Shirley, I remember the case you mentioned quite well. Believe it or not, the judge bought that defense of it being consensual because she asked him to wear a condom and ruled him “not guilty”. HOWEVER-
Protest from the public swayed the decision. People picketed in front of the courthouse (I remember one sign said, “No Means No”) and he reversed the ruling (or else a higher court reversed it. I don’t remember that part). Sorry…I have no site for this. I am remembering what I saw in the news. I made a point to see if there was a follow-up to that story when I heard about the judges ruling.
MaryAnn
I’m sorry you didn’t win, mom, but I’ll give you a constellation prize! -Greg
MaryAnn, etc: I remember this one pretty well. It was in Texas in the early 90s. The rapist broke into the woman’s house after midnight and raped her at knifepoint - but a grand jury declined to indict because of the condom. I think he was mildly retarded and his attorney argued that in his mind asking him to wear a condom was giving consent. (What did he need the knife for then, I wondered.) Anyway I think the outcry did result in new charges being brought but I don’t remember the rest of it.
There was also a woman in upstate New York several years ago who was gang raped while passed out unconscious in a bar. Now I disagree with the notion that a drunk woman can’t legally consent to sex, but this wasn’t a drunk woman, this was an UNCONSCIOUS woman. Her rapists pled guilty and were given $800 fines, no jail time. After an outcry their guilty pleas were overturned and the men went to trial (separately) - the first was found not guilty after just a few hours of deliberation. I was out of the country at the time so I didn’t hear how the others’ trials turned out.
Absolutely correct, just as certain behaviors increase a person’s chance of being mugged. The difference is that nobody would find a mugger not guilty just because his victim exhibited those behaviors.
Genetic predisposition toward a natural tendency to commit rape? Anyone proposing the argument that a human being should have his behavior judged on the criteria applied to baboons and other animals should be allowed the entire argument, without challenge. After all, in a civilized society, we keep dangerous animals in cages for their entire lives. Sounds like a workable plan to me.
When the animals become so intractable that even a cage is not enough to prevent their violence from harming others, we kill them. This whole idea sounds like a system that we could use.
<P ALIGN=“CENTER”>Tris</P>
I’m not intending to imply insult or judgment here but I am curious to know in order to be able to respond to your posts in an appropriate manner, so please forgive what appears to be, but in fact is not intended as, an insulting question:
Are you stupid? –Melinda Shore
Exactly my fear. My real issue is with Dateline, a highly visible show, broadcasting such a story. To say that rape occurs in the animal kingdom is different than saying men are predisposed to rape. I may have too much faith in men, but I’ll assume the majority of you all aren’t constantly supressing an urge to forcibly rape every woman you see.
Rainn is the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network, which runs a highly effective, confidential crisis call-in line. One of the more disturbing stats is that somewhere in America, a women is sexually abused every 2 minutes.
I don’t mean to sound like a bitch, but get your facts straight. Of COURSE there are no hard numbers. Rape still has a stigma attached to it. The one-in-three number is one I’ve heard from the local Women Helping Battered Women shelter, it could be a Vermont State stat. As for the “typical rape victim,” I would imagine the repition is due to on-going abuse by family members, spouses, etc. Don’t assume that because a husband rapes his wife that it is any less horrific then a stranger.
A friend tells this story:
I was standing in line in a cafeteria that had the radio on with my friend, a rape victim. A commercial for some Rape Crisis line came on, citing the one-in-three women have either been raped or will in her lifetime statistic. He scoffed and said “If that’s true, one of you three” he pointed to myself, my friend, and a woman walking by, “has been raped. So much for statistics.” I almost hit him.
It happens, Marc. It happens a lot, it happens to a lot of women who don’t have the strength to go through with a painful prosecution, so they never report it. Or they feel, as Vermont State Rep Jim Jeffords once said (I so hate this man) “Rape is a private issue and should not be discussed outside the home.” Get educated.
While it is trash, 90210 had a good rape analogy: imagine your house gets broken into. You’re always looking over your shoulder, waiting for the robber to come back, find you there, and kill you. You eventually get so freaked out that you have to move. That’s how rape victims feel in their own bodies. Except they can’t move.
Sorry for the angry-woman rant, but the only thing that will curb the violence against women is if people become enraged enough to do something.
One must have chaos in oneself to give birth to a dancing star. -Nietzche
What exactly is so threatening to people about rape being “natural”? It’s like some people here refuse to even consider what the author is trying to say. The research must be bad because it disagrees with what you believe in?
It’s obvious that there is a genetic predisposition to rape in certain circumstances. The purpose of DNA is to reproduce itself. Is your world view really so fragile that you can’t accept that humans are just a type of animal?
Why is there so much agression towards this research? Does anyone really think their purpose is to promote rape? Why does this concept threaten you so much?
I haven’t read the research, but they supposedly focused on the insect world, and in fact, didn’t interview a single human rapist or human victim. I wouldn’t say that this makes their research automatically invalid but it puts in on shaky ground, IMO.
RAPE IS IN A GENE? You have got to be kidding me. There are plenty of genes that we have in which we know not to do. We have a nose… do we go and smell peoples faces? We have legs… do we go and kick everyone that is walking in front of us? Give me a break… even if it is in a gene, only the evil would use it. Anyone who commits a rape is a criminal and there should be no 2 thoughts of why that man did it.
Thoughts by Chrissy
“What you think is what you think…but what I think is how it is.”
-me’00
Now, everyone is entitled to read the observations of scientists and animal behaviorists, and draw his/her own conclusions. However…
It strikes me as odd that, when animals are observed doing things that we approve of, we’re quick to say “AHA! That proves that the behavior we approve of is good an natural!”
Example? Well, both male and female chimpanzess have been observed engaging in sex play with members of the same sex. Gay activists were quick to publicize this, saying that any activity engaged in by our closest animal relatives MUST be good and natural (as if “good” and “natural” were synonymous).
Well, I happen to think it’s foolish to base human morality on the behavior of animals. But if you’re going to use ape behavior to justify ONE type of sexuality (as gays and their supporters do), you have no leg to stand on when it turns out that apes do other things you don’t like so much.
Well, just because something is natural doesn’t mean it’s socially acceptable. Using your index finger to pick your nose is perfectly natural, but it’s certainly frowned upon in our society. Using violence to resolve conflict is certainly natural- just about every species on earth does it- but that doesn’t mean that we consider it morally appropriate.
Yes, I am drawing a connection between picking your nose and rape. The one is socially unacceptable, the other is morally unacceptable. But what are morals other than societal strictures?
A.) The research is questionable
B.) NBC was irresponcible in airing stories on questionable research
C.) Their purpose may not have been to promote rape, but it gives an abused woman one less reason to report (well, he didn’t MEAN to, it’s in his genes, Jane Pauley said so, he still loves me…) it gives an aggressive man one more reason to disregard the “no means no” rule. While they as researchers have every right to research whatever hypothosis they want, NBC has an responcibility to stop going after sensational stories that could potentially cause any of the rationales above.
D.) I’ve said in every post:
The real question is why this doesn’t anger more people.
One must have chaos in oneself to give birth to a dancing star. -Nietzche
I am a rape survivor who was too afraid to report the crime to the police, because it was a case of date rape. I had dated the jerk for several months prior to said incident, never dressed provocatively, and made it very clear that I intended to save myself for marriage. So much for that. This occurred in 1982, a time when no one ever talked about date rape. I now regret not reporting it because who knows how many other women this jerk has attacked since then?
I am very close to two rape surviors, both of whom reported the crime. One was a work place rape, and the guy got a slap on the wrist, and kept his job. The other survior was raped at a party by three men. The police told her the likelyhood of catching them was next to nothing. We still don’t like to admit this happens, and the system still lets them slip by. So Trixie, don’t regret, the likelyhood of him recieving any jail time on one accusation is low. It would have required facing him in court and relating the experiance to a room full of strangers, and then the cross examination. It would be hard for anyone to do, especially considering you had just undergone a trauma.
One must have chaos in oneself to give birth to a dancing star. -Nietzche