I don’t see the disconnect between rape being about sex. After reading both the “pro-domination” and “pro-sexual gratification” cites, I would say the answer is in between the two extremes.
Rape has a sexual component to it. A rape without any sexual contact is not considered “rape” but assault. At the same time an assault with any sexual component (legally) equates to a sexual assault (rape is no longer used these days).
It’s counterintuitive to me because I do not want to dominate the women I have sex with. I want to have sex. My view is based on my own view on sex. I would say most males have the urge to have sex only for sexual gratification, while on the other side of the spectrum are men (and women of course) who view sex simply as some sort of power struggle.
I admit the “fantasy” rape on the internet appeals to me on some levels only on the context that sex is happening, not the fact that the men (or women) are taking “advantage” of another person (at least to any extreme). And culture has a rather large bearing on why rape is more common in say, Japan (with a rather large selection of rape anime) and other countires.
At a guess I would say most people fall into the sex = fun side of things which is why it’s a common misconception(?) that rape must deal primarily with sex.
You have to be a woman. Penetrating a warm body feels infinitely better than any method of masturbation. It would provide a more satisfying orgasm by virtue of feeling better physically, though no doubt the emotional consequences, not to mention the prison sentence, would catch up with one after the fact.
Bad sex is way better than masturbation. Just like bad delivery pizza is better than good frozen pizza.
Of course you guys are welcome to your opinions about whether you would prefer (a) masturbation, or (b) intercourse with an unconscious woman, but it is ridiculous for you to (implicitly at least) claim to speak for all men on the subject.
Aholibah’s reasoning sounds plausible to me, a straight non-virgin, adult male. If it doesn’t sound plausible to you Blake or Ellis Dee, well, of course you’re welcome to your opinions. But enough with the “you obviously don’t know what you’re talking about” kind of dismissive posturing.
I was speaking to the assertion that masturbation feels better than bad sex. Also the point that the only possible advantage to sex with an unconscious person is domination. My response is that a vagina feels better than a hand.
Do you, constantine, claim masturbation feels better than sex?
If your wife or live-in girlfriend, in response to your advance, replied “go for it, but I’m not waking up for it”, would you decline on the grounds that masturbation feels better?
I don’t think the idea that all violent crime is motivated to a greater or lesser degree by a desire for domination is wrong at all. There is a reason why some people steal by non-violent means (embezzlement, shoplifting, writing bad checks, etc) and others do so by pointing a gun in someone’s face.
** constantine** I don’t feel at this point that I can respond to your criticism better than ** Ellis Dee** has already done, so you can take his response as mine.
Nor do I, though I’d have to give it more thought to be definite. My point is that if it is true then the oft heard refrain “rape is not about sex, its’s about violence” is as counterintuitive and incorrect as a claim that “bank robbery isn’t about getting money, it’s about violence”.
Actually, if we limit ourselves to sensation and ignore emotional connection, masturbation feels better than good sex unless you’re inept at masturbation. There does exist truly spectacular sex with another person but you aren’t going to obtain that from anyone who isn’t doing things on purpose to arouse tantalize and tease you physically.
Apparently experiences do vary. I disagree on the pizza opinion, too. We may just be completely without a common frame of reference here.
[hijack, I’m afraid]
But as to your first paragraph, does this mean that if you found yourself with access to a recently dead woman and in urgent need of an orgasm, you’d go for the corpse rather than masturbating?
[/hijack]
But 'rape is not about sex, it’s about violence" is not really a claim. It’s a slogan, just as “armed robbery is not about getting money, it’s about violence” would be a slogan. And in a world like the one I remember in the 70’s , where it wasn’t at all uncommon for people to ask what the victim expected when she dressed like that, went out at night alone, whatever, as if any normal man would turn into a rapist if sexually aroused, where people could say " He’s too good-looking to need to rape" and where a weatherman could believe the “lie back and enjoy it” comment was acceptable on-air after a news story about a rape, it wasn’t a bad slogan. A more accurate statement would be :
"All rapes are at least somewhat about power, domination or control. By definition, rape is having sex with another person without that person’s consent , which is a form of domination in itself. There may also be sexual desire involved, or the sexual desire and the desire for control may be so twisted together that they are impossible to separate. But a normal man does not turn into a rapist because once he is aroused, he suddenly becomes incapable of controlling his actions. And a rapist will not suddenly become harmless if he loses the use of his sexual organs- he may simply start using instruments to commit the assault , as some already do. The problem is in the rapist, not in how the victim was dressed or in where she was walking late at night. "
But that won’t fit on a bumper sticker or a poster. And I think the slogan did its job- it got people to think enough about the issue to change attitudes significantly. I still hear people blame the victim inciting the rape sometimes, but the people hearing the comment are stunned, not nodding thier heads in agreement. I haven’t heard "He’s too good-looking to need to rape " in at least 20 years.
The good sex vs. bad sex sub-hijack has missed one key point: we don’t desire to have sex because it feels good. That’s a side benefit, but our desire to have sex with another person is way out of proportion to how good it feels. Just look at what young men do for sex - the violence, grooming, even dancing! We don’t do that stuff becuase sex simply feels good. Comparing sex with another person to masturbation misses the point entirely.
For anyone who maintains that the male sex drive has little to do with rape, can you find cites of how castration has affected recidivism in male sex offenders? I’ll start looking, but according to that theory, one would expect no difference.
That’s a major problem with the idea of castration for sexual predators. The slogan “rape is about power, not sex” invalidated the concept of (chemical) castration before it even became an option.
My guess is that castration does not affect recidivism, and I would love to see any cites one way or the other.
I think Doreen summed it up nicely: the slogan was misleading (and IMO wrong), but had good intentions and served its purpose.
Actually, there are some studies. Castration has been tried in Europe since 1920. There’s not a huge amount of data, but what we have shows that recidivism is reduced drastically. Studies in Denmark report that rates dropped from 50% down to 5%, and from Germany, from 90% to 2%. Studies reporting lower effects included other sex “offenses” which may not apply, such as consensual homosexual sex.
The nearest I’ve ever been tempted to commit rape involved a fellow-lodger who was pissed out of her skull. It had a lot to do with the fact that I hadn’t got laid in a year and a half. I doubt that it would have been very satisfactory, but at the time I gave brief but serious consideration to the idea, as I was certainly getting sick and tired of my hand. I’m not proud of experiencing the temptation; I’m pleased to say I put it from me with not much of a struggle.
(Parenthetically, I was, years later, invited to “help myself” by a girlfriend who had also got falling-down drunk, and I’m here to confirm that the superiority of a vagina, when it is an uncooperating albeit not unwilling one, to a hand, is by no means a given.)
So that’s one vote for “it’s about sex”. Mind you, since I am not an actual rapist but am just reporting a near miss, that would weaken the point somewhat, I guess.
And OTOH I remember reading a newspaper report about a predator who had been doing his stuff in the Ibiza nightclubs, and in his case he was getting any amount of consensual action - so there’s a counterbalancing vote for “it’s about power”.
I’ve been reading along and would like to know if all of you who maintain that rape is simply a man unable to control his raging sexual appetite have thought about the logistics of rape? We’ve got a few examples here of drug induced date rape where the victim is unconscious and therefore unable to fight back. I can see where you can argue that scenario is a horny guy gaining compliance through drugs and alcohol. That isn’t the only type of rape out there though.
What about the guy in an alley who grabs a kicking and screaming woman at knifepoint? Forcing her to submit under threat of death? She’s not going to be warm and soft and moist - she’s going to be rigid and most likely dry and screaming or crying. Forcing himself into her is going to be painful to her and probably to him since friction without lubrication is hot and painful. I highly doubt the rapist will pause to whip a bottle of KY out of his pocket to ease his progress.
Now for all the men who have stated that sex, even bad sex, is better than masturbation. Does bad sex include having your partner sobbing and terrified and in pain? Would you really be able to maintain your sexual desire and your erection as she begged you to stop? How much of that scenario is about sexual gratification and how much is about power and domination?
Data showing that castration reduces sexual violence would not specifically support the thesis that rape is in part precipitated by being horny, regardless of whether or not such is the case. We already have pretty strong evidence that testosterone is linked to aggression, right?
You have to pay attention to the difference between causation and correlation, and the possibility of conflated indepdendent variables being introduced:
Continuing the (inevitable) hijack about Sex VS Power:
I think it’s evident that the two cannot be seperated so easily. Often one leads onto the other. For instance, many consenting partners get a real kick out of tying each other up, handcuffing each other and such. In those circumstances, the pair are obviously getting sexual pleasure from their positions of power (or being dominated).
I have never met someone who had committed rape or been raped themselves (at least, none I know about), but I suspect that it is often very similar in cases of rape: the man (or woman) gets a sexual buzz out of having complete control over his victim. In that sense, it’s incorrect to say ‘it’s about power’ or ‘it’s about sex’ - it’s about both.
Also, as most people will know, you don’t have to actually experience physical pleasure to enjoy a sexual encounter - for instance, performing a sexual act on a partner can often be as sexually exciting as being performed on. Most teenage boys would tell you that fondling a girlfriend for the first time is very exciting and arousing, even though the guy is not getting any physical pleasure. In the same way, a rapist could experience a great deal of sexual pleasure simply from dominating his victim (from putting a gun to their head, for instance).
I’m afriad I have no idea who began the theory of ‘it’s about power’ - my guess is that it originated in a lot of different places at lots of different times, rather than being invented by one person or group.
I think Doreen has it exactly right. The slogan “rape is about power, not sex,” is more like a rallying cry: “taxation without representation is tyranny,” rather than a scientific claim like “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
The point is, people used to (and many still do) think and talk about rape as if it were sex with a violent component (and even then the violent component was usually downplayed) rather than a violent act that involved sex.
The sexual component predominated in the discussion. So rape survivors were treated as people complaining about a sex act. So they were subject to jokes and insults because, after all, it’s not polite–especially for a woman–to talk about a sex act in public. And it’s particularly not polite or appropriate to complain about “bad sex.” So people judge the accusers claim against the defendant: “he raped me” by looking at ridiculously irrelevant factors such as the defendant’s appearance–a guy who was too good looking wouldn’t need to rape to get sex, so she must be making it up, and the accusers appearance, “a guy like him would never be interested in a plain looking girl like that, so she must be making it up.”
Well, of course, rape is not “bad sex.” Rape is “bad violence,” and the emphasis should be on the violent component, and rape survivor treated as someone who suffered an attack, not as a woman complaining that the sex was a little too rough.
Thus the point of the slogan. Now to the extent that this slogan forestalls legitimate research into possible means–such as, I suppose, castration (chemical or otherwise)–for stopping rape, well,then that is grounds for criticizing it, or at least criticizing uncritical adoption of it.
Since this has obviously become a debate, I’m putting in my 2 cents. I think “Rape is not about sex” is simply empty rhetoric, and unnecessary at that. The reason rape is wrong is because it hurts the victim; the perpetrator’s motivation is irrelevant towards evaluating the wrongness of the crime. The problem with inventing dogmatic phrases such as “Rape is not about sex”, is that it tends to imply that rape somehow would not be as bad if it were about sex, which is ludicrous. It seems unnecessary to me to take something like rape, which is universally agreed to be an evil, and attempt to strengthen the case for it being wrong. No such strengthening is needed. Inventing catch-phrases that are not supported by evidence doesn’t help. But of course, most people are afraid to criticize such rhetoric because they are likely to be branded as not being sufficiently tough on rapists, or even as being pro-rape, which of course is not the case at all. It’s kind of like the following hypothetical exchange:
