Is rape worse than murder?

[Agent Foxtrot]

In this (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=508148) thread in the Pit, a man serving time for raping a teenage girl is out of prison on pass, sees the mother of the daughter in the street, and taunts her. The mother responds by dousing him in combustibles and setting fire to him, killing the man.

There are some in the thread whose response was, "Good for her!" Poetic justice notwithstanding, the man raped her daughter, but she murdered the man.

I've also noticed on these boards that rape is much more vilified than murder. Why? If a woman is raped, she indeed suffers mental and physical trauma, but is able to live on.* If someone is killed, he/she is dead, period.

Thoughts?


*ETA, not an official cite, but I know a few women who have been raped and have managed to live fulfilling lives afterward -- mentally, physically, and sexually.

[gigi]

Is there a fate worse than death? I think so, but that's me personally and it would be impossible to legislate personal opinions of what crime is worse.

[Cuckoorex]

I am not sure how anyone can argue against this; even if the rape victim has a long, difficult road to recovery, she (or he, males can be raped) at least isn't dead. I've known two women who were rape victims, neither of which seemed to fear for their lives during their ordeal. They dealt with their experience in different ways, and while they may or may not have issues with sexuality, they're not dead. So to me, that counts for a lot. Being dead almost always beats out being traumatized, to me, as far as "bad situations" go. I'm sure there are examples of people who would rather have died than lived through their ordeal, though.

[Giles]

If it really were worse than death, then people being raped would resist to the point of death.

[Uosdwis R. Dewoh]

You can survive rape and lead on to live a perfectly normal life. The term "murder" heavily implies non survivability.

[Cuckoorex]

The term "murder" heavily implies non survivability.

Cite?

Just kidding. I just got a chuckle out of that.:D

[mswas]

Yeah, murder is worse.

[SenorBeef]

The question you're posing isn't if rape is worse than murder, - obviously it's not - but if the rape of an innocent, random person is worse than the murder of a rapist.

In this case - the guy's a rapist who taunted the mother of his rape victim. He's clearly unrepentant scum to the gravest extreme. Ignoring the greater vigilantism issues, society benefits from his death. So in this case you're comparing a random rape - always bad - to the murder of someone who's better off dead - not even bad. There's no reason to infer a greater "murder vs rape" implication from it.

[mswas]

SenorBeef Good point.

[Mosier]

Agree with Senorbeef. Not all murders are equal.

[Kalhoun]

I agree that all murders are not equal, but all murders are worse than all "plain" rapes.

[E-Sabbath]

I'm going to Chris Rock on this. "I don't agree... but I understand."

[Freudian Slit]

I remember one of the posters saying something like, "This guy had 69 years of life, the girl had 13 before her life was ruined." That attitude disturbs me--obviously, being raped can screw with your head, at any age, but to say that someone's life is basically ruined or over because they were raped just seems like you're giving the victim some kind of stigma. I also remember a lot of posters here saying that the most harmful thing wasn't necessarily being raped for them, but people telling them how ruined or damaged they must feel.

[Tastes of Chocolate]

While I agree that SenorBeef has a good point, every time I hear something that smacks of better off dead then raped, I wonder if there is still a sense that a woman's virginity/chastity is the most important thing about her.

[Kalhoun]

While I agree that SenorBeef has a good point, every time I hear something that smacks of better off dead then raped, I wonder if there is still a sense that a woman's virginity/chastity is the most important thing about her.

Exactly. Rape is survivable, both physically and emotionally. It's not the "death" of the victim.

[mswas]

I remember one of the posters saying something like, "This guy had 69 years of life, the girl had 13 before her life was ruined." That attitude disturbs me--obviously, being raped can screw with your head, at any age, but to say that someone's life is basically ruined or over because they were raped just seems like you're giving the victim some kind of stigma. I also remember a lot of posters here saying that the most harmful thing wasn't necessarily being raped for them, but people telling them how ruined or damaged they must feel.

Yes, it's almost like society WANTS you to feel like it's the defining event of your life.

[jsgoddess]

I think we can all think of times when killing someone is justified.

I don't think we can all think of times when raping someone is justified.

In fact, I don't accept that there are such times.

So, while rape for the victim isn't worse than murder, I think rape reveals more about a rapist than murder does about a murderer.

[Lobohan]

Can we all agree that cutting someone's arms off is worse than rape?
Is murder is worse than cutting someone's arms off?
Tah Dah!
Murder > Arm Lopping > Rape





Like it was said though, it depends on circumstances. We don't know anything about what happened in this situation. We don't even know if the guy was actually guilty.

I don't think we can all think of times when raping someone is justified.Did Hitler deserve to be raped? Did Elizabeth Bathory?

[jsgoddess]

Did Hitler deserve to be raped? Did Elizabeth Bathory?

No. Rape is sexual gratification through inflicting harm or trauma on someone. There is no justification.

Especially if you argue that the victim is really really horrible. Well then, what does a rape accomplish? If Hitler had been raped, would he have stopped killing people? Not likely. The only one who benefits from a rape is a rapist.

[Skald the Rhymer]

Rape worse than murder?

Generally, no, but it depends on context.

I can imagine knowing that someone had committed a murder and still being willing to be friends with that person. I cannot imagine knowing that someone had committed a rape (by violence, threat of violence, extortion, or drug) and wanting even to be in the same room with the person.

[begbert2]

Can we all agree that cutting someone's arms off is worse than rape?
Is murder is worse than cutting someone's arms off?
Tah Dah!
Murder > Arm Lopping > RapeActually, I can't agree with either of those premises as a universal, without knowing the criteria you are using for "worse".

For example, if you murder somebody by shooting them through the head without them being aware it's happening, I doubt they mind at all. Society and their relatives will mind, though.

And with arm-cutting and rape, well, how much the suffer depends on how long you let them live after...though again, society and their relatives are going to probably want to have words with you either way.


This whole discussion really seems like an apples and oranges thing to me - though the detail that the dude being murdered was a clearly unrepentant rapist does seem to push the 'worseness' of his murder down enough that it's probably somewhat fairly safe to say that it's better than the rape. Though the lady should still go to jail.

[Skald the Rhymer]

If it really were worse than death, then people being raped would resist to the point of death.

Not necessarily true. A person can be overpowered and bound. A person can be so terrified that he or she paralyzes in fear. Et cetera.

