICATED, while alleviating responsiblity of the female if she is intoxicated.

He must also have the intent to have sex regardless of consent. If he can show that he honestly believed she was consenting, that may be a defence in a rape case.

Plus, while women may not be able to make rational decision when drunk (like men), she still made the rational decion to get drunk in the first place.

Deciding to get drunk is not the same as deciding to have sex.

If you decide to get so drunk you can't tell I'm stealing your wallet from your pocket, that doesn't mean I should get off scott free if I take advantage of your drunkeness to steal your wallet. You didn't consent to giving me your wallet. You only consented to getting drunk.

It's the female's (is it is with males)responsibility to get drunk in situations that will not result in bad things happening.

Why is the male absolved of all responsibility all of a sudden? Is it not the male's responsibility not to take advantage of drunken girls?

[Bells]

Houston & Texas News

Houston Rape Suspect Says Sex Was Consensual
Nov. 2, 2006

An illegal immigrant accused in at least two sexual attacks on women and suspected in five others denied the rapes and said the encounters involved consensual sex, his attorney said this morning.

Jose Fernando Rivera-Sanchez, 28, who identified himself as Leopoldo Sanchez to his court appointed lawyer, Gilberto Villarreal, is charged with two counts of aggravated sexual assault.

"He's denying he raped," Villarreal said. He said Rivera-Sanchez admitted to consensual sex in the cases, and asked Villarreal to hire investigators to look into the allegations and the backgrounds of the victims.

Police have said Rivera-Sanchez admitted he liked picking up prostitutes and smoking marijuana.

Prosecutor Sylvia Escobedo Newman said Houston police continue to investigate Rivera-Sanchez and said he may be implicated in five other assaults for a total of seven.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/4305826.html

Yes and? Just about all rapists will deny it JB.

Honestly, what's the point of this article you're linking?

[J.B]

Moreover, just because a man gets an erection doesn't mean he is necessarily enjoying the experience. In fact, many men who are raped feel a tremendous sense of guilt if at some stage they got an erection. The fact is: erections are a physical response of the body, and not completely under the control of a man. A man does not have to be enjoying a sexual act in order to get an erection.

How are you able to be so sure that this can happen?

[James R]

J.B:

You're a man, I assume.

Have you ever had an involuntary erection? No?

Well, then, I guess you're right and I'm wrong, based on your experience.

[Theoryofrelativity]

I am reposting this for the idiots that keep posting that I justify rape and support rapists. Apparantly they make it up as they go along.

PJ

promiscuous women do care if they are raped, it is no different. They have been violated, possibly dragged off the street by a stranger at knife point, forced to fulfill vile acts that they do not consent to. Why do you think they would not care? Promiscuous women select their sexual partners, there is an attraction, they consent and are prepared for the act, contraception, condom, etc. Rape is no less damaging to a promiscuous woman than not, hence the yrs of therapy and counselling that follow. This is not a myth PJ it is reality.

There is also no such thing as non violent rape, if the woman is not sexually
aroused, penetration hurts a lot, hence they can tell if a woman is raped generally by the 'damage' that occurs internally and the bruising etc. Doctors find smear testing very difficult on tense women for this very reason. If the woman is tense, the instrument which is not as wide as a cock hurts the female much. The Dr can't get it in. Fact not fiction PJ.

The act of sex requires relaxation in order to be comfortable, with a hysterical and frightened female fearing for her life (I think fearing for ones life is reason enough to care..don't you PJ?) the muscles of the viginal wall will be very tense, almost impenetrable, hence harm occurs when forced entry takes place.

I would rather be beaten PJ than raped. Thus violence towards me is preferable. Women do not deem rape lightly just because they enjoy consenting sex with multiple partners.

I understand this is hard for men to understand, afterall you have to be a woman to know what it feels like to be a woman. Men and women are not the same. I ask you though to consider rape for what it is, it is not SEX, it is a violent assault on the womans most intimate part of the body. The rest of the body may be unharmed but her vagina has been assaulted. Thus she CARES PJ.

She will also wonder if she was to blame somehow, be afraid to go outdoors for fear of recurrance, possibley becoming agrophobic. It will affect future sexual relations as the act of sex will remind her of the assault. She may never live a normal life again. Fact not fiction PJ. Women who are raped regardless of their sexual nature care. The proof is in the fact that not a single woman raped has ever said, they Do not care...ever.

PJ

Would you not find a strange and threatening man forcing his cock into your mouth and anus worse than a punch on the nose?

It is worse for many reasons PJ, one because of the associations with that area which we are indoctrinated with since birth. Also because unlike a punch on the nose, intercourse within a relationship is normal, thus this violent assault may disrupt the womans ongoing sexual life for reasons already stated. This will thus affect her relationship with her partner, have ramifications for any children they share (if the parents separate etc) so on and so forth.

Also the pain could be potentially worse than that of a beating.
As a man you cannot comprehend the pain sensors in that area as you do not possess them.

Regarding vile acts which you say promiscuous women undertake anyway. They are not VILE acts PJ if consentual, they are vile when not consentual and forced. Unless you consider blow jobs and intercourse vile acts when in the context of consenting sex?

However I see you are anti rape, what is becoming clear though in your posts is your deep loathing and lack of respect for promiscuous women. Life experience may be responsible for this attitude so I shall not pass judgement but I will say a promiscuous woman is no more loathesome than a promiscuous male afterall the promiscuous woman is having sex with someone is she not?

Damn good post, ToR.

Thankyou

meanwhile I have this to add

I have not read all this thread but I note clothing issues come up. Men desire women (straight ones) regardless of what they wear but

in this culture men think that women in sexy/scant clothing are deliberately dressed that way to invite male sexual attention. I am not going to go into detail about this misconception (though in some cases no doubt it is correct) but it is a misconception.

Now I do not critisise men for this misconception. The ways of women are indeed strange and complex in these matters.

But while women should be able to dress how they please, the reality is certain dress will attract certain attention, not because they LOOK more attractive BUT because they look more AVAILABLE. Sexually available.

This is the point I believe PJ was trying to make but got jumped on.

Personal example re me:


I was a virgin until I was 19yrs old and was in a very well established relationship before I gave it up, thus I was not a slag and not easy.

BUT this did not stop me from dressing (a short phase) like (I can now describe it this way as I am older and can SEE better) a hooker at age 17.

I could not understand that while my dowdy mate got asked on dates, I seemed to attract more 'lewd' offers (which I declined) I was naive, totally inexperienced with males and just did not know what I know now basically. I wanted to look attractive, I thought I did. I did, BUT I looked TOO sexually provocative and as such attracted (all be it unawares) the wrong type of attention.

Until men become aware (believe) that clothing/lack of (in a females mind) is not necc. intended to illicit a sexual response from men (unless in the bedroom or by hookers) women dressed with less will continue to attract a type of attention they may not desire.

Now I only dress sexily when out with my boyfriend and nice but conservative the rest of the time. If I have a night out with a female friend, I may dress more sexily but not so much that I look like I am deliberately inviting sexual attention. I am aware basically of the messages a man may misread from my outfit!

[COLOR="Red"]Rape of any female in any state of dress is inexcusable,[/COLOR] but it is a matter of responsibility that men and women are educated to understand each others thought processes in matters that may endanger them or lead them to false assumptions.

Generally debate involves debating someone with an opposing not shared view. But personal dislikes have a habit of resulting in talking shit about other posters regardless of their actual view point. You let your personal feelings allow you to read selectively, misquote, misrepresent and make personal insults and adhom all of which makes you no better than any other person responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

[Bells]

Deja vu!! I feel like I've read this before...

[J.B]

J.B:

You're a man, I assume.

Have you ever had an involuntary erection? No?

Well, then, I guess you're right and I'm wrong, based on your experience.

A involuntary erection is no big deal.

I'm talking about this statement of yours, how do you know this?

Many men who are raped feel a tremendous sense of guilt if at some stage they got an erection.

[Tiassa]

For J.B.

I'm curious: are you playing some sort of role in your question to James R about shame, or do you really not know?

- Myth: Getting an erection or ejaculation during sexual assault means "you really wanted it" or you consented.

Fact: Getting an erection shows nothing other than your body responds the way it is suppose to. It has nothing to do with desire. If you were penetrated, the pressure from the prostate gland would cause an erection. Ejaculation is also very normal and some rapist will go out of their way to make sure you ejaculate, to try and make you feel ashamed, (adds to their dominate feeling of power) and they know it will likely reduce your chances of reporting the crime. (Univ. of Wisconsin)

- Experts believe that current male rape statistics vastly under-represent the actual number of men who are raped each year both because crime statistics often do not actually include men as potential victims of rape and because men are less likely to report rape. Research suggests that the rates of under-reporting among men are even higher than those of women.

