Fell free to follow up on studies 97 - 101 listed on page 27.
Author Lynn Hecht Schafran, is the Director of the National Judicial Education Program. The article is written for lawyers prosecuting rape cases.
This seems the opposite of your Rule of Thumb link. In this case the ‘common knowledge’ is that women’s clothing is a major contributor to their rape, where the research does not confirm it. I couldn’t find any links to informed dissenting opinion. I’d be interested to see what your google-fu can turn up.
I’ve always been skeptical about this idea, and wonder where it comes from.
It seems to me that often, probably usually, rape is inspired by sexual desire, but is for the victim about a loss of power.
I think what is wrong with rape has mostly to do with issues of power and bodily control. But I don’t think a desire for power or control is what inspires most rapists to rape.
But this is just speculation. Where did the idea that it’s all about power come from?
(oh, this Ted_Y boy’s gonna get eaten alive, and he won’t even know why.)
The orangutan did not commit rape or even sexual assault, as it lacked the mens rea necessary to commit any crime. It is not a human, so it is not held to the standards of human behavior, including comprehension of consequences, knowledge of right and wrong, or the ability to aid in its own legal defense.
“Revealing” dress is subject to cultural standards and context. A naked woman on a nude beach in France is in far less danger of any type of rape than a woman who accidentally shows an ankle under her burkha in Afghanistan. A naked woman in Afghanistan would hopefully be taken in by the authorities, medical personnel, or protected by a stranger, as she would not be in her right mind. Otherwise, she would most likely be raped and dead by morning - not because she was naked, but because her nakedness was a sign that she was vulnerable, an easy kill.
There is no one simple motivation that defines all rape. Several years ago, I read about a man who raped a two year old boy to death while the boy’s mother slept in another room. I consider that a rape motivated by sexual gratification, opportunity, and a complete lack of empathy. If that little boy hadn’t been available, most likely the family dog would have been raped. The gang rape and murder of Brandon Teena/Tina Brandon was less about sexual gratification than it was about destroying someone in the most brutal, degrading manner possible. A former coworker of mine was raped by a friend when she let him sleep over at her place. She’d spent the evening saying “no” to his requests for sex, so he waited until she was asleep, climbed on top, and had sex with her without her consent. That was more about sexual gratification with a specific person, maybe with the benefit of “getting back at her” for saying no.
I think the only bearing revealing clothing has to rape is because:
a. Depending on context, it can be used to interpret that a woman is easier prey. Perhaps her dress implies that she’s a prostitute, in which case, it’s far less likely the authorities will pursue her rapist. Perhaps it’s a clue that she doesn’t read social situations well (wearing a low cut top and high cut skirt to a funeral, say) and can be manipulated into a situation where rape is more easily accomplished.
b. Some people (apparently, the Thais for one) still consider dressing in revealing clothing to be “asking” for it. A rapist might use that reasoning as a rationalization to himself - it was okay that he raped that girl, because she was asking for it. Or, he might be a step removed and consider it a defense if he’s caught, regardless of whether he believes it himself.
c. Related to b, if a woman is going out looking for a sex partner, then she will probably dress in revealing, provocative clothing, the better to interest potential partners. Some people infer from this that she has already consented to sex with anyone interested, as opposed to advertising her availability and making the final decision at a later time. Again, a rapist might believe this, use it to rationalize his behavior, or use it as a defense.
d. If it is a misogynistic society, like the Taliban, rape is used as a tool of terror and punishment. Any woman who does not kowtow to authority is likely to be called a whore. If she questions or challenges authority - her husband, her father, the police, the government - either loses their protection and can be raped with impunity, or she is likely to be killed by her male family members. I suppose in those cases, she may be accused of dressing in revealing manner as an excuse to indulge in an “honor” killing.
Probably from an assumption that the typical rape is one committed by a sadist who kidnaps a woman, confines her, ties her up, etc. in some big ritual violation. The “rape is power, not sex” idea is somewhat less applicable to the rather-drunk guy who gets too aggressive with the rather-drunk woman.
There are indeed categories of rape and rapists, with the wiki page listing some of them, and power-as-motivation is not universal. In fact, very little is universal about rape, so I guess while revealing clothing might be a factor in some, it wasn’t in others.
As for the OP, my willingness to take him seriously is inversely proportional to the number of times he uses “lol” in his posts.
The whole “dressing sexy makes it OK for men to rape you” is so OBVIOUSLY an attempt to shift the blame to the victim, it’s hard to see why any reasonable person would take it seriously. By the same reason, being young and hot (i.e., having a bitchin’ bod) also makes you a more likely rape victim, but you don’t see that passed around as a likely explanation because it’s much harder to blame someone for something they have no control over.
Actually, nearly every review I have seen of that book from a scientific perspective has noted that Ghiglieri extrapolates from poorly understood or poorly documented information, rarely even basing his claims on actual studies.