[Thudlow Boink]

The question you're posing isn't if rape is worse than murder, - obviously it's not - but if the rape of an innocent, random person is worse than the murder of a rapist.This is precisely it. The opinion people were expressing in the thread the OP links to is not that a person getting raped is worse than a person getting murdered; it is that something horrible happening to an innocent young girl is worse than something horrible happening to a hardened assholish criminal.

[Chronos]

Quoth jsgoddess:I think we can all think of times when killing someone is justified.

I don't think we can all think of times when raping someone is justified.

In fact, I don't accept that there are such times.

So, while rape for the victim isn't worse than murder, I think rape reveals more about a rapist than murder does about a murderer.Very close to what I was going to say. I'd phrase it slightly differently, though: While I do think it is possible for a person to deserve death, I do not think it is ever our place to decide that in a specific case. So I would not say that murder is ever justifiable, though it can be just.

[SciFiSam]

If it really were worse than death, then people being raped would resist to the point of death.

What? I guess you mean the 'stop struggling or I'll kill you' kind of circumstances. But not all rapes are like that, and there are many other reasons people don't, or can't resist - and many reasons that people might try to resist 'to the point of death,' but be thwarted.

I think we can all think of times when killing someone is justified.

I don't think we can all think of times when raping someone is justified.

In fact, I don't accept that there are such times.

So, while rape for the victim isn't worse than murder, I think rape reveals more about a rapist than murder does about a murderer.

That's a line of reasoning I hadn't considered.

For the victim, being dead is the absolute worst state, and as far as they're concerned it doesn't matter all that much whether they were a victim of murder, manslaughter, drunk driving, or even an accident. In any case, being dead is worse than being raped.

You wouldn't think so from some newspaper articles I've read over the years. Many of them indicate that someone's life is pretty much over because they've been raped, and I've heard people say that maybe the rape victim would be better off dead. Not so. Rape is a despicable act and can be (usually is) hard to cope with, especially violent rape, but it doesn't meant the victim should ever be written off.

For the killer I'd say that rape is different to murder - murder, not manslaughter (like it might have been in case linked to in this thread - we don't know the details). True, I can think of situations where it's justified to kill someone, but they're all self-defence, and that is not murder - not all human killing is murder. I bet there are plenty of rapists who could honestly say that they'd never murder anyone, and plenty of murderers who despise rape. It would be impossible to say whether the rapist or the murderer were categorically 'worse' than the other.

The law punishes the murderer more because of the effect on the victim, not because their crime makes them more dangerous. Well, also because some judges thinking that the victim brought it on herself, or wanted it really, and so on, which they're less likely to think in the case of murder.

[Marley23]

Rape worse than murder?

Generally, no, but it depends on context.
Not "generally" no, regular NO. Rape's a terrible thing and I'm glad it's an acceptable thing to discuss today - but the idea that a woman's broken forever once she's raped, or that her life is ruined as expressed in the Pit thread, is actually backward and antiquated. It's not helpful. Sympathy and understanding are helpful, and I don't mean to tell anybody how to deal with their own trauma... but this can't be a useful way of viewing women who survive rape.

[WhyNot]

I remember one of the posters saying something like, "This guy had 69 years of life, the girl had 13 before her life was ruined." That attitude disturbs me--obviously, being raped can screw with your head, at any age, but to say that someone's life is basically ruined or over because they were raped just seems like you're giving the victim some kind of stigma. I also remember a lot of posters here saying that the most harmful thing wasn't necessarily being raped for them, but people telling them how ruined or damaged they must feel.
Yep, that'd be me. At least, I was one of them.
Not "generally" no, regular NO. Rape's a terrible thing and I'm glad it's an acceptable thing to discuss today - but the idea that a woman's broken forever once she's raped, or that her life is ruined as expressed in the Pit thread, is actually backward and antiquated. It's not helpful. Sympathy and understanding are helpful, and I don't mean to tell anybody how to deal with their own trauma... but this can't be a useful way of viewing women who survive rape.
But hold on here - let's not go too far the other way, either. For some people (men and women) being raped really is worse than death. How can we tell? 'Cause sometimes rape victims kill themselves rather than live with the pain/memory/dishonor/PTSD of the rape.

The only rape(s) I can answer the OP for are my own. No, my rapes were not worse than anyone's murder. I was pretty messed up (As Freudian Slit says, more from other people's reactions and misguided advice than the rapes, but yes, the rapes left their mental and emotional scars, too) as a result of being raped, and I pretty well messed up some other people (boyfriends) as a result, but eventually I got over it and so, I think, have they.

Not everyone does get over it. And so for those people, yes, perhaps, rape is worse than death. I refuse to tell any survivor of rape what he or she should feel.

[Dissonance]

Ignoring the greater vigilantism issues, society benefits from his death. So in this case you're comparing a random rape - always bad - to the murder of someone who's better off dead - not even bad.The problem is you're not ignoring the greater issue of vigilantism, you're giving it a big thumbs up. He's better off dead and dousing him in gasoline and lighting him on fire isn't even bad? While I can understand the reasons behind the mother doing this, that doesn't make her actions "not even bad" and actually benificial to society. There is a reason that civilized society doesn't accept vigilante 'justice' or extra-judicial killings as being not bad and actually pretty much okay.

[SenorBeef]

That's why I specifically set aside the vigilantism issue. I realize that vigilantism has many negative effects on society, and I wasn't saying she should go free. I should've said it "arguably isn't even bad", as clearly it can be argued.

Put another way - if the guy suddenly died of a stroke, society would probably be better off. Therefore his murder is less bad than some random person being murdered.

[Dissonance]

My point is you didn't set it aside, you said it was a positive for society that he was burned alive. Just saying you're putting vigilantism aside and then saying society benefits from his death and he's better off dead and killing him isn't even bad doesn't mean you actually put vigilantism aside. You've pretty much said it was okay.

Eh, throwing "arguably isn't as bad," in front of the murder of someone who's better off dead doesn't really help it. Note that you called what she did murder rather than killing, because that's what it was - extrajudicial killing or more simply murder.

[SenorBeef]

I did set it aside:

Ignoring the greater vigilantism issues[/b], society benefits from his death. So in this case you're comparing a random rape - always bad - to the murder of someone who's better off dead - not even bad. There's no reason to infer a greater "murder vs rape" implication from it.

The effects of vigililantism are complex and tangenital to my point. I was simply trying to articulate that this wasn't simply a matter of which was worse between rape and murder, but that the particular circumstances were more relevant.

I wasn't attempting to take a stance that what she did wasn't a crime. I could've been more clear about that though.