While male rape occurs, it's often not considered an acceptable topic for discussion because of the commonly held beliefs that men are "too big," "too strong," or "too much into sex" to be sexually assaulted. The adverse effects of commonly held gender stereotypes of males contribute to the stigma, shame, and embarrassment a male survivor goes through as they begin to cope with what has happened to them. ("Go Ask Alice", Columbia Univ.)

- Men, young men and boys suffer rape-related trauma by rape and sexual assault just as female victims do. In addition, due to male socialization to consider all male-male sexual contact to be shameful, to 'be tough and take it like a man' and to eschew victimhood in all its forms, many males who were survivors of male rape choose to suffer in silence rather than risk reporting the crime. These victims consider the shame of disclosure and their likely shunning by other males, as worse than the crime itself; a form of double-bind shame similar to the double-bind blame that male-female rape victims often face ....

.... When a male is raped (by a male or female) the involuntary physiological response of erection or orgasm cannot be taken to imply that the act was welcomed by the victim. A capable assailant, male or female, can induce these involuntary physical responses in the majority of males with force and/or with deception. Likewise, in incest or incestuous male-male rape, 'voluntary' initiation, 'voluntary' participation, and involuntary enjoyment by the victim, do not imply that the sexual assault is consensual, less loathsome, or less traumatic to the victim. Many people mistake these involuntary physiological effects, falsely, as indications of consent, when in fact the male rape victims have no more control over his involuntary physiological responses than do female rape victims. (Wikipedia)

I admit, sometimes I forget that there are people out there who don't get it, aren't paying attention to this particular subject, or have somehow, otherwise missed it.

How do we know that many men who are raped feel a tremendous sense of guilt if they got an erection? It's in the literature, and if you've ever known a male rape survivor, you would know that the literature cannot prepare you for the reality of how that friend feels.

[J.B]

Thanks Tiassa,
This is a subject I did not know about at all.

[Tiassa]

I'm happy, J.B., that for once I could be of some help.

[aliciat]

James R, thank you for exposing and confronting the culture we live in that condones and excuses rape.

[James R]

Welcome to sciforums, aliciat, and thankyou.

[Beryl]

I'd say the she never said no one because in some cases it could truly mean he didn't realize what he was doing was rape. However if she never quite said no but it was pretty obvious anyhow, then it doesn't matter.

[darksidZz]

I never even saw this poll until now, and it's creepy cuz it's one I would make

[darksidZz]

I think all these 3 in combination

Woman had many past sexual partners + Woman was drunk at the time (i.e. got herself drunk) + Woman at no time clearly said "No" to sex.

would mean he didn't rape her, if 2 of them exist in the given situation maybe he is not guilty then either, it's hard to say for certain.

[EmptyForceOfChi]

i thought this thread was yours darksiddz i saw the poll, then i scrolled down to see that james was the author, and i knew it was going to be an actual debate with facts and shit like that so i didnt post a response apart from this one now that adds no insight to anything,


i did click all of the poll answers though, except for the last one,

peace.

[James R]

I suggest you both read the entire thread. You might learn something.

[EmptyForceOfChi]

thats 16 pages about rape. not to sound arrogant or ignorant but i know why rape happens its because we are animals with urges. there are many seperate cases with seperate minor details, but it all boils down to natural desires if we scrape away the psychobabble and modern ethics and morals debate.


you only have to watch a nature documentary on animal mating behaviour to figure this out, or watch how your cats and dogs behave at home when it comes to sex,


peace.

[redarmy11]

Well.. that's debatable. The fact that we're all 'animals with urges' doesn't explain why some people rape and others don't, does it.

So there's clearly more to it, isn't there.

But in any case the thread's not about 'why rape happens'. It's about attitudes to rape. So a better contribution would be to explain how and why, in your opinion, style of dress, or amount of drink consumed, or marital status constitute mitigating circumstances in an assault.

Or you could leave it at saying that you checked all of the options except the last one, and leave us all to wonder about your reasons for doing so.

Peace.