The sex myth

K-9

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

No, no, no. It's not 'attitudes' that cause rape, it's rapists. Someone thinking walking a dodgy area on your own is not a good idea (for men or women) does not create rapists, murderers or muggers. You are really not the best person to be working in a rape crisis centre.



Never heard anyone say that

While I'd agree to an extent, some attitudes certainly don't help. The "she's asking for it" type one if a women wears short skirts, low tops thing. The Sunday Tribune did a survey a few years back before it closed and that attitude was still very prevalent among teenagers, of both sexes.

You'd think in this day age it would be nearly extinct, but nope. The Listowel case is another example, where all types of slurs were thrown at the girl.

kylith

Uriel. wrote: »

hmmm

Does The Gentleman's Club's Thread "tGC Easy on the Eye Thread"


classify as being a component of the rape culture? :pac:

Only if TLL's 'Who makes you drool?' does.

Henlars67

wetfoot wrote: »

I think the Steubenville case is a very good example of rape culture. The first thing to remember is that the perpetrators were examples of your average high school student. There is nothing particularly evil or different about them. They, like their peers used social media, were interested in sports and were also very popular, not only with their friends but also young women and their teachers.

These same young men thought it appropriate to take an extremely drunk young girl from party to party, sexual assault her, rape her and publicise it via social media. The only consequence of this behaviour in their minds was the kudos they received from their friends for being a pair of studs. At no point did any of those young men stop and think that they were doing anything wrong. The very fact that they described their behaviour while it was happening on social media proves that.

The case was only brought to the attention of the media via a female blogger who had seen the social media activity of that night. She has since been subject to appalling abuse as has the victim of the attack. Mostly from other young women who feel she asked for it, should have been grateful to get the attention from those young men and has ruined the lives of promising, popular students.

On the day of the verdict, the Fox and CNN reporters were nearly in tears about those boys and the loss of their futures. The outpouring of support for the perpetrators and the outpouring of vitriol against their victim is a perfect example of rape culture.

Not really the same as laughing off a slap on the arse though, is it?

K-9

Sleepy wrote: »

Working in bars throughout my college years I'd have been groped, pinched or felt up on a weekly basis. Once I even had a woman walk up to me and unzip my fly observing that there was nothing I could do about it without dropping the large stacks of glasses I was holding at the time. TBH, I found that one amusing even if she wasn't someone I'd have welcomed a sexual advance from. Were I to categorise those incidents as sexual assault, and on the basis of assessment being espoused by some in this thread I should have, I believe I'd be trivialising "real" sexual assault.

But it's an individual thing, just because you view it lightly and don't regard it as assault doesn't mean another man, or indeed a woman has to. That's the point getting missed.

Trudiha

Wow, in a thread that become about rape, some men find it acceptable to post links to places where it's encouraged to objectify women amid claims there's no rape culture.

tritium

Trudiha wrote: »

I can't see any real point in that. All I'm seeing is a bunch of men who don't seem to have any investment in changing the status quo. It's like being in a room with a bunch of rednecks, shouting 'racism, what racism?

As I'm sure you realise, when you resort to name calling and abuse it usually means you've lost the intellectual argument.....,,


The reality is many posters here, myself included, disagree with you as to what the status quo actually is. As I noted earlier, if you're looking to be offended it's usually possible to find it. polarising terms such as "rape culture" will always invite a backlash, since there is tremendous controversy, even within feminist groups around it. That said I think most posters, while disagreeing with you have given fairly cogent arguments for their position

Gbear

Czarcasm wrote: »

One expression in common everyday use that I personally find particularly disgusting and trivialising of the act of rape is the use of the word "frape", as in somebody else having accessed your account on facebook and posting on your behalf.

The casual use of the word rape in itself in everyday common language use is trivialising the act of rape.

I disagree with this.

Context forms an important part of language and people are generally able to understand that.

For example:

A soccer commentator talks about how a winger got the better of a fullback
"He absolutely murdered him there". No problem.

Conversely, if he said
"He absolutely raped him there", cue ****storm.

The former doesn't trivialise or condone murder. The latter doesn't do the same to rape.

Context is more important than the word used. The commentator could've replaced the words "rape" or "murder" with an inaudible grunt and we'd still know what he meant.

There's a more general problem of people trying very hard to get offended by things that are completely trivial. That in turn trivialises actual problems, like rape.

Standman

Trudiha wrote: »

Wow, in a thread that become about rape, some men find it acceptable to post links to places where it's encouraged to objectify women amid claims there's no rape culture.

This is quite a silly post.

wetfoot

Czarcasm wrote: »

This exactly. It's the same as the "slut walk" nonsense- their intention being to "take the power out of the word" "slut".

A rapist isn't going to give a shìte about what society chooses to call their behaviour, much less what society chooses to call their victims, or "survivors" is the new buzzword apparently.

Survivors isn't so much a buzzword but an example of the power of language. Certainly in domestic violence circles, women who have experienced abuse often prefer to self identify as survivors as opposed to victims. It suggests not only an aspect of strength but also choice and for many women it's the first choice they have been free to make on their own terms.

We talk all the time about people surviving extreme events, whether that's an accident or an attempt on their life or other such trauma. Personally I think it's an appropriate term to use as it suggests there is life after abuse.

I also think its worth pointing out given some of the comments on this topic that it might be appropriate for men to listen when women tell them there is such a thing as rape culture. It doesn't mean we're calling you rapists, but we are telling you something important that we feel and you can make a difference to.

kylith

Trudiha wrote: »

Wow, in a thread that become about rape, some men find it acceptable to post links to places where it's encouraged to objectify women amid claims there's no rape culture.

Are you talking about Uriel's link to TGC? There's an exact counterpoint for that thread in The Ladies Lounge. Is that also encouraging objectification?

Having flicked through the thread in TGC I can't see anything that could count as remotely 'rape culture'. Lots of remarks about beauty and grace, but nothing I'd find at all disrespectful or objectifying, and there's probably less flesh on show than in WMYD in TLL.

ahnowbrowncow

Trudiha wrote: »

Wow, in a thread that become about rape, some men find it acceptable to post links to places where it's encouraged to objectify women amid claims there's no rape culture.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055192287

Oh no, women are objectifying men.

Can you have a discussion without using the phrase rape culture or do you just resort to it whenever you can't think of a counter argument?

tritium

Trudiha wrote: »

Wow, in a thread that become about rape, some men find it acceptable to post links to places where it's encouraged to objectify women amid claims there's no rape culture.

Sigh, there you go looking for offence again. As someone already pointed out the ladies lounge has a similar "who makes you drool" thread. Are you twice as outraged yet?

There's nothing wrong (it's probably even healthy) with fancying someone if the opposite, or indeed same, sex. I'm sure you can find a few posters whose language in tgc you object to, and to be honest so could I in the ladies lounge. The doesn't make the thread evil

Trudiha

tritium wrote: »

The reality is many posters here, myself included, disagree with you as to what the status quo actually is. As I noted earlier, if you're looking to be offended it's usually possible to find it. polarising terms such as "rape culture" will always invite a backlash, since there is tremendous controversy, even within feminist groups around it. That said I think most posters, while disagreeing with you have given fairly cogent arguments for their position

What part of what the statue quo is do you disagree with, do you not think that women are raped? Are you suggesting that I shouldn't be offended by rape or that I shouldn't be offended by a society that allows rape to happen and rapist to get away with it?

I can see that many men find the term 'rape culture' offensive and I guess that's because it implies that rape doesn't happen in a vacuum, that it might have something to do with the ideas held by many men rather that just rapists. I can see why that might make people uncomfortable but it doesn't mean that rape culture doesn't exist. I can see how we can all perceive things differently, depending on our starting point, I have mine and you have yours, but do you not find it just a bit strange that a discussion about rape turns into a discussion about what victims should wear and how they should behave? If I were to suggest that a rapist should wear a tshirt saying 'rapist' on nights he feels like raping, would you really think that was a sane argument to put forward?

Trudiha

kylith wrote: »

Are you talking about Uriel's link to TGC? There's an exact counterpoint for that thread in The Ladies Lounge. Is that also encouraging objectification?

Having flicked through the thread in TGC I can't see anything that could count as remotely 'rape culture'. Lots of remarks about beauty and grace, but nothing I'd find at all disrespectful or objectifying, and there's probably less flesh on show than in WMYD in TLL.

The objectification of men doesn't lead to the kind of fear that curtails mens' lives. Have you every heard a mammy telling her teenage son to cover his body in case he encounters a woman unable to control herself?

shopaholic01

This thread is one of the most bizarre I've seen on Boards.


I don't believe having your bum touch is sexual assault. By that definition a lot of males and females commit sexual assault every weekend.

Yes, groping is annoying, but a simply F*ck off stops it. I've had it happen and it never once occured to me that I had been sexually assaulted. I can only imagine how a guard would react if I were to report it.

It's dangerous to equate this to sexual assault, or to indicate that it may lead to rape. It demishes the impact sexual assault has on a victim, and could ultimately lead to these crimes being taken less seriously.

It's interesting that in Irish law a woman cannot commit rape, just sexual assault. It immediately implies that a sexual crime committed by a woman is 'less serious' than one with a male perpetrator.

I don't believe Ireland has a 'rape culture', neither do I know any man who condones rape, finds it amusing or blames the victim.

If an alien were to land and read this thread they would be likely to assume that men and women are a separate species intent on harming each other.

shopaholic01

Trudiha wrote: »

The objectification of men doesn't lead to the kind of fear that curtails mens' lives. Have you every heard a mammy telling her teenage son to cover his body in case he encounters a woman unable to control herself?

No, I've never heard it said to a daughter either.

Your post suggests that men can't control their sexual urges and randomly rape women on a whim.

Is that the result of the 'rape culture'?

Sleepy

Trudiha wrote: »

You're not looking out for the victim, you're simply trying to change the victim to one that's more exposed or vulnerable. Cover up the woman you know and the attacker will go and find one with a shorter skirt or who's a bit drunker. What do you think is the logical conclusion of this, that women are all held under lock and key?

Following that logic, any woman who attends a self defence classes with the idea of preparing herself to beat the daylights out of a potential rapist is now contributing to Rape Culture and a Rape Apologist :rolleyes:

Rosy Posy wrote: »

sbsquarepants wrote:

So what are you supposed to do? Breathalise every man or woman you score with? If two people meet in a nightclub and wake up naked the following morning with no memory of what happened (as has happened me several times and i'm sure happens most people at some stage) what crime has taken place?

I guess it depends on whether one person was significantly drunker, and whether consent was obtained.

One person being "significantly drunker" would only qualify here if one of the parties was nearly sober or the other was passed out unconscious tbh.

Whether consent was obtained is going to be very difficult to figure out in a culture as drink obsessed as ours. Without going down lunacy lane and suggesting everyone should obtain consent in writing prior to any sexual activity how do we figure out if consent was given by both parties in the situation sbsquarepants outlines? Video every sexual encounter from start to finish?

TBH, I could almost understand someone who had regular drunken sex installing a camera and videoing every encounter without informing their partners as protection from such claims. I'm not saying I'd condone it by any means but I'd understand their line of thinking.

Trudiha wrote: »

I find it frustrating to hear, over and over again from seemingly decent people that rape is wrong but that some women are more rapable than others and we just have to accept that.

If we define "rapable" as meaning "likely to be raped" then yes, some women are far more rapable than others: young women who drink to excess, prostitutes, drug users and those who pay no heed to their personal safety are all statistically more likely to be raped than a woman who doesn't engage in such risk-taking behaviour.

It's called reality and if you can't accept it, there's a word for that too: delusional.

K-9 wrote: »

But it's an individual thing, just because you view it lightly and don't regard it as assault doesn't mean another man, or indeed a woman has to. That's the point getting missed.

No, it doesn't. But if they genuinely think it's as serious as an assault as a rape, they clearly think shoving past someone on the street is the same as hitting them with a baseball bat.

Trudiha wrote: »

I can't see any real point in that. All I'm seeing is a bunch of men who don't seem to have any investment in changing the status quo. It's like being in a room with a bunch of rednecks, shouting 'racism, what racism?

So men can't have any investment in changing the status quo?

The status quo that there are rapists in the world? Nope, have a stake in that one in the beautiful shape of a 4 year old daughter. She not only be taught to avoid risk taking but will also be taught every vulnerable location on the human body and how best to strike it.

She'll also be taught the reality that no matter how many slut walks there are, no matter how hysterically the English language gets mis-used and no matter how many genuinely positive ad campaigns like the old "no means no" ones there are: there will still be rapists in this world and those rapists will still consider some women to be easier targets than others.

tritium

Trudiha wrote: »

I can see that many men find the term 'rape culture' offensive and I guess that's because it implies that rape doesn't happen in a vacuum, that it might have something to do with the ideas held by many men rather that just rapists.

Ah, so now it's ideas held by men rather than by society. I think I see where this is going and to be honest it's not a very nice or balanced place!

I can see why that might make people uncomfortable but it doesn't mean that rape culture doesn't exist. I can see how we can all perceive things differently, depending on our starting point, I have mine and you have yours, but do you not find it just a bit strange that a discussion about rape turns into a discussion about what victims should wear and how they should behave? If I were to suggest that a rapist should wear a tshirt saying 'rapist' on nights he feels like raping, would you really think that was a sane argument to put forward?

if you go back through the thread, I think you'll find you were one of the principal actors in bringing up and sustaining the point about dress and behaviour

kylith

Trudiha wrote: »

The objectification of men doesn't lead to the kind of fear that curtails mens' lives. Have you every heard a mammy telling her teenage son to cover his body in case he encounters a woman unable to control herself?

Oh, so it's ok to objectify men because women can't physically overpower them? Do men not feel intimidated when harassed by women?

Pug160

A myth, in my opinion is that because we now live in a very sexualised society, most people are having sex, and more than ever before. I think that is false and there's a possibility that less people are having sex now, and the truth is that it's a minority of men who are getting most of the girls.

Odysseus

wetfoot wrote: »

Survivors isn't so much a buzzword but an example of the power of language. Certainly in domestic violence circles, women who have experienced abuse often prefer to self identify as survivors as opposed to victims. It suggests not only an aspect of strength but also choice and for many women it's the first choice they have been free to make on their own terms.

We talk all the time about people surviving extreme events, whether that's an accident or an attempt on their life or other such trauma. Personally I think it's an appropriate term to use as it suggests there is life after abuse.

I also think its worth pointing out given some of the comments on this topic that it might be appropriate for men to listen when women tell them there is such a thing as rape culture. It doesn't mean we're calling you rapists, but we are telling you something important that we feel and you can make a difference to.

If we are going to talk about the power of language and taking into consideration that those who are putting forward this notion of a "rape culture" have stated that this is caused by the actions of both genders.

Should the above post not state something like:

"that it might be appropriate for people to listen when when other people tell them there is such a thing as rape culture. It doesn't mean we're calling you rapists, but we are telling you something important that we feel and you can make a difference to."


Have worked with those who have experienced sexual violence of both genders, I don't think I need to be educated by a specific gender on the topic. Of course there is plenty of room for my ongoing CPD, but that will be facilitated by experienced people, not one specific gender.

Mr Benevolent

Pug160 wrote: »

A myth, in my opinion is that because we now live in a very sexualised society, most people are having sex, and more than ever before. I think that is false and there's a possibility that less people are having sex now, and the truth is that it's a minority of men who are getting most of the girls.

So you're single and male then?

Czarcasm

Gbear wrote: »

I disagree with this.

Context forms an important part of language and people are generally able to understand that.

For example:

A soccer commentator talks about how a winger got the better of a fullback
"He absolutely murdered him there". No problem.

Conversely, if he said
"He absolutely raped him there", cue ****storm.

The former doesn't trivialise or condone murder. The latter doesn't do the same to rape.

Context is more important than the word used. The commentator could've replaced the words "rape" or "murder" with an inaudible grunt and we'd still know what he meant.

There's no other context for the use of the word "frape" which is "facebook rape", or a "surprise attack" on somebody if you will. In the context of posting a comment purporting to be somebody else, that's called "fraud", there's no need to invent a new buzzword for it by trivialising the act of non consensual sex.

There's a more general problem of people trying very hard to get offended by things that are completely trivial. That in turn trivialises actual problems, like rape.

You don't have to try very hard to be offended by the trivialisation of the act of rape. That's why words that were commonly used years ago to describe black people or homosexuals are not acceptable in common language use today. We all know what they mean, it doesn't make them any less offensive.

With regard to the idea of context, like I said, it's flippant use is just something I personally find disgusting, I've pulled my friends up on it before who have used it flippantly if they fancied a guy, for example one occasion that springs to mind is when a friend of mine saw a guy she liked in the club and said to me rather enthusiastically-

"I'd fcuking rape him!"

At which point I turned to her and said-

"And how would you like for him to rape you?"

She got the point.

Tigger

Czarcasm wrote: »

One expression in common everyday use that I personally find particularly disgusting and trivialising of the act of rape is the use of the word "frape", as in somebody else having accessed your account on facebook and posting on your behalf.
.

what about grape ?

Wibbs

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Can you have a discussion without using the phrase rape culture or do you just resort to it whenever you can't think of a counter argument?

+1 TBH the second I read the term presented as argument I do tend to take everything that follows with a large pinch of sodium chloride. Not always, but usually.

Odysseus

wetfoot wrote: »

Survivors isn't so much a buzzword but an example of the power of language. Certainly in domestic violence circles, women who have experienced abuse often prefer to self identify as survivors as opposed to victims. It suggests not only an aspect of strength but also choice and for many women it's the first choice they have been free to make on their own terms.

We talk all the time about people surviving extreme events, whether that's an accident or an attempt on their life or other such trauma. Personally I think it's an appropriate term to use as it suggests there is life after abuse.

I also think its worth pointing out given some of the comments on this topic that it might be appropriate for men to listen when women tell them there is such a thing as rape culture. It doesn't mean we're calling you rapists, but we are telling you something important that we feel and you can make a difference to.

Apologies double post

Czarcasm

wetfoot wrote: »

Survivors isn't so much a buzzword but an example of the power of language. Certainly in domestic violence circles, women who have experienced abuse often prefer to self identify as survivors as opposed to victims. It suggests not only an aspect of strength but also choice and for many women it's the first choice they have been free to make on their own terms.

We talk all the time about people surviving extreme events, whether that's an accident or an attempt on their life or other such trauma. Personally I think it's an appropriate term to use as it suggests there is life after abuse.

I also think its worth pointing out given some of the comments on this topic that it might be appropriate for men to listen when women tell them there is such a thing as rape culture. It doesn't mean we're calling you rapists, but we are telling you something important that we feel and you can make a difference to.

I wouldn't reduce such a serious topic to a back and forth about semantics, and I acknowledge that it's only a personal thing for me, but to use the term "survivor" in the context of an invasion of the person is akin to putting a positive spin on the fact that they were violated.

It's just not something that sits right with me to put any kind of a positive spin on something such as rape. I understand what the word survivor is MEANT to do, but for an action such as rape, nice fluffy words in the aftermath really only serve to play down the effect it can have on a person.

Pug160

I don't want to poke at a hornet's nest or anything here, and I do realise how serious rape is and I would never condone it. But just out of interest, how many of you realise just how many women have rape fantasies and how many women crave a brutish man who is very dominant sexually? I'm not linking the two I'm just asking. I have known of a lot of women who are like this.

Standman

Pug160 wrote: »

I don't want to poke at a hornet's nest or anything here, and I do realise how serious rape is and I would never condone it. But just out of interest, how many of you realise just how many women have rape fantasies and how many women crave a brutish man who is very dominant sexually? I'm not linking the two I'm just asking. I have known of a lot of women who are like this.

If you aren't linking the two then what's the relevance of the question?

shopaholic01

Pug160 wrote: »

I don't want to poke at a hornet's nest or anything here, and I do realise how serious rape is and I would never condone it. But just out of interest, how many of you realise just how many women have rape fantasies and how many women crave a brutish man who is very dominant sexually? I'm not linking the two I'm just asking. I have known of a lot of women who are like this.

Another strange post.

If a woman has asked to be treated like this, or has consented to it, it is not rape.

smash

Pug160 wrote: »

I don't want to poke at a hornet's nest or anything here, and I do realise how serious rape is and I would never condone it. But just out of interest, how many of you realise just how many women have rape fantasies and how many women crave a brutish man who is very dominant sexually? I'm not linking the two I'm just asking. I have known of a lot of women who are like this.

You realise that has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, right?

Czarcasm

Pug160 wrote: »

I don't want to poke at a hornet's nest or anything here, and I do realise how serious rape is and I would never condone it. But just out of interest, how many of you realise just how many women have rape fantasies and how many women crave a brutish man who is very dominant sexually? I'm not linking the two I'm just asking. I have known of a lot of women who are like this.

Key word bolded in your post there Pug, and the figures for people that have rape fantasies and indeed carry out said fantasies, there is always the key factor there is that they consent to sex, women who are ACTUALLY raped do not crave being dominated by a brutal rapist.

Pug160

Standman wrote: »

If you aren't linking the two then what's the relevance of the question?

I'm just curious. It's not beyond the realms of possibility, that someone extremely deluded and irrational could use it (my example) as an excuse. In my opinion, there are dangerous social cocktails, that when mixed, have the potential for disaster. The other cocktail in that mixture, by the way, is the powerless feeling some men have.

Czarcasm

smash wrote: »

You realise that has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, right?

Only for the fact that at least it's put an end to a myth that Pug seems to have believed that there was no difference between fantasy and reality.

wetfoot

Henlars67 wrote: »

Not really the same as laughing off a slap on the arse though, is it?

No, it absolutely isn't. But it does cross the social boundaries of entitlement though.

I don't think I am entitled to touch anyone else's body without their consent. I do not assume that physical contact from me would be welcomed by either someone I didn't know or indeed someone I did unless it was either invited or a usual, established and consenting part of our interactions.

I may well be a joy-thief, but I can't laugh off a slap on the arse because it's sending a message that it's completely ok to touch me when I've given no indication that it would be welcome. And when I do challenge it, I'm mostly accused of being frigid, uptight or just plain rude. Very rarely does someone ever say they're sorry for overstepping the mark or appreciate that I may feel uncomfortable. Mostly in their minds I am a joyless harridan who has rejected the great gift of their touching.

ressem

A lot of this thread has been with regard to the 1 in 4 statistic questioned by Henlars67 and asking whether that is a myth.


I think it's derived from the

In Ireland research has shown that one in four children (27%) will experience sexual abuse before the age of 18

The SAVI report...
(http://www.oneinfour.ie/content/resources/savi.pdf carried out in 2002 by Department of Psychology at the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland using random digit dialling)

states that out of a sample size of 3118 respondents, 20.4% of girls and 16.2% of boys experienced unwanted sexual experience involving contact. 10% of girls and 7.4% of boys had non-contact unwanted sexual experience.

The most serious abuse listed in table 4.3 (penetrative categories 9-12 defined by the study) included 1.1%, 1.1%, 0.9%, 0.6% male and 1.7%, 0.9%, 0.3%, 4.4% female children. Or category 8 of attempted intercourse 3% and 4.6%. (Some people might be present in multiple categories)

These would be legally termed Aggravated sexual assault or rape.

In this report there's 12 categories of abuse listed for respondents which occured when they were young.

1. During your childhood or adolescence did anyone ever show you or persuade you to look at pornographic material (for example, magazines, videos, internet, etc.) in a way that made you feel uncomfortable?
2. Did anyone ever make you or persuade you to take off your clothes, or have you pose alone or with others in a sexually suggestive way or in ways that made you feel confused or uncomfortable in order to photograph or video you?
3. As a child or adolescent, did anyone expose their sexual organs to you?
4. During this time did anyone masturbate in front of you?
5. Did anyone touch your body, including your breasts or genitals, in a sexual way?
6. During your childhood or adolescence, did anyone try to have you arouse them, or touch their body in a sexual way?
7. Did anyone rub their genitals against your body in a sexual way?
8. Did anyone attempt to have sexual intercourse with you?
9. Did anyone succeed in having sexual intercourse with you?
10. Did anyone, male or female, make you or persuade you to have oral sex?
11. Did a man make you or persuade you to have anal sex?
12. Did anyone put their fingers or objects in your vagina or anus (back passage)?

Including all the other categories of sexual abuse Table 4.23 says that
29.5% of women thought that the sexual abuse had more than a little effect on them. 70.5% said little or none.
18.1% of men thought that the sexual abuse had more than a little effect on them. 81.9% said little or none.

Pug160

Czarcasm wrote: »

Key word bolded in your post there Pug, and the figures for people that have rape fantasies and indeed carry out said fantasies, there is always the key factor there is that they consent to sex, women who are ACTUALLY raped do not crave being dominated by a brutal rapist.

My other post explains what I was getting at. I'm not deluded - some people are, unfortunately. The same people who should probably be locked up.

EddieJohnsonJR

Pug160 wrote: »

and the truth is that it's a minority of men who are getting most of the girls.

Revlolutionary insight, Pug160. You are clearly the Sherlock Holmes of the 21st century.

Czarcasm

Pug160 wrote: »

I'm just curious. It's not beyond the realms of possibility, that someone extremely deluded and irrational could use it (my example) as an excuse.

Rapists use it to excuse their behaviour all the time, I trust you've heard of phrases like "she was asking for it", "she was screaming for more", "she never told me to stop", etc, etc.

In my opinion, there are dangerous social cocktails, that when mixed, have the potential for disaster. The other cocktail in that mixture, by the way, is the powerless feeling some men have.

And you've lost me, or is it that you mean a deluded and irrational person can't help wanting to rape somebody? There's counselling services they can avail of... actually no, you have lost me, you're going to have to explain that one.

K-9

ressem wrote: »

A lot of this thread has been with regard to the 1 in 4 statistic questioned by Henlars67 and asking whether that is a myth.


I think it's derived from the


The SAVI report...
(http://www.oneinfour.ie/content/resources/savi.pdf carried out in 2002 by Department of Psychology at the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland using random digit dialling)

states that out of a sample size of 3118 respondents, 20.4% of girls and 16.2% of boys experienced unwanted sexual experience involving contact. 10% of girls and 7.4% of boys had non-contact unwanted sexual experience.

The most serious abuse listed in table 4.3 (penetrative categories 9-12 defined by the study) included 1.1%, 1.1%, 0.9%, 0.6% male and 1.7%, 0.9%, 0.3%, 4.4% female children. Or category 8 of attempted intercourse 3% and 4.6%. (Some people might be present in multiple categories)

These would be legally termed Aggravated sexual assault or rape.

In this report there's 12 categories of abuse listed for respondents which occured when they were young.



Including all the other categories of sexual abuse Table 4.23 says that
29.5% of women thought that the sexual abuse had more than a little effect on them. 70.5% said little or none.
18.1% of men thought that the sexual abuse had more than a little effect on them. 81.9% said little or none.

I always associated it with child sexual abuse as well, and the thought had occurred to me as well while reading the thread.

Pug160

Czarcasm wrote: »

Rapists use it to excuse their behaviour all the time, I trust you've heard of phrases like "she was asking for it", "she was screaming for more", "she never told me to stop", etc, etc.





And you've lost me, or is it that you mean a deluded and irrational person can't help wanting to rape somebody? There's counselling services they can avail of... actually no, you have lost me, you're going to have to explain that one.

Well, for example, a deluded and irrational man might think all women really want to be raped deep down (because of what he has read), and coupled with a powerless feeling it could be a recipe for disaster. Now obviously, 99.9 percent of men would never think this way, but I'm just trying to get inside the minds of these people.

Gbear

Czarcasm wrote: »

There's no other context for the use of the word "frape" which is "facebook rape", or a "surprise attack" on somebody if you will. In the context of posting a comment purporting to be somebody else, that's called "fraud", there's no need to invent a new buzzword for it by trivialising the act of non consensual sex.

There is other contexts for "frape" because it is essentially the same as saying rape. It's just sort of portmanteaued into one word for convenience.

It in no way trivialises rape any more than the aforementioned football commentator did so for rape or murder.

It has nothing to do with actual rape.

Czarcasm wrote: »

You don't have to try very hard to be offended by the trivialisation of the act of rape. That's why words that were commonly used years ago to describe black people or homosexuals are not acceptable in common language use today. We all know what they mean, it doesn't make them any less offensive.

N*gger is still used solely as a racial slur (in English at any rate), as well as most of the other ones.
However, you wouldn't try to argue that, I dunno, "paintbrush" or something like that that involves a hairy black thing is now off-limits, because context would determine whether you meant it in as a racial slur or something like a tool for painting.

Homosexual slurs are generally somewhat different. Fagg*t was a bundle of sticks. Nowadays it's mostly synonymous with asshole.
One could be a homosexual who's incidentally acting like a ****** (see Louis CK sketch).

Czarcasm wrote: »

With regard to the idea of context, like I said, it's flippant use is just something I personally find disgusting, I've pulled my friends up on it before who have used it flippantly if they fancied a guy, for example one occasion that springs to mind is when a friend of mine saw a guy she liked in the club and said to me rather enthusiastically-

"I'd fcuking rape him!"

At which point I turned to her and said-

"And how would you like for him to rape you?"

She got the point.

That's slightly different because the context is explicitly referring to sex.
Saying "I'd rape a cheeseburger right about now" isn't the same as "she's sexy, I'd rape her sideways".

Again though, you'd want to have better things to be doing than getting offended by ****e like that. Childishness, plain and simple.

King of Kings

Czarcasm wrote: »

With regard to the idea of context, like I said, it's flippant use is just something I personally find disgusting, I've pulled my friends up on it before who have used it flippantly if they fancied a guy, for example one occasion that springs to mind is when a friend of mine saw a guy she liked in the club and said to me rather enthusiastically-

"I'd fcuking rape him!"

At which point I turned to her and said-

"And how would you like for him to rape you?"

She got the point.

you sound like a barrel of fun .

There is a clear difference in context. she wasn't being serious in her remarks.


.

tritium

K-9 wrote: »

I always associated it with child sexual abuse as well, and the thought had occurred to me as well while reading the thread.

It may be, or it may (more likely I suspect ) also be related to a us campus survey by Mary koss that one in four women has been a victim of rape or attempted rape. However as I alluded to earlier there are massive methodological concerns with that study that call the figure into question

Uriel.

kylith wrote: »

Are you talking about Uriel's link to TGC? There's an exact counterpoint for that thread in The Ladies Lounge. Is that also encouraging objectification?

Having flicked through the thread in TGC I can't see anything that could count as remotely 'rape culture'. Lots of remarks about beauty and grace, but nothing I'd find at all disrespectful or objectifying, and there's probably less flesh on show than in WMYD in TLL.

I wish I hadn't have mentioned TGC now...
Guess it's part of rape culture and many boardsies who've flicked through that thread have gone on to be rapists as a result.

EddieJohnsonJR

King of Kings wrote: »

you sound like a barrel of fun .

Barrel is an offensive term, due to how it may be used in context to denote a widely shaped person, please do not use it any longer.

wetfoot

Czarcasm wrote: »

I wouldn't reduce such a serious topic to a back and forth about semantics, and I acknowledge that it's only a personal thing for me, but to use the term "survivor" in the context of an invasion of the person is akin to putting a positive spin on the fact that they were violated.

It's just not something that sits right with me to put any kind of a positive spin on something such as rape. I understand what the word survivor is MEANT to do, but for an action such as rape, nice fluffy words in the aftermath really only serve to play down the effect it can have on a person.

I absolutely respect what you're saying. But I work with survivors of domestic and sexual violence and the majority of the women and men i work with choose to self reference in that way. There is nothing that can play down the effects or the trauma of their experience which often never lessens or goes away. I see your point about potentially putting a positive spin on the experience but the word victim also carries an inbuilt stigma for a lot of people and one of the most important things for people recovering from trauma is to not feel that they are still being victimised by their experience. Acknowledged, supported and recovering, yes. But not still victimised.

If that makes sense.

Czarcasm

Pug160 wrote: »

My other post explains what I was getting at. I'm not deluded - some people are, unfortunately. The same people who should probably be locked up.

This one?

Pug160 wrote: »

A myth, in my opinion is that because we now live in a very sexualised society, most people are having sex, and more than ever before. I think that is false and there's a possibility that less people are having sex now, and the truth is that it's a minority of men who are getting most of the girls.

Yeah, that's a myth too btw, seeing as there are more pensioners rediscovering their sexuality in the last ten years than ever before-

http://www.healthcareglobal.com/global_hospitals/number-of-pensioners-with-stis-doubles-in-10-years


As for the "minority of men" that are "getting all the girls", that's a myth borne of your own insecurity, I wouldn't be cruel enough to suggest you were deluded.

Sleepy

shopaholic01 wrote: »

Another strange post.

If a woman has asked to be treated like this, or has consented to it, it is not rape.

The only way I can see it as being related was to the concept of rapists not realising they were actually raping somebody. Once read an account of a young man's first forays into BDSM with his then girlfriend. Long story short, they didn't use a safe-word and their role-play of her fantasy of being raped ended up actually being one. Now it never went as far as a court-room because it was an "accidental" rape (if such a term can be used) but it devastated the guy involved. (I'm sure it had a similar impact on the girl but it was his blog post I was reading rather than hers - she never seemed to consider him as having perpetrated a crime against her but it took him years to forgive himself, if in fact he really had considering he was blogging about it over a decade after it had occurred.)

shopaholic01

Pug160 wrote: »

Well, for example, a deluded and irrational man might think all women really want to be raped deep down (because of what he has read), and coupled with a powerless feeling it could be a recipe for disaster. Now obviously, 99.9 percent of men would never think this way, but I'm just trying to get inside the minds of these people.

Can you explain the 'powerless feeling' part?

What is it and why does your hypothetical man have it?