[Kalhoun]

I don't think the bad guy is necessarily "better off dead" though I can see where society would be better off without him.

[madmonk28]

If we are to look at the specifics of the example in the OP, I think that raping a child is a worse crime than murdering an unrepentant child rapist.

[MrDibble]

I think we can all think of times when killing someone is justified.
I can't.

Anyway, I've been raped (twice) and I in no way see it as worse than death. Hell, I don't even see it as worse than being seriously beaten up, which I've also had happen to me.

[Marley23]

Not everyone does get over it. And so for those people, yes, perhaps, rape is worse than death. I refuse to tell any survivor of rape what he or she should feel.
I'm not willing to conclude that something is worse than death because it leads to suicide. Some people kill themselves after going broke or the end of a relationship and few of us would agree those are worse than death. Some people aren't able to deal with it for whatever individual reasons. I'm not telling anybody what to feel, I am objecting to the attitude that the life of every rape victim is ruined by this one act to the point that they might actually be better off dead.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

I think we can all think of times when killing someone is justified.

I don't think we can all think of times when raping someone is justified.

In fact, I don't accept that there are such times.

So, while rape for the victim isn't worse than murder, I think rape reveals more about a rapist than murder does about a murderer.I generally agree, but it doesn't work for me when I start substituting specific terms in place of "murder." For instance, I couldn't agree if your first statement was "I think we can all agree that there are times where 'burning someone alive' is justified."

[Snarky_Kong]

The problem is you're not ignoring the greater issue of vigilantism, you're giving it a big thumbs up. He's better off dead and dousing him in gasoline and lighting him on fire isn't even bad? While I can understand the reasons behind the mother doing this, that doesn't make her actions "not even bad" and actually benificial to society. There is a reason that civilized society doesn't accept vigilante 'justice' or extra-judicial killings as being not bad and actually pretty much okay.

Death of Asshole Vigilantism Net
+1000 -2000 -1000


You can be for the murder or somebody and still be against vigilantism. The death penalty is just murder by consensus of more people.

[jsgoddess]

I generally agree, but it doesn't work for me when I start substituting specific terms in place of "murder." For instance, I couldn't agree if your first statement was "I think we can all agree that there are times where 'burning someone alive' is justified."

I agree with you. Setting someone on fire isn't one of the times when I can work up a justification, though I'm not saying it could never, ever be justified. This particular case, though? No. Basically, she tortured him to death.

[Lust4Life]

The question you're posing isn't if rape is worse than murder, - obviously it's not - but if the rape of an innocent, random person is worse than the murder of a rapist.

In this case - the guy's a rapist who taunted the mother of his rape victim. He's clearly unrepentant scum to the gravest extreme. Ignoring the greater vigilantism issues, society benefits from his death. So in this case you're comparing a random rape - always bad - to the murder of someone who's better off dead - not even bad. There's no reason to infer a greater "murder vs rape" implication from it.

You've said what I think.

[gigi]

I agree that all murders are not equal, but all murders are worse than all "plain" rapes.

What about "mercy killing"?

[Skald the Rhymer]

Not "generally" no, regular NO. Rape's a terrible thing and I'm glad it's an acceptable thing to discuss today - but the idea that a woman's broken forever once she's raped, or that her life is ruined as expressed in the Pit thread, is actually backward and antiquated. It's not helpful. Sympathy and understanding are helpful, and I don't mean to tell anybody how to deal with their own trauma... but this can't be a useful way of viewing women who survive rape.

Marley23, did you read the rest of my post?

I neither stated nor implied that a person who has been raped (it can happen to men too, don't forget) would be better off dead. I wrote that, like I can envision myself being friends with someone who has committed an action that is legally considered murder, while I cannot conceive of the same thing in the case of rape. Killing is sometimes justified; rape never is.

[Marley23]

Marley23, did you read the rest of my post?
Yes. Several other people made similar points to the part I quoted, though, so I wasn't responding to you alone.
I neither stated nor implied that a person who has been raped (it can happen to men too, don't forget) would be better off dead.
I said that's the implication of the idea that rape is worse than murder, not that you in particular implied it in your post. I'm not sure offhand if you read the Pit thread that inspired this one, but I felt there were several posts there that made the same implication, including one that stated specifically that the life of a 13-year-old rape victim was ruined.

[Skald the Rhymer]

Yes. Several other people made similar points to the part I quoted, though, so I wasn't responding to you alone.

I said that's the implication of the idea that rape is worse than murder, not that you in particular implied it in your post.


In the first place, I would argue that the statement "rape is worse than murder" does not necessarily imply one thing. The statement is vague and can be taken in several possible ways. For instance:


Being raped is more destructive to the victim than murder is.
Committing a rape is a greater sin in the eyes of God/the gods than murder is.
Committing rape should be punished more severely by human laws than murder should be.
I find rape so offensive personally that I would rather be in the company of a murderer than a rapist.
Murder is sometimes justified; rape never is.



And that's just off the top of my head.

As the OP is ambiguous, I chose to respond in such a fashion that I clearly meant the latter two interpretations. If you wish to contest sense 1, you can, but you ought not to do so while quoting me and only me--and not even quoting my entire post---as doing so gives the impression that I wrote in support of that thesis.

And I read and posted in the thread which spawned this one.

Anyway,



I agree that all murders are not equal, but all murders are worse than all "plain" rapes.

What about "mercy killing"?

I actually know a person who committed a mercy killing; she upped a morphine drip for a family member who was terminally ill and in horrible pain. That person is technically a murderer, but not, by my lights, morally so. She acted out of love; she acted properly; she is morally superior to rapists.

[Marley23]

In the first place, I would argue that the statement "rape is worse than murder" does not necessarily imply one thing.
That's a good point, and I did focus on one particular interpretation, which is the first one you listed.
as doing so gives the impression that I wrote in support of that thesis.
I don't think it does, given that your post is immediately viewable here. But anyway:
I actually know a person who committed a mercy killing; she upped a morphine drip for a family member who was terminally ill and in horrible pain. That person is technically a murderer, but not, by my lights, morally so.
I wouldn't consider that person a murderer either.

[Skald the Rhymer]

That's a good point, and I did focus on one particular interpretation, which is the first one you listed.

I don't think it does, given that your post is immediately viewable here. But anyway:

I wouldn't consider that person a murderer either.

The law does, though. As "murder" is a a legal construct, you can see why I feel it is sometimes justified.

In fact, I'd say that there are other cases where murder is justified, or at least understandable. Re: the other thread, my biggest problem with the way the aggrieved mother did what she did is the irresponsible and dangerous-to-the-general-public way she did it, and the fact that the rapist scum was pretty much tortured to death. If I were on the jury deciding her case, and she had shot him in the back of the head in a private place so that no one else was endangered, I'd be inclined to say, "Yeah...what you did was very bad. You are no longer allowed to watch television."

[Kalhoun]

What about "mercy killing"?

Well, I don't consider "mercy killing" or "assisted suicide" to be "murder", though I'm fully aware the law does. If someone asks you to end or assist in ending their life, it's not the same as taking someone out without their OK.

[Marley23]

The law does, though. As "murder" is a a legal construct, you can see why I feel it is sometimes justified.
True. My error was that I didn't think of that as a possible kind of murder included by the OP. I think he was going for a more narrow view like the one I described but that doesn't mean everybody else meant the same thing.
In fact, I'd say that there are other cases where murder is justified, or at least understandable.
Understandable and justified are very different ideas and I think it's a bad idea to use them interchangeably. An ex-girlfriend of mine was raped years before I met her, and for a long time I thought every day about how I'd have him killed if I could. I think just about anyone would find that understandable. But justified? Even I'd have a hard time saying so.

[WhyNot]

I'm not telling anybody what to feel, I am objecting to the attitude that the life of every rape victim is ruined by this one act to the point that they might actually be better off dead.
But by your objection, it sounds like you are telling people what to feel - you're telling them they're not ruined by this one act. I'm saying they might be or they might not be. The only person who can say is them.

Admittedly, I could parse your objection differently, with the stress on "every", and then I think we totally agree. It's just not clear to me which way you meant it from your writing.

[Martin Hyde]

Murders is the worst of crimes. When you take someone's life from them you take away all the possibilities, you take away what they would have become. There is no comparable crime.

The ability of humans to persevere is remarkable, and people come back from virtually everything other than death. When you take a human life you are destroying that person, everything that they are or will ever be is being snuffed out.

[Agent Foxtrot]

Since some have said that my OP was a bit ambiguous, I'll try to clarify. It seems to me that there's a lot more vitriol on these boards towards a person who rapes or molests a 13-year-old girl than one who kills a 13-year-old girl. Why? You won't really see any (or as many) RO pits involving murder as you would sexual misconduct.

[Skald the Rhymer]

Since some have said that my OP was a bit ambiguous, I'll try to clarify. It seems to me that there's a lot more vitriol on these boards towards a person who rapes or molests a 13-year-old girl than one who kills a 13-year-old girl. Why? You won't really see any (or as many) RO pits involving murder as you would sexual misconduct.

Perhaps not for the reason you think. I've started a couple of RO threads about rapists I unfortunately lived in proximity too. But if I see a case about a child being murdered, I am unlikely to start a thread or open one because I just can't bear to think about it. I was mostly silent in the threads about that little girl whose mother seems to have killed her and then spent a month partying before bothering to report her for just that reason; it was too awful to think about.

[Knorf]

Murders is the worst of crimes. When you take someone's life from them you take away all the possibilities, you take away what they would have become. There is no comparable crime.

For example, maybe the rapist in the OP could have been rehabilitated. You might assume he couldn't be, but you cannot be certain.

There is no possible recovery from murder.

There is possible recovery from rape.

Murder is worse.

Life is more precious and sacred than one's sexuality, in a nutshell. Forcing someone into a sex act against their will is of course heinous and despicable. Murder is even worse: it's forcing someone to not merely give up their sexuality against their will, it's forcing them to give up their life.

[Knorf]

Since some have said that my OP was a bit ambiguous, I'll try to clarify. It seems to me that there's a lot more vitriol on these boards towards a person who rapes or molests a 13-year-old girl than one who kills a 13-year-old girl. Why? You won't really see any (or as many) RO pits involving murder as you would sexual misconduct.

I think this is because Americans are really, really, really hung up about sex. Horrific graphic violence in a movie, no problem; touching, beautiful, graphic, sex = OH MY GOD won't SOMEONE PLEASE think of the CHILDREN!

[YogSosoth]

Murder's much better for the victim. Once he's dead, he's no longer suffering. Its irrelevent to say that the victim may come out better for the experience had he lived. Once death is there, there's no more suffering and you certainly cant miss the life that you dont have

Given that, I would say that a murder is a worst crime, but a rape victim suffers more than a murder victim over the long term

[Monster104]

Life is more precious and sacred than one's sexuality, in a nutshell. Forcing someone into a sex act against their will is of course heinous and despicable. Murder is even worse: it's forcing someone to not merely give up their sexuality against their will, it's forcing them to give up their life.
To many others, though, the sexuality of an innocent is more precious and sacred than the life of someone who corrupted the sexuality of an innocent.

For a lot of people, it seems to have more to do with very bad things happening to an innocent person vs guilty person, than it has to do with the severity of the act itself.

I would feel bad for an innocent person being burned to death, but I'm not going to waste my emotions for a rapist who was burned to death. I have more sympathy for the mother than the rapist in this case - he pressed her emotional buttons and intentionally provoked her rage. I'm not excusing what she did...but I am sympathetic to her situation.

[Marley23]

But by your objection, it sounds like you are telling people what to feel - you're telling them they're not ruined by this one act. I'm saying they might be or they might not be. The only person who can say is them.
They're not ruined. Whether they feel that way about it or not is another matter.

[Skald the Rhymer]

Murder's much better for the victim. Once he's dead, he's no longer suffering. Its irrelevent to say that the victim may come out better for the experience had he lived. Once death is there, there's no more suffering and you certainly cant miss the life that you dont have

Given that, I would say that a murder is a worst crime, but a rape victim suffers more than a murder victim over the long term

Though I've opined upthread that I could befriend a murderer but not a rapist, I must disagree. If faced with the improbable choice of someone I loved being raped OR murdered, I'd much rather they be raped, because there is the possibility of recovery and healing. The notion that a woman is forever ruined by rape fraught with sexist and paternalistic assumptions.

[Skald the Rhymer]

But by your objection, it sounds like you are telling people what to feel - you're telling them they're not ruined by this one act. I'm saying they might be or they might not be. The only person who can say is them.

Admittedly, I could parse your objection differently, with the stress on "every", and then I think we totally agree. It's just not clear to me which way you meant it from your writing.


Another way to look at it as that the person might believe that, but she or he is wrong. Healing is possible if the person is alive, and such statements that a rape victim is 'ruined' make such healing more difficult to achieve.

