How dare they have opinions that don’t match hers.
I thought we were seeing a new BigT up until his footnote.
What I got from the ‘starting from scratch’ comment was that maybe they’ve decided to work from a new angle. Maybe they worked on it by looking for the victims and trying to go backward from there, and it isn’t going as well as they’d like, so now they’re trying to start from the perpetrators and work forward instead. It seems to me that identifying the victims was a necessary first step anyway, to keep something from happening again, or to see if there was a connection that would lead to something solid.
Where did I say “I couldn’t take it?” 
Whatever “it” is.
I don’t understand what your issue with this is. Nothing you are saying in this thread makes any sense.
I think bucketybuck nailed it. I used to appreciate your posts. I’ve even supported you on these boards, the last time was in your pit thread. But I think that was where it all started going pear shaped for you. You started flouncing around the forums bragging about how everyone loves you, giving you the ‘right’ to spout off about every little thing… all because of a failed pitting. It’s sad really watching you melting the wicked witch. It seems you torture every little phrase into some indignation.
I don’t dislike you but please stop with the yap, yap, yap.
Don’t you think these two conclusions kind of contradict each other? I don’t see how you can conclude that ugly women don’t get raped from a statement that I cannot understand how raping a disabled women can be appealing on any level - sexual, domination, anything.
Maybe it would be clearer if I said I can’t understand the motivation behind the crime.
Or maybe not.
This was kind of a strange thread, the way it turned.
ETA: thanks, jsgoddess, in all sincerity. I’m glad you can retain enough perspicacity about me to understand my posts.
Regards,
Shodan
Sorry, I misunderstood – I thought you meant “empathize”, as in empathizing with the victim, not the rapist.
(Note – I’m not trying to be sarcastic there, just admitting I misunderstood)
I don’t know why anyone abuses the disabled, except that they’re extremely sick individuals. When people say rape is about “power”, I think that’s a generalizating. Not all rapists are motivated by the same thing – in this case, it’s probably about humiliation, and just be a sick fuck. Domination – look, I can harm someone who can’t fight back?
But I’m not a criminal psychologist.
I WILL however say that the comparison to the disabled in THIS particular case of sex with a blow up doll vs. sex with a disabled individual is pretty crass. Even if it wasn’t intended to be. That’s fucked up, Shodan.
I agree. I was just making a general observation about my feelings on the issue.
Well, I guess I can see that. My point was that it would be better to have sex with a blow-up doll than rape a disabled person. Or to rape anyone, for that matter, but that should be obvious.
Like I said, I don’t see the appeal of this on any level. It can’t be motivated by sex. Dominating someone who can’t take care of themselves can’t be particularly satisfying. If you want to feel better about yourself, wouldn’t it make sense to try to dominate someone who can put up a fight? It’s like showing off your strength by breaking a popsicle stick. How does that prove anything?
Maybe it is just because these women are easy victims. Again, I don’t see the appeal on any level. But then again, there are a lot of things I don’t “get”, and some of them are sexual. I don’t see how this could be satisfying or enjoyable even for the rapist.
Maybe it was sexual sadism, but that is also something I don’t “get”.
And I probably would rather not.
I hope they catch whoever did this nasty crime, and that they are dealt with such that they never have the opportunity to do this again.
Regards,
Shodan
I don’t think the sort of person who gets off on dominating other people is in it for the challenge of the experience. Look at your average schoolyard bully. Who does he target? The runty little skinny kid who can’t put up a fight? Or the starting lineman for the football team?
Perhaps it’s to “prove” to themselves that they can have sex. I know of a case where a mentally handicapped girl was raped, and she thought that the guy who took advantage of her was her boyfriend. Predators tend to focus on the weak kids In this case they think " I can convince this girl with mental disablites that I’m actually her boyfriend…then I can get sex!" . There was a case in my hometown where the gym teacher took advantage of girls with low self esteem.
That’s a reasonable point, therefore I feel I should accuse you of condoning bullying. You monster.
Regards,
Shodan
I do think it’s a little curious to say one can understand the rape of a beautiful woman but not somebody who’s severely disabled. It suggests to me that the first part of the statement might not actually be true (and I do see that I’ve missed the last few posts talking about exactly this).
It kind of points out something that’s been argued about in different threads recently, which is that a lot of people want to assign rape to a point on the sexual behavior scale that’s just, like, a few notches beyond hitting on a woman, or something. Within that framework it’s easy to come to grips with a rape of a healthy attractive woman, and impossible to do so when women institutionalized with disabilities are raped. If the rapist is motivated by the desires that motivate normal human sexuality, it seems incoherent. Which, and I certainly don’t want to make this thread another argument about this, but which I think demonstrates exactly why somebody like me is adamant about saying rape isn’t “about sex” in any ordinary sense, but rather a kind of consumptive, destructive inclination.
I don’t know if that’s what Shot from Guns is picking up on or not. I don’t think what Shodan said is hard to understand or at all offensive in what he intended. But I do think it’s a good indication that maybe the way we commonly understand rape doesn’t account for an element that’s at least very often present.
I think this is really well put.
mhendo, I should have pointed out that it wasn’t your comments I found so bafflingly thick.
One of the more popular genres of erotica is non-consensual. It’s along a spectrum from “I’ll pull out” all the way to violent gangrape in an alley, but it seems that lots of men enjoy the fantasy of hot women having sex against her will, or some component of the act being against her wishes.
Not to beat this particular horse too badly, but doesn’t this kind of show my point? Despite Rule 34 I don’t think there is much porn about sex with mentally disabled women. Granted I know relatively little about the topic.
If rape porn is more common than sex-with-mentally-disabled-women porn, then that would show that it is that much more common to sexualize rape (in fantasy) than to sexualize sex with disabled women.
That doesn’t make either OK.
This was pretty much what I was saying originally. And ISTM that marshmallow’s post about rape porn would seem to show that, at least in fantasy, a certain subset of men can see rape as being motivated by sex.
Maybe that is totally different from the motivations of real rapists. Fantasy often has little to do with reality. Or maybe those who are into rape porn are rapists by intention even if not by deed. I wouldn’t know.
But as I said earlier, if these rapes were motivated by sexual desire, I don’t “get” that. If they were motivated by domination or sexual sadism, I don’t “get” that either. As I’ve said elsewhere (TMI alert) I tend to be rather vanilla in my sexual tastes, which overall has worked out pretty well for me. And I have been rather happily married for the last several decades, which no doubt helps.
Regards,
Shodan
I appreciate that that was your point originally. What I’m saying is that if you think you understand the rape of a beautiful woman because you understand sexual attraction to a beautiful woman, you are probably mistaken, and that mistake is put into clearer relief by the rape of someone you don’t understand sexual attraction to. They aren’t categorically different phenomena.
(IMHO) Yes they are! Look, there are two kinds of rape: Rape due to lust for sex and rape due to lust for power. Obviously, if all you have is lust for sex, you’ll probably just hire a prostitute; but if you have high levels of lust for sex with someone, you’ll want to have sex with them (obviously) and, with a little push thanks to lust for power, you’ll be willing to rape her. Shodan can understand this type, because even though the power angle is lost on normal people like him, he understands the sex angle.
Power=rape is not necessarily true, because if all you wanted is power, you’d kidnap someone and torture them, or you’d set fires in order to control the fire department, or you’d become a serial killer. But if there’s ALSO a sexual angle, then rape makes more sense. From this standpoint, Shodan cannot understand rape that is mostly power based, which is why he finds the rape of disabled women (or any other type of woman who is less likely to cause sexual attraction) much harder to understand–it’s just more alien.
Amiright, Shodan?
It’s a common fantasy for both sexes.
That’s fine, but your explanation belied the point by blending them. I’m not an expert, and it’s a complicated thing. All I’m trying to say is that your framework of looking at the problem doesn’t account for the real-world instances of the crime.