International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Social Issues & Current Events (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82)
-   -   What makes some people want to have sex with unwilling 'partners'? (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=324594)

Roboramma 6th July 2018 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12351097)
No, not really. I consider it the default mode.

Sure, I certainly think you are right, but that doesn't mean that the question is meaningless. Just as we might ask why do people dislike sex with unwilling partners, we can ask why people like sex at all. We can ask why we like food, and similarly why we dislike some foods. These questions might seem so obvious as to not be worth asking but they do have answers and those answers can supply insight into further questions.

I really do think that it's only by understanding the norm that we can understand deviations from it.

I'm not going to try to answer those questions right now. I think sometimes the right question is harder to come at than an answer, so if I've managed to offer that, that's not a bad start.

Of course I may be wrong and mine may be the wrong question, but I really don't want to get too involved in this thread to be honest. :boxedin:

dann 14th July 2018 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roboramma (Post 12352269)
I think sometimes the right question is harder to come at than an answer, so if I've managed to offer that, that's not a bad start.


The right question is always a good beginning, but I think that yours can be improved by deleting the negatives:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roboramma (Post 12351011)
The real question is what makes the rest of us not want to have sex with unwilling partners.


And this is the point that I think that all the advocates of coerced sex miss with their pseudo-Darwinian arguments: Nature actually made sex enjoyable for both parties! So if you want to experience the pleasure of having sex, all you need to do is find somebody you would like to have it with who would also like to have it with you.
The next question is either the one I asked in the OP or, to put it bluntly: Since nature has made it pretty easy to make this thing work, what the hell goes wrong for people when they have to resort to fantasies (and even worse: the reality) of sexual coercion instead? Because coercion doesn't really seem to be what nature intended (if nature could actually have intentions).

Quote:

Of course I may be wrong and mine may be the wrong question, but I really don't want to get too involved in this thread to be honest. :boxedin:

No, and I can see why. Many people seem to feel so threatened by this question that they can't relate to it in a straightforward manner. Their response seems to be 1) that's how nature wants it (which is obviously false), 2) can't be answered (which is always a ridiculous idea), 3) something must be wrong with people who try to answer it. Yeah, right!

Roboramma 14th July 2018 11:24 PM

I agree that your version of the question is also a good one and one that is relevant to the issue under discussion. :)

Bikewer 15th July 2018 06:43 AM

NPR’s The World has run a number of articles on the particularly nasty situation regarding rape in India. In some provinces, it’s endemic.
They have interviewed men who have been arrested and imprisoned, and they all reflect the cultural attitudes that sound very familiar... That it’s the woman’s fault. That women should not “dress that way” or “be out at night” or go to clubs, or whatever. That they are asking for it.
Worse, in interviewing the victims, they express the attitude from female family members that feeds into the male attitude... That “men can’t help themselves”, or that “they love you so much they just have to have it” .
Things that were heard commonly in this country not all that long ago.

When I started my police career in the late sixties.... This attitude was reflected in the way police tended to handle rape cases. Unless the woman had been the victim of extreme violence, officers joked about “failure to pay” rather than rape, indicating that rape victims were essentially prostitutes.
Often, such cases were “shitcanned” as quickly as possible, or the investigators would give the victim the “runaround” where she could not pin down the exact location of the incident and thus since “venue” could not be established, no investigation could continue.

There’s an ongoing scandal, especially with smaller departments, where “rape kits” taken at emergency rooms are simply tossed into the evidence locker and never submitted for testing. In some cases that have come to light, literally thousands have been discovered.

My first department had to take over one of the small municipal departments in the area after it was discovered that none of their officers met the state-mandated qualification requirements. In going through the department’s stuff, a Yard-Barn type storage shed was discovered out back and in same, along with a lot of other “evidence” that had never been cataloged, were hundreds of these rape kits.... All useless due to improper storage.

Sabrina 15th July 2018 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12362448)
The next question is either the one I asked in the OP or, to put it bluntly: Since nature has made it pretty easy to make this thing work, what the hell goes wrong for people when they have to resort to fantasies (and even worse: the reality) of sexual coercion instead? Because coercion doesn't really seem to be what nature intended (if nature could actually have intentions).

I think your confusion lies in assuming that humans only do what nature intended us to do. If that were the case, we'd likely still be a hunter/gatherer society.

Personally, I believe that an individuals who forces themselves upon another individual (be they male or female as the perpetrator) is very likely suffering from a form of mental illness caused by chemical imbalance. Hormones have been shown to be a humongous part of our sexual behavior; the act of sex itself releases endorphins, dopamine, and serotonin, among others, all chemicals designed to make you feel good. It is possible, for at least some individuals who rape others, that this chemical imbalance leads to not feeling as good when they engage in more normal sexual behaviors, and to feeling as good or better when they engage in forced sex than they do with normal sex. Is that the answer for all rapists? Probably not; but it could explain at least some of them.