[Freudian Slit]

I think we can all think of times when killing someone is justified.

I don't think we can all think of times when raping someone is justified.

In fact, I don't accept that there are such times.

So, while rape for the victim isn't worse than murder, I think rape reveals more about a rapist than murder does about a murderer.

Yeah, I agree. There was a creepy thread a while back in Cafe Society asking about instances where rape was justified, and I really couldn't think of any, even fictional, examples where it was. But people were...it was really odd.

And as Skald points out, I couldn't stay friends with a rapist. I could possibly stay friends with a murderer (it would depend) but I just can't think of a reason why you'd have to rape someone.

[Knorf]

The notion that a woman is forever ruined by rape fraught with sexist and paternalistic assumptions.

Interesting that everyone is assuming the rapist is male and victim is female. That's true most of the time, but not all of the time.

Anyway, IANARV (I Am Not A Rape Victim), but Skald's point of view here makes sense to me.

Another point: we're all making out rape to be an explicitly black and white issue, with obvious and clear guilt, and so on. How often is this really the case? Is it not true that many rapes are difficult to prove because the circumstances are murky? Is it not true that a number of rape cases in recent years have been overturned due to DNA evidence?

Murdering an accused (even convicted) rapist means that if it turns out later you had the wrong perp, it's far, far too late.

I more convinced than ever that capital punishment and enlightened society are mutually exclusive. Vigilantism is horrible for society, and should not be left out of this discussion.

[Cat Fight]

I think we can all think of times when killing someone is justified.

I don't think we can all think of times when raping someone is justified.

In fact, I don't accept that there are such times.

So, while rape for the victim isn't worse than murder, I think rape reveals more about a rapist than murder does about a murderer.

Yes. You cannot rape someone in self defense.

It is an incredibly tricky line, between a time (or place) where rape is legal and common and just something women should bear, and one where women are ruined and destined to be tormented for the rest of their lives. It's difficult to maintain a grey area, to both tell victims they can live fulfilling lives, but at the same time encouraging them to go through therapy and pursue long, often re-victimizing police investigations and trials, not to mention demanding harsher sentencing for rapists.

I'd sooner liken it to child molestation or torture, in so far as there seem to be varying 'degrees' of severity from an outsider's p.o.v., but that only the victim can truly say how they've been affected (anyone who watches Intervention can see how being assaulted as a child or even an adult can have drastic consequences).

[Knorf]

I couldn't stay friends with a rapist.
What if the circumstances of the rape were far from clear? What if alcohol were involved? What if the accused were truly and fully repentant?

There are far too many assumptions looming behind these statements. Rape cases should never devolve into "blame the victim," but let's do keep in mind that just because someone is accused of rape doesn't mean that person is guilty.

This rapist you can't be friends with: who is this person? Someone who gleefully committed a crime, and now is not repentant in the least? Of course, who'd be friends with someone like that? But what if it were someone who just fucked up really badly a long time ago, and carries and faces an enormous burden of regret now, and has served time in the due course of justice? What if it were a drunken acquaintance rape with no clearcut guilty or innocent situation? What if it were a situation similar to that 18-year old African-American man who got a purely consensual blow job from a white 15-year old (I forgetting the precise details, but something like that.)

The problem with vigilantism is not just that it can get a lot of things really, horribly wrong, but that it dehumanizes the accused, whether the accused is guilty or not. No proper notion of justice can be carried out under such circumstances.

[Freudian Slit]

This rapist you can't be friends with: who is this person? Someone who gleefully committed a crime, and now is not repentant in the least? Of course, who'd be friends with someone like that? But what if it were someone who just fucked up really badly a long time ago, and carries and faces an enormous burden of regret now, and has served time in the due course of justice? What if it were a drunken acquaintance rape with no clearcut guilty or innocent situation? What if it were a situation similar to that 18-year old African-American man who got a purely consensual blow job from a white 15-year old (I forgetting the precise details, but something like that.)

All right, I guess I'd leave aside statutory rape, or rape where it was completely ambiguous what happened (though I kind of wonder how someone got convicted if it was that ambiguous). So, let's say it's a case where we know, beyond a reasonable doubt, with DNA and the like, that the person is a rapist. If someone fucked up really badly and regrets it, that's great, and it's better than raping someone and gleefully laughing about it, but I still don't think I could befriend them. It would be too hard. If that makes me a worse person, so be it.

[SciFiSam]

All right, I guess I'd leave aside statutory rape, or rape where it was completely ambiguous what happened (though I kind of wonder how someone got convicted if it was that ambiguous). So, let's say it's a case where we know, beyond a reasonable doubt, with DNA and the like, that the person is a rapist. If someone fucked up really badly and regrets it, that's great, and it's better than raping someone and gleefully laughing about it, but I still don't think I could befriend them. It would be too hard. If that makes me a worse person, so be it.

I'm with you on that one. One of my brothers served jail time for killing someone - though he went down for manslaughter, not murder (I must have been one of the few five-year-olds in the world who had a clear understanding of the difference, legally and ethically, between manslaughter and murder), and he's accepted by the family. One of my other brothers sexually abused his four-year-old stepdaughter. He might as well not exist, as far as the rest of the family are concerned.

[Monster104]

but let's do keep in mind that just because someone is accused of rape doesn't mean that person is guilty.
We're not talking about someone "accused" of rape, we're talking about convicted rapists. And while there have been people wrongly convicted of rape, they are exceptions. The vast majority of convicted criminals are rightly convicted, and that includes rapists.

If you run into someone convicted of rape, it's an extremely slim chance that they didn't actually do the rape. Thus, your objection in this regard to people saying "I couldn't be friends with a rapist" doesn't seem to be a very compelling one.

[Knorf]

All right, I guess I'd leave aside statutory rape, or rape where it was completely ambiguous what happened (though I kind of wonder how someone got convicted if it was that ambiguous). So, let's say it's a case where we know, beyond a reasonable doubt, with DNA and the like, that the person is a rapist. If someone fucked up really badly and regrets it, that's great, and it's better than raping someone and gleefully laughing about it, but I still don't think I could befriend them. It would be too hard. If that makes me a worse person, so be it.
My point is that its awfully easy for our imagination about the rapist to become a dehumanizing caricature, assuming all the most awful, monstrous things, and base our reaction on the caricature thereby ignoring the human reality, which probably doesn't match the monstrous image. Again, justice cannot be served under such circumstances.
If you run into someone convicted of rape, it's an extremely slim chance that they didn't actually do the rape. Thus, your objection in this regard to people saying "I couldn't be friends with a rapist" doesn't seem to be a very compelling one.
I'm not sure it's as rare as you think.

[Freudian Slit]

My point is that its awfully easy for our imagination about the rapist to become a dehumanizing caricature, assuming all the most awful, monstrous things, and base our reaction on the caricature thereby ignoring the human reality, which probably doesn't match the monstrous image. Again, justice cannot be served under such circumstances.

Okay, leaving aside issues where the wrong man was blamed (which doesn't even really count, since the guy isn't actually a rapist), and issues of statutory rape where there was consent but a relatively small age difference...when is a rapist not such a bad guy?

[Knorf]

Okay, leaving aside issues where the wrong man was blamed (which doesn't even really count, since the guy isn't actually a rapist), and issues of statutory rape where there was consent but a relatively small age difference...when is a rapist not such a bad guy?
I take it we're also trying to take a road here where the rapist's guilt is clear-cut. Something nice and clean, with no gray areas.

Rape is a crime, and a pretty heinous one, at that. It deserves to be punished, and our legal system has provisions for such.

But I would like to point out that the crime a person has committed does not really tell you everything there is to know about that person. As a reasonably moral and ethical human being, I feel confident in my ability to determine whether an act is right or wrong, and even to make some judgment about appropriate punishment when wrong acts are committed. What I cannot do is look into a person's "soul" (for lack of a better word) and see whether that person is intrinsically vile and utterly irredeemable. Therefore, what I do not feel is that I am thereby in a position to judge whether someone should live or die, and neither, I feel, are you or anyone else.

[Skald the Rhymer]

Interesting that everyone is assuming the rapist is male and victim is female. That's true most of the time, but not all of the time.

I am not making that assumption. I argued against it upthread, in fact--at least I think I did, though conceivably it was eaten by hamsters. Anyway, I phrased the remark you refer to in reference to the notion about rape being the end of a woman's life, which is, as I said, fraught with some unfortunate sexist assumptions about what makes a woman valuable, and how much capacity women have for healing and strength.

[YogSosoth]

Though I've opined upthread that I could befriend a murderer but not a rapist, I must disagree. If faced with the improbable choice of someone I loved being raped OR murdered, I'd much rather they be raped, because there is the possibility of recovery and healing. The notion that a woman is forever ruined by rape fraught with sexist and paternalistic assumptions.

You are looking at it from your point of view. I clearly gave 2 distinct classifications for the victim and the criminal

For you, their death is worse because you are not feeling their pain, you are only thinking that you will never see them again. Rape allows you to reestablish a connection with the victim while murder robs you of that chance. Its the same reason why some people refuse to let a loved one expire while on artificial life support: they dont feel the pain and they always think it can get better

Given my distinction between victim and criminal, or third party, you needn't say that you disagree: we were talking about 2 different things and you mentioned nothing to agree or disagree with me over

[SciFiSam]

I am not making that assumption. I argued against it upthread, in fact--at least I think I did, though conceivably it was eaten by hamsters.

My posts have also always not mentioned gender except in reference to specific people. I see a lot of other people posting without referring to gender too, except in posts like yours where there was a reason for bringing gender up.

Obviously not everyone who's convicted of rape is actually guilty of it, but sometimes you do know for sure. I personally know several men who have raped friends of mine, including one who not only raped my friend but organised for several of his friends to do the same. He never even got charged, but I have personal evidence that he definitely did do it (I found her afterwards, when he and his friends dumped her out of their car in the middle of the road). He will never be a friend of mine. One man raped me in the same room as another friend (who didn't realise what was going on at first, because there was a barrier between us and she couldn't see him holding me down) - she would not be friends with him after that.

Another male friend was accused of rape and I was happy to stay friends with him, because I didn't know if he'd done it - and he was actually cleared after three months in prison on remand. So sometimes you can't be sure, but sometimes you really, really can.

[SciFiSam]

You are looking at it from your point of view. I clearly gave 2 distinct classifications for the victim and the criminal

For you, their death is worse because you are not feeling their pain, you are only thinking that you will never see them again. Rape allows you to reestablish a connection with the victim while murder robs you of that chance. Its the same reason why some people refuse to let a loved one expire while on artificial life support: they dont feel the pain and they always think it can get better

Given my distinction between victim and criminal, or third party, you needn't say that you disagree: we were talking about 2 different things and you mentioned nothing to agree or disagree with me over

No, it's not just that. It's because you can get over being raped (not always, but at least you have the chance), but you can't get over being murdered. Yes, the suffering has ended for the murder victim - but so has absolutely everything else.

[WhyNot]

They're not ruined. Whether they feel that way about it or not is another matter.
I don't know, I'm prepared to agree with someone who thinks their decades long post traumatic stress disorder - which makes having a normal sexual relationship or parenting relationship impossible - makes them "ruined".

I don't think death is the worst thing that can happen to a person. I think that unrelenting suffering and anguish is much worse. Panic attacks and flashbacks are worse. A quick and clean murder doesn't cause that. I think torture and rape both can be far worse than death.

[MaddyStrut]

I've been raped, and I think murder is far, far worse. Now, I did have a period where I felt incredible guilt for not fighting back enough. I don't want to relive the experience, so I'll sum it up by saying I submitted when it seemed the alternative was getting VERY hurt. And I didn't want that. I felt guilt for that. I got over it.

However, what percent of murderers go on to kill again vs. rapists who go on to rape more? The answer to that would affect my decision on how strongly to punish one vs. the other. I don't think rape deserves the death penalty, but if there's high recidivism, I'd like to keep rapists in jail as long as possible.

As for the situation referenced in the OP, I cut the woman some (SOME) slack because it was her 13 year old daughter. I'm sure she doesn't wish her daughter would have been murdered rather than raped, but there's got to be an awful lot of trauma seeing something happen to her daughter, who was so very young.

[Knorf]

I am not making that assumption. I argued against it upthread, in fact--at least I think I did, though conceivably it was eaten by hamsters. Anyway, I phrased the remark you refer to in reference to the notion about rape being the end of a woman's life, which is, as I said, fraught with some unfortunate sexist assumptions about what makes a woman valuable, and how much capacity women have for healing and strength.

Sorry, I didn't mean you precisely. I didn't make that clear. I understood what you were referring to--and I agreed with your statement about unfortunate sexist assumptions.

I wonder whether some people who think murder is justifiable also believe in life after death in some sense. Killing someone isn't so bad, because there's the afterlife, perhaps they think. Just wondering.

I wonder how many rape victims feel that they are ruined to the point they'd rather be dead, all due to the rape. I suspect, very, very few.

[madrabbitwoman]

I wonder how many rape victims feel that they are ruined to the point they'd rather be dead, all due to the rape. I suspect, very, very few.

That would be me - sort of - and I'm working on changing my views.
I would have preferred death. If I were dead then the suffering would be over with. I am still struggling with the thought that the confident normal happy human being I was supposed to become was murdered by the actions of another and I am what remains.
My life is really messed up but I am trying to get better.

[jsgoddess]

I wonder whether some people who think murder is justifiable also believe in life after death in some sense. Killing someone isn't so bad, because there's the afterlife, perhaps they think. Just wondering.

I don't believe in life after death.

Of course, I think it would be difficult for me to say I think "murder is justifiable." I just think that some of the things that are legally "murder" can at some times be justified actions. To add a context, some of the things that are legally "theft" can at some times be justified actions. Some of the things that are legally "kidnapping" can even at some (rare) times be justified actions.

[Freudian Slit]

I don't know, I'm prepared to agree with someone who thinks their decades long post traumatic stress disorder - which makes having a normal sexual relationship or parenting relationship impossible - makes them "ruined".

Looking over your posts, I think that the main thing is that the person who rapes or assaults or takes advantage is always in the wrong. That is, no matter what happens to the victim (whether they live a happy life, whether they see it as no big deal or as a life shattering event), the rapist is still as bad. But the victim has the right to say, "For me, this was huge" or "For me, this wasn't such a big deal." Like, let's not judge what a bad thing it was to do based on just how much the victim suffered. Whether they were raped and went on to live a happy life, or whether they were raped and are now unable to form close relationships/have sex, the rapist is still just as evil, IMHO.

[WhyNot]

I wonder whether some people who think murder is justifiable also believe in life after death in some sense. Killing someone isn't so bad, because there's the afterlife, perhaps they think. Just wondering.
I believe there may possibly be reincarnation of some sort, but I'm far from certain of that. But I don't believe the "I", the person's personality and memory, reincarnates, no. So my belief - or, rather suspicion - in reincarnation does not color my view in this matter.

What colors my view in this matter is more logical than that: There are three possibilities, as I see it, for what happens after death. First the Christian/Greco-Roman/etc. view that there's some sort of idyllic afterlife, in which case, the murder victim should be happy enough and we should all celebrate. Second, the reincarnation theory, in which case...meh. Sure, it's probably annoying to have your lessons interrupted and have to go be a baby again, but most of us spend a whole lot more time getting things wrong than getting things right, and life, in a larger sense, goes on. Or the third option is the atheist belief that there is not anything at all after death - no bliss, no second chances, but just nothing at all. In which case, again, meh. The murdered person isn't around to suffer or be bothered by his murder at that point.
I wonder how many rape victims feel that they are ruined to the point they'd rather be dead, all due to the rape. I suspect, very, very few.
Not as a result of the rape, but as a result of the way it was handled, I seriously considered suicide several times in my teens and twenties. The only reason I didn't do it (and this isn't a joke) is that I'm terrible at follow-through. I was a wreck, and I hurt a LOT of people, for which I'm terribly sorry today. I can only hope that my hurting them hasn't created a situation where they hurt others in turn. If I had been able to see more clearly what I was doing, yes, I would have found the guts to kill myself and save the world that much more misery. What I did, emotionally and psychologically, to other people, was just as violent and destructive as most rapes. If I had a working time machine, I'd go back and put a bullet in my head, despite the joys I've had since then.

Just like when we discuss DNR Orders and Living Wills and Assisted Suicide, I think people have the right to determine when too much suffering is too much for them. In this case, they have the right to view themselves as "ruined" or "not ruined". While things got better for me, and yes, they'll probably get better for most victims of most crimes, it's not up to me to approve of their level of suffering or not.

Freudian Slit, I absolutely agree. Just because someone doesn't feel "ruined" doesn't let his or her rapist off the hook. The potential was still there for huge suffering; the rapist couldn't have known that his or her victim wouldn't be one of the ruined ones. We should judge the crime on the potential for harm, as well as the actual harm caused in a specific case.

[Knorf]

Freudian Slit, I absolutely agree. Just because someone doesn't feel "ruined" doesn't let his or her rapist off the hook.
I don't believe anyone is advocating "letting the rapist of the hook." The talk is whether murder is worse than rape. And yes, it is.

[Skald the Rhymer]

You are looking at it from your point of view.

I was the victim of such a crime when I was young. It was horrible and I'm not going to talk about it except to say that the belief that I was irreparably damaged was itself a hindrance to my healing.

It is entirely understandable, and perhaps natural, for a rape victim to believe that she is so injured that s/he can never get better. But that belief is not helpful, and validating such a belief makes it more likely that the victim never will heal. We don't seek out paths that we don't believe exist.

[Kalhoun]

Freudian Slit, I absolutely agree. Just because someone doesn't feel "ruined" doesn't let his or her rapist off the hook. The potential was still there for huge suffering; the rapist couldn't have known that his or her victim wouldn't be one of the ruined ones. We should judge the crime on the potential for harm, as well as the actual harm caused in a specific case.

I think that feeling of being "ruined" comes largely from the way parents and others treat the victim after the fact. It doesn't lessen the crime, but it certainly will have an effect on the recovery. I think carrying on about what a piece of shit the abuser is can be very detrimental. A child will identify with an abuser just by being part of the incident. I think it's similar to children who are told their absentee parent is a piece of shit. The child is connected to that person and may begin to feel like a piece of shit by association.

[YogSosoth]

No, it's not just that. It's because you can get over being raped (not always, but at least you have the chance), but you can't get over being murdered. Yes, the suffering has ended for the murder victim - but so has absolutely everything else.

Thats the thing, for the victim, murder is like an escape. Thats why I think that for the victim, rape is worse

[wsbenge]

I don't think rape and murder can be compared, and in many cultures both are capital offenses.

One thing for sure, the offender was terminally stupid to taunt the parent.

In the paper today, a 15 year old girl was raped, her father and brother found out, tracked the offender down, and shot him. I hope their life hasn't been ruined by it.

[Gary_Oak]

That parent is a piece of shit for setting that guy alight..... and i hope she get the death sentence, no question asked because burning people alive is worse than rape, but murder is worse than both

I get really outraged when people say that rape is worse than murder (its one of these topic that i would get violent over)..... Rape is as about same as getting beaten up badly.... I don't get why people get far more so tense about rape than murder.... i tend not to get into arrangement's with people about this topic in real life, since i will probs have the tendency to attack people if they disagree with my logic

I don't think rape and murder can be compared, and in many cultures both are capital offenses.

One thing for sure, the offender was terminally stupid to taunt the parent.

In the paper today, a 15 year old girl was raped, her father and brother found out, tracked the offender down, and shot him. I hope their life hasn't been ruined by it.

I hope to see that father get the death sentience or life in prison.... Its time for law to give mandatory death or life sentience (for states or country without the option for death penalty) who murder like this

[madrabbitwoman]

I see that you have never been raped. Otherwise you would know that it is NOT the same ad getting beaten up. There is a whole different level of shame, humiliation... you have no idea really words cannot describe. I don't condone murder in generally and would never commit it but I have spent a fair bit of the last 10 months wishing he had killed me or wishing I could kill him.

So I don't think they equate but they are closer than you believe


That parent is a piece of shit for setting that guy alight..... and i hope she get the death sentence, no question asked because burning people alive is worse than rape, but murder is worse than both

I get really outraged when people say that rape is worse than murder (its one of these topic that i would get violent over)..... Rape is as about same as getting beaten up badly.... I don't get why people get far more so tense about rape than murder.... i tend not to get into arrangement's with people about this topic in real life, since i will probs have the tendency to attack people if they disagree with my logic



I hope to see that father get the death sentience or life in prison.... Its time for law to give mandatory death or life sentience (for states or country without the option for death penalty) who murder like this

[Czarcasm]

There is no right or wrong answer, there is only a personal answer, and that answer can change if/when one is raped. My personal answer is that rape is not worse than murder.

[John Mace]

Man, was I confused by this Zombie Doppelgänger! (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=678166)

[crucible]

Perhaps a point made by others, but aren't we saying, if we think rape is so horrible, that the honor killing of rape victims by family members is, somehow, justified, since the victim is obviously never going to recover from having been raped, and, actually, must have encouraged it or they would have resisted to the point of death?

[Steener122]

I'd have to say I agree with Beef. Obviously rape doesn't kill someone, but rape can totally destroy someones life and in essence "kill" the person that once was. Rape is a HORRIBLE crime.
Murder is also a VERY HORRIBLE crime, but murder of an innocent person and murder of a rapist, who then keeps taunting the victim and their family isn't quite as horrible. Someone who would do something like that would most likely rape again, destroying another life, and its been proven that rapists usually get more violent as the rapes go on, sometimes eventually killing their victim.
I can't say I blame that mother AT ALL for doing that to than "man" if you, your mother, sister, brother, female (or male) friend was raped and then you saw that man and he taunted you about it day after day, wouldn't you eventually snap, or at least WANT TO?
I don't think there are many victims of rape who haven't had a fantasy about killing or at least hurting the man who raped them. I was raped at 15, and although I went through years of denial in the last couple years I've started to deal with it, and I have thought many times I wish I could make him feel the pain I felt. The fear. The years of damage he did to me. I told the police but the detective treated me badly. But this man did go to prison for raping another girl who was 13 or maybe 12, he got out after 7 years, and then moved out of state. In his new state me might not even have to stay on the sex offender list for life!!! This man is going to be able to move on. I, this other girl and I would be willing to guess other victims have the rest of their lives to deal with it.

So basically YES murder of someone who is innocent is of course worse than rape (or at least just as bad) but I don't think the murder of a rapist who isn't at all remorseful is nearly as bad. If the rapist has remorse and honestly wants to become a better person, thats different.

[Gary_Oak]

As for the situation referenced in the OP, I cut the woman some (SOME) slack because it was her 13 year old daughter. I'm sure she doesn't wish her daughter would have been murdered rather than raped, but there's got to be an awful lot of trauma seeing something happen to her daughter, who was so very young.

Despite any trauma that the daughter got, there no bloody excuse for that women to do anything like this, and I hope she get life jail sentience at the minimum (if she's in a state or country without death sentience) or my preferred way the death sentience. If I were the judge, i would have no hesitant to put her to death

[colander]

Despite any trauma that the daughter got, there no bloody excuse for that women to do anything like this, and I hope she get life jail sentience at the minimum (if she's in a state or country without death sentience) or my preferred way the death sentience. If I were the judge, i would have no hesitant to put her to death

I feel newfound sympathy for Ash Ketchum.

[Knorf]

Man, was I confused by this Zombie Doppelgänger! (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=678166)

It snatched me up as well!

[Cheshire Human]

So many n00bs, so many few Braaaaaiiiiiinnnnnns!!!!!!!

[Steener122]

So many n00bs, so many few Braaaaaiiiiiinnnnnns!!!!!!!

What? Are us noobs hated or something?

[kambuckta]

What? Are us noobs hated or something?

Not hated, just your braaaaaaaains are still tastier and tenderer. We thrive on your delicate greymatter, sustains us y'know. :p

[Steener122]

Not hated, just your braaaaaaaains are still tastier and tenderer. We thrive on your delicate greymatter, sustains us y'know. :p

Should I wear a helmet before I get on the message boards for awhile until my noob brain isn't as appealing to eat? I wouldn't want to get my brain munched on.:eek:;)

[Cheshire Human]

What? Are us noobs hated or something?

N00bs? No.

N00bs who pointlessly ressurect 3 or 4 year old dead zombie threads? And then ARGUE about the long dead issue? Yes.

If the shoe fits, rot in it. But you won't find any brains in that shoe.

[MrDibble]

I don't think there are many victims of rape who haven't had a fantasy about killing or at least hurting the man who raped them.
Two things:1) Not many, but they do exist. I'm one of them.
2) Got to love the explicit assumption that it's only men who rape.

[stui magpie]

Geeez, nice topic.

Murder is worse than Rape because Murder extinguishes a life. The person is dead and has no opportunity to fulfil their live potential.


That's not to suggest that Rape is by any way good. Depending on the circumstances of the rape, some women who are raped can eventually put that behind them and live normal lives after counselling and therapy.

On the other hand, for some rape victim's Death would have been a preferable outcome.

In a murder it's the family and friends who have to take the pain, the dead person doesn't. In a rape, the victim has to live with it for the rest of their life and so does their family.

nasty situation either way.

edit, just noticed the comment about raising old threads. Sorry, didn't realise how old it was I read the OP and a few of the next ones, skimmed the rest.