One explanation mioght be that while one can employ a gun, knife, or club in any weather, dropping one’s pants to commit rape in the winter imposes an added burden on the perpetrator that might provide a bit of inhibition for the act.
I have seen a lot of women wearing extremely sexy clothes in public. I have raped very few of them. As a matter of fact ,none. It is not the clothes or lack of. If you are a rapist ,you will rape whether they are wearing sexy clothes or not. Rape was not invented in the last 20 or 30 years when scantier clothes became public.
TBH, I’ve always thought that was rubbish. Doubtless some guys get a thrill from power/domination etc, but I’d say mostly it’s about sex.
They see a girl who’s hotter than they could ever hope for, and they go for it.
And, I think most of you are ignoring the fact that sexy clothes often (but nor always) equal skimpy clothes. These give ease of access, and that is doubtless what a rapist would be looking for.
It’s the first thing I would consider after ruling out sexual desire. Why would I rule out sexual desire? If I want to understand why someone did act A and not act B, I would begin by considering how those acts are different, not how they are the same. So, what’s the difference between a loving couple and a woman being raped?
Imagine you’re going to see one of two movies, both of which star Brad Pitt, who, I might add, really is the coolest. However you decide to see one of these movies, Brad Pitt will necessarily have nothing to do with it, because he’s in both movies.
Does this mean sexual desire has nothing to do with rape? I think the answer has to be no, and I think that research will bear this out (wiki suggests some already think it has). Because, after all, it is at least part of what separates a rapist from a robber or murderer. But how far does this actually take us? Robbers and murderers have sex, too!
You are assuming that all people have equal oppurtunity to be a loving couple, and to rape.
There are many people out there who are too ugly/awkward/poor to seduce/pay for a woman/man.
If A is not an option, then maybe B becomes an imperative?
Rape is a hate crime, not so much a sex crime. Sex is just a consequence of that attacker’s hate and control issue. Now, does dressing provocative make women more susceptible to rape? I’m sure it has in some cases. But do some research on women that have been raped, ask them what they were wearing when they were raped and I guarantee you it was a mini skirt and pumps. Most were dressed in regular jeans and a shirt or blouse.
I wish people would stop saying this. Most rapist are NOT a stranger in a dark alley or an intruder breaking into your home. Most rape is just a guy trying to get laid and not taking no for an answer. I think that kind of situation IS purely about sex, not that it makes it any less reprehensible but women have a lot more to fear from the cute guy they are on a date with whos really horny than they do from a crazy stranger in the park.
It’s not really necessary to assume this, based on the existence of rapists that have been married, or had girlfriends, or what-have-you.
I’m not denying there’s a sexual component to rape; I’m denying how critical it is in understanding the crime of rape. Everyone wants more stuff; not everyone is a thief. Of course desire for property or money drives thieves, but that’s not the end of the analysis; it doesn’t really even help us locate thieves (who after all might be white collar, skimming off the top there).
Ruling out sexual desire seems really, really weird to me. Sexual desire is a fundamental component of being an adult human. It’s a very powerful motivator.
Someone who is a decent person, who recognizes that other people have their own desires, and who recognizes that being raped is a horrific experience, will of course not let their own desire for sex overrule their desire not to inflict horror on other people.
But someone who treats all other people (or just women) as objects–be they sociopaths or psychopaths (see this thread for the distinction)–will not have compunctions about fulfilling their sexual desire at the cost of inflicting horror on someone else.
There are, to be sure, some examples of rape that are more about power than about sex. Stranger-rape probably falls in this category a lot of the time. There are other examples of rape that are more about fulfilling sexual desire than about power. Date rape probably falls into this category a lot of the time.
It seems bizarre to me to suggest that someone who takes a woman on a date, tries to be charming all evening, goes back to her house with her, tries to remain romantic, and then refuses to take no for an answer and rapes her, is doing it all for the power. His horrifying and revolting choices appear to be motivated by sexual desire, and when the woman appeared to be thwarting his desire, he refused to let her do so.
Yes, there’s obviously a power play in there. But I wouldn’t say that the power play is the primary motive.
It’s been a few years since I’ve read up on this subject. I remember that last time I read up on it, I was convinced that the “rape is not about sex” argument was based on extremely faulty research.
Two final thoughts. First, if all rape turned out to be about sex and not about power, that wouldn’t make rape one iota more acceptable. Second, if it turned out that women who intended to dress in a sexually attractive fashion were targeted by rapists more often than women who intended not to dress in a sexually attractive fashion, that wouldn’t make rapists one iota less culpable for their crimes. I think we need to make these two things clear so that we can have the conversation without any repellent implications being attached to the conversation.
This is an interesting point. I’d say that thieves desire material goods, as do a lot of people; what separates them (usually) from other people is their willingness to make other people suffer in order to gratify their desire for material goods. It’s not their desire to demonstrate their superiority over their victims that leads to carjackers taking cars at gunpoint, nor is it their unique desire to have a nice car; it’s their lack of concern for the victims that leads to their carjacking exploits.
Rapists are similar (in at least some cases). It’s neither their desire to demonstrate their superiority over their victims that leads to rapists committing rape, nor is it their unique desire to have sex; it’s their lack of concern for the victims that leads to their committing rape.
Left Hand of Dorkness, wikipedia mentions a [lone] study where rapists were shown to respond positively to sexual sadism. I think that’s an interesting point, and definitely goes along with your last post.
I’ve read the odd theory or three that rape is an evolutionary strategy that we should expect to happen in some (small) proportion. I don’t know what to make of it; a lot of game-theoretic theories that depend on evolution for their support seem sketchy to me (they sound more like stories than theories). But it would serve as an ultimate cause of rape, while something like sexual sadism would only be a proximate cause.
Yes, it is a fundamental component of being human, so therefore it is necessarily a part of rapists, who after all are homo sapiens sapiens, but that deduction, while sound, gets us nowhere.
I agree. I’ve never cared for the “rape is about power” meme. It’s never made sense to me.
The hypothesis linking temperature an aggression is something I’ve heard of as well. From where I read, it was referred informally as the heat theory but is pretty much the same thing. It goes about the notion that when it’s too cold, our instincts towards keeping warm, survival, comes first so we are less aggressive. When it is too hot, we’re too uncomfortable to be making a big deal out of things. Then there’s the perfect temperature I think around 92 Fahrenheit where people become more prone to aggressive behavior. This may very well have a strong link to rape as well as any other types of aggression.
Ruling out data is never good… lol It would’ve made more sense if they ruled out cases to make the data correlate to only a small amount of cases, but fully consider it.
Well there are people who just robbed a store and on his way out spots a woman and rapes her on the spot. I don’t think anything was planned there. Also, those who raped that spontaneously tend to carry less weapons, maybe a knife and at most a hand gun. The criminals who carry larger weapons from shotguns to machine guns would less likely rape spontaneously.
I completely agree, as most people probably do, that opportunity comes first.
? I’m supporting that rape is about primarily sex and not violence. But then again, people eat even when they’re not hungry, do they not?
Great point. This shows opportunity presented by clothing. Some people are responding as if I’m saying that the clothing is the primary reason for rape which I am not. Let’s put it this way: A rapist is camping at a dark alley and a woman passes by who was wearing revealing clothes. He waits. Then a woman comes by dressed formally with a purse and everything. He wait. Now the next woman can be either revealing, or not revealing. Which case would you reckon yield a higher probability of rape? Another important factor we should note is that many rapist are criminals of not just rape but also thievery and other crimes. Considering that, maybe the purse is more appealing but if we just look at the rape aspect, revealing definitely wins (loses).
Well why is it that you’re eating me alive? lol Plus I don’t think you did as thorough a job as you’d think. All in all, you made things more personal than need be.
Nobody ever suggested that the ape should be tried guilty of rape. That was the point of the story. Now take the same story and replace the orangutan with a male adult human. He’d probably go to court, at the very least, for those same behaviors.
There is no need to this this* too* seriously, we’re just discussing.
Love your point about dropping pants in bad weathers. I laughed for that one.
For the book, I’m just taking examples from it. I mean it as I didn’t witness the orangutan case myself, but I learned of it through the book. The author proposed some good points although I don’t view everything exactly the same way as he does, nor should anyone else. If I truly intended to simply pass on his views, I would’ve quoted.
Yes, thank you for making that clear. It is very important for everyone, who participates in this discussion, to keep in mind that no matter what kind of conclusion anyone comes up with, they’re by no means proving the rapist any less guilty. It is sad though how some people considers any discussion in this topic obsolete just because we’re not necessarily proving anything.
Some post earlier mentioned the term “potential rapists”. Everyone is a potential rapist but what differentiates rapists from (hopefully) the rest of us is their lack of empathy towards others. Good point.
I’m happy to see several good points made. Not to undermine anyone’s effort, but some points are more agreeable (in turn obvious) but pointing them out does make things clearer for everyone. Keep up the good work.
Do you mean that revealing clothing supposedly increases the probability? That’s what I was addressing. This could be true in any of three ways. First, the determined rapist picks someone dressed provocatively, and is not opportunistic. Doubtful. Second, someone on the street is driven to rape by revealing clothing. Also not likely, A third way, which I didn’t cover, was that revealing clothing drives normal people to become rapists. In that case the rate should fluctuate with dress, and the rate would be a lot less in the old days when a glimpse of stocking was something shocking. Not too likely either.