In all honesty, I don't think your question even has anything remotely resembling an answer yet; there's just so much we don't understand about how our own bodies and brains work, much less when they don't. The best anyone could give you at this point is a guess, and my guess is, chemical imbalance, plus mental illness, leads to enjoyment of forcing oneself onto others. I don't think that anyone has really come up with a better answer as of yet, and likely no one will in my or your lifetime unless a LOT more is understood about how the human body works or doesn't work.

Another thing we may be forgetting is that human beings' DNA is constantly evolving, shifting, changing, and it's possible that we're simply in a stage of human evolution where defective genes could be held responsible for the more deviant behaviors such as rape, pedophilia, etc., and they'll eventually be bred out of the population. Nature is constantly experimenting, and while some things (the cockroach) have been pretty much perfected, human beings have a while before that happens for us.

Again, I don't think an answer really exists to respond to your original question, at least not with any amount of satisfaction, but those are my best guesses, so... YMMV.

dann 16th July 2018 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bikewer (Post 12362668)
NPR’s The World has run a number of articles on the particularly nasty situation regarding rape in India. In some provinces, it’s endemic.
They have interviewed men who have been arrested and imprisoned, and they all reflect the cultural attitudes that sound very familiar... That it’s the woman’s fault. That women should not “dress that way” or “be out at night” or go to clubs, or whatever. That they are asking for it.
Worse, in interviewing the victims, they express the attitude from female family members that feeds into the male attitude... That “men can’t help themselves”, or that “they love you so much they just have to have it” .
Things that were heard commonly in this country not all that long ago.


I mentioned an article about Indian rapists in posts 243 and 246.

Quote:

When I started my police career in the late sixties.... This attitude was reflected in the way police tended to handle rape cases. Unless the woman had been the victim of extreme violence, officers joked about “failure to pay” rather than rape, indicating that rape victims were essentially prostitutes.
Often, such cases were “shitcanned” as quickly as possible, or the investigators would give the victim the “runaround” where she could not pin down the exact location of the incident and thus since “venue” could not be established, no investigation could continue.

There’s an ongoing scandal, especially with smaller departments, where “rape kits” taken at emergency rooms are simply tossed into the evidence locker and never submitted for testing. In some cases that have come to light, literally thousands have been discovered.

My first department had to take over one of the small municipal departments in the area after it was discovered that none of their officers met the state-mandated qualification requirements. In going through the department’s stuff, a Yard-Barn type storage shed was discovered out back and in same, along with a lot of other “evidence” that had never been cataloged, were hundreds of these rape kits.... All useless due to improper storage.

Awful!

dann 16th July 2018 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabrina (Post 12363039)
I think your confusion lies in assuming that humans only do what nature intended us to do.


I don't think I'm confused, and I don't assume that people only do what nature intended us to do. However, if you compare with other species, it's obvious that sex is enjoyable for both men and women, which makes coercion something that nature doesn't really explain. If you go back to the beginning of the thread, you will notice that many want to explain sexual coercion with nature. I'm not one of them.

Quote:

If that were the case, we'd likely still be a hunter/gatherer society.

Even early hunters and gatherers using tools (knives, bows, arrows, pots, jars etc.) and language-based cooperation had stopped being mere nature.

Quote:

Personally, I believe that an individuals who forces themselves upon another individual (be they male or female as the perpetrator) is very likely suffering from a form of mental illness caused by chemical imbalance. Hormones have been shown to be a humongous part of our sexual behavior; the act of sex itself releases endorphins, dopamine, and serotonin, among others, all chemicals designed to make you feel good. It is possible, for at least some individuals who rape others, that this chemical imbalance leads to not feeling as good when they engage in more normal sexual behaviors, and to feeling as good or better when they engage in forced sex than they do with normal sex. Is that the answer for all rapists? Probably not; but it could explain at least some of them.

Do you have links to research that would make your chemical theory seem less unlikely? That hormones play a role in sexuality, yes, obviously, but that they also determine or at least contribute to a preference for coercion is far fetched. (I don't remember if it was Ron Tomkins or xjx who wanted to use endorphins as an explanation.)

Quote:

In all honesty, I don't think your question even has anything remotely resembling an answer yet; there's just so much we don't understand about how our own bodies and brains work, much less when they don't. The best anyone could give you at this point is a guess, and my guess is, chemical imbalance, plus mental illness, leads to enjoyment of forcing oneself onto others. I don't think that anyone has really come up with a better answer as of yet, and likely no one will in my or your lifetime unless a LOT more is understood about how the human body works or doesn't work.

Lack of empathy seems to be typical for rapists, but mental illness as such probably not. Again: "chemical imbalance" sounds too much like a bad excuse (much like Kurt Vonnegut's "bad chemicals" as the explanation for all kinds of atrocities in Breakfast of Champions). It seems to deny the actual thought processes that make the act of coercion seem not only acceptable but also desirable to the perpetrators.

