This is not a “FACT”, it is specious nonsense you are trying to hand wave into existence. There are in fact levels of lust and horniness that will lead quite directly to rape if the opportunity presents itself, and the rapist perceives that the consequences are negligible. Your notion that there just HAS to be something else in the mix beyond the pure desire (and consequence free opportunity) to force yourself upon, and couple with, a woman you find desirable is absurd on it’s face.
Why does it have to be either/or? Rape is about sexual domination. Why do you need to oversimplify it when it’s already that simple?
Rape is about sex by definition.
That is why battery is a separate charge. Battery is about power over another without the sex.
That’s kind of the entire point. Lust based rape is not about sexual “domination” from the man’s perspective, it’s about “sex” and physical domination of the woman being raped is one of the primary operational requirements toward achieving that end. Dominance is not the end in and of itself. If we’re talking about the operational context then sure, rape is obviously going to require physically dominating the victim, but it’s not the objective of lust based rape.
I concur.
Take my client who ended up convicted for sexual assault (a.k.a. rape) for having sex with a woman who had passed out while they were heavily drinking and heavily making out. Straight opportunism rooted in horiness. Domination or power had nothing to do with it. This sort of “Sleeping Beauty” rape is a problem in my area, where some people drink far too much at parties.
There are many different reasons behind why rapes occur. When it comes to rape, the single unifying factor is not the reason behind a rape, but rather is that a person suffers the act of being raped.
That isn’t true, not even of men who cannot get women. It’s about the power to MAKE a woman have sex with him, he gets to choose who he has sex with and he doesn’t consult the other party about it beforehand. So it is always about power. If you take out the power component than you get into consensual dynamics which still have a power layer inherent to them as well.
Rape like Murder can have permanent biological consequences for the woman who is raped. She could get pregnant by her rapist. That’s pretty much ultimate power. That is why those two crimes are considered so heinous, because they deal with the power of life and death. You can force a woman to create a life against her will. That’s a powerful thing.
There is no reason to try and separate the terms as rape is specifically the act of dominating someone so that they can’t not fuck you.
You are confusing and/or conflating the genesis of the act of lust driven rape (sexual desire) with the operational aspects of achieving that end (physical domination). My answer to the question of what lust driven rape is"about" in addressing the genesis and objective of lust driven rape is “sex”.
Saying that the primary impulse and driving motivation to do something you desire is really about the operational means and opportunity to achieve that end is kind of cart and horsing the question IMO.
Actually, I have. bell hooks, too, who is the same sort of rageaholic writer.
The Ms. messageboards no longer exist, or I would point you to them for many examples of what I mean.
Regards,
Shodan
No, that’s unhealthy self-conditioning.
I don’t consider it a normal “part of” sex. I consider it a (bad & wrong) attempt to get sex. And it can be about power. It can be about both.
Yeah, but the OP’s username and the OP of this thread go well together, so that’s a plus. 
Because he’s trying to dominate with power. Do try to keep up. 
[quote=“Nzinga_Seated, post:33, topic:513212”]
There is no way anyone can convince me that an act which ends in orgasm …/quote]
Very often it does not.
Good post. I think most of the “rape’s not about power, how silly is that?” stuff is a strawman argument that strips all complexity from the phrase and fails to recognize the context in which it was coined. Of course many of those who like to say “rape is about power” miss the complexity as well, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there.
That.
The other thing was that it was intended to shut down the debate on whether the putative victim really didn’t consent or (even more controversially) had acted foolishly in putting herself in a situation that would be expected to end badly (or be remembered badly when she sobered up). Who would consent to an act of violence and power?
Also, we do well to recall that “feminist theory” is basically a warmed over version of the Marxist template ((the little darlings weren’t going to be able to come up with something truly novel): identify the Big Bad Meanie (the wealthy/the Patriarchy), diagnose everything bad in life as coming from their (maintaining capitalist markets and wages/rape), explain that (the worker/the women) are thus structurally and perenially exploited and need the socialist state and law to intervene on their behalf.
Oh, and a final also: remember that “feminist theory” is made and debated largely in the world of academia (God knows it’s not salable in the real market). Remember that especially in the humanities, academia is the place where the more outlandish, counter-factual, attention-whoring, and completely untenable your idea is, the more Clever-clever brownie points the echo chamber awards you.
You remember “the Principia Mathematica is a rape manual?” Do they even take this stuff seriously themselves? Maybe they do.
There are so many logical holes here I can’t believe you posted this in seriousness.
Damn, you just described this place to a tee.
Seriously though, these types of tactics have been S.O.P. for the left for as long as I can remember, not just feminism. And it’s one of the primary reasons why I’ve always believed that the nation’s college and university systems have been the driving force behind leftist ideology in the U.S. for the last hundred years or so, and especially since the late sixties.
People don’t know enough about the tactics of Marxism when they come out of high-school (or even enough about Marxism itself) to have this type of convicion and behave this way, but they damn sure do once they hit college. If we are ever going to put a stop to the inexorable march toward nanny-state socialism (and perhaps even communism, which to me is what socialism will eventually morph into) and having government meddling in every aspect of our lives, it’s going to be necessary to break the grip that leftie professors have on this country’s colleges and universities.
So come on, everyone…let’s get crackin’! 
Actually, no. It has its origins outside of academia, at least until after 1988 or thereabouts. (Give any radical movement enough time and it may well become both acceptible and harmless as a consequence of a process akin to taxidermy).
The above two links are from a long thread started by december.
Feminist theory is the powerful explanatory social theory of the late 20th century. You do not need to agree with all of its tenets or ascribe to its general principles, but derogating the entire thing as an irrelevant blathering occurring only in academic betrays your ignorance and lack of interest in historically important things that have occurred most probably within your own lifetime.
Your response is nonsensical with respect to the question being debated here regarding what the motivational genesis of rape is “about” for men. It is obvious that some rapes are primarily “about” power. It is equally obvious that some rapes are primarily about lust with sex as the objective.
If you are not debating this point re the genesis of the impulse, but some larger meta-point along the lines that ALL rape, including lust motivated rape, is in some fashion “about” power because it requires physical coercion/domination to achieve then fine, point granted, done and done.
It’s easy (and IMO somewhat lazy) to say that people making the “some rape really is about sex” assertion don’t understand the complexity of the context. The point at issue here is the genesis of the impulse to rape. If you have some specific argument that sexual lust is not the real genesis for any rapes, but a power dynamic is the real motivator, please state your argument.
You’re the best, man! Don’t ever change (or it would confuse the heck out of me). I saw that you just posted to this thread, but before I got to the post, I mused to myself how you would work in Liberalism and the sixties into this topic. And you did it more creatively than I imagined. Bravo!
Normal Phase and Nametag, do you believe the “rape is not about sex” is analogous to saying “mugging is not about money”? If not, could you explain what dynamic makes the two statements different?
As I said before, I read an article some years ago in which the origin of the myth was devastatingly attacked: it was based on faulty research, pure and simple. I really wish I could dig up that article now. Claims that the statement is being oversimplified, or that it’s being strawmanned, are nothing more than fanwankery. It’s not being oversimplified, it was nonsense from the beginning.
A similar, subtler argument can be built that has serious persuasive power. If you argue that rape occurs within our society as often as it does because of a sense that many men have of rightful dominance over women–if you argue that rape occurs because of a power imbalance–then you’ve got something worth discussing.
But rape is very often about sex. And that means that in addressing the problem, we need to address the sexual urges that feed into it. We need to teach teenage boys that their horniness isn’t a crime, but that what they do with it may be.
The “context” is that it was coined as a way to demonize men, by that segment of the far left that interprets EVERYTHING as being about power. The segment that seldom even acknowledges that any other sort of relationship or behavior exists. It was a way of portraying men as being all part of a huge conspiracy designed to oppress women, by women who didn’t want to admit that the majority of men, good and bad, have no such grand agenda. Admitting that rape is often just a ruthless man indulging in an appetite, with no larger plan or agenda involved is against that mythology.