Quote:

Another thing we may be forgetting is that human beings' DNA is constantly evolving, shifting, changing, and it's possible that we're simply in a stage of human evolution where defective genes could be held responsible for the more deviant behaviors such as rape, pedophilia, etc., and they'll eventually be bred out of the population. Nature is constantly experimenting, and while some things (the cockroach) have been pretty much perfected, human beings have a while before that happens for us.

Let me confront you with your own first sentence:
Quote:

I think your confusion lies in assuming that humans only do what nature intended us to do.

Quote:

Again, I don't think an answer really exists to respond to your original question, at least not with any amount of satisfaction, but those are my best guesses, so... YMMV.

That's the point of the thread! And I think that the NYT article about the minds of rapists already delivered some good answers.

Ron_Tomkins 16th July 2018 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12351085)
So Ron, could you at least attempt to make it probable that I don't understand or accept the possibility of people wanting to have sex with unwilling partners?

Yes, of course. It was pretty obvious from the start that that's what this thread is all about. Glad you're finally starting to see it.

Sabrina 16th July 2018 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12363622)
That's the point of the thread! And I think that the NYT article about the minds of rapists already delivered some good answers.

You missed my overall point. There IS no answer that will explain every single rapist. At this point, one can point out commonalities from rapist to rapist, yes, but every single case must also be approached from an individual standpoint. The reason The South Hill rapist raped is not the same reason as, say, Ted Bundy raped. There may be similarities, sure, but there really is no overarching answer that will explain why ALL rapists coerce or force sex from the unwilling. Given that, I don't think your question will ever be satisfactorily answered. It could be childhood abuse, it could be a chemical imbalance, it could be they're just wired wrong, there could be a genetic component we haven't isolated yet... I mean, the list goes on. We'll likely never figure it out in this lifetime.

Ron_Tomkins 16th July 2018 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabrina (Post 12363790)
You missed my overall point. There IS no answer that will explain every single rapist. At this point, one can point out commonalities from rapist to rapist, yes, but every single case must also be approached from an individual standpoint. The reason The South Hill rapist raped is not the same reason as, say, Ted Bundy raped. There may be similarities, sure, but there really is no overarching answer that will explain why ALL rapists coerce or force sex from the unwilling. Given that, I don't think your question will ever be satisfactorily answered. It could be childhood abuse, it could be a chemical imbalance, it could be they're just wired wrong, there could be a genetic component we haven't isolated yet... I mean, the list goes on. We'll likely never figure it out in this lifetime.

Don't bother. That answer will never satisfy Dann. He's looking for the Grand-Unifying Theory of what makes every single person have sex with unwilling partners, and he won't be satisfied until he finds it. We're better off coming up with a made up answer for him, so he can finally give the thing a rest.

Sabrina 16th July 2018 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins (Post 12363805)
Don't bother. That answer will never satisfy Dann. He's looking for the Grand-Unifying Theory of what makes every single person have sex with unwilling partners, and he won't be satisfied until he finds it. We're better off coming up with a made up answer for him, so he can finally give the thing a rest.

Which is impossible, essentially.

Each rapist, no matter their gender or sexual orientation, has their own reason(s) (I neglected to note in my previous post that there could be more than one reason for instigating rape, depending on the individual) for raping. It's entirely possible that they themselves may not even be aware of all the reasons they do it, so even if we ask them and they respond truthfully, we could still be missing something. I don't know about you, but I'm not willing to just one-off an answer when it comes to a subject as serious as this; if ALL the reasons a person rapes another cannot be identified, then clearly no, as you put it, Grand-Unifying Theory can reasonably be identified to explain why ANYONE rapes another person, much less why ALL of them do it.

Ron_Tomkins 16th July 2018 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabrina (Post 12363961)
Which is impossible, essentially.

Each rapist, no matter their gender or sexual orientation, has their own reason(s) (I neglected to note in my previous post that there could be more than one reason for instigating rape, depending on the individual) for raping. It's entirely possible that they themselves may not even be aware of all the reasons they do it, so even if we ask them and they respond truthfully, we could still be missing something. I don't know about you, but I'm not willing to just one-off an answer when it comes to a subject as serious as this; if ALL the reasons a person rapes another cannot be identified, then clearly no, as you put it, Grand-Unifying Theory can reasonably be identified to explain why ANYONE rapes another person, much less why ALL of them do it.

Just in case I wasn't clear: I'm agreeing with you on everything you're saying. I'm just telling you, don't bother wasting time explaining this to Dann, when pretty much everyone has been telling him this already over 8 pages, and he still doesn't understand it.

Sabrina 16th July 2018 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins (Post 12364154)
Just in case I wasn't clear: I'm agreeing with you on everything you're saying. I'm just telling you, don't bother wasting time explaining this to Dann, when pretty much everyone has been telling him this already over 8 pages, and he still doesn't understand it.

No you were clear, and I don't necessarily think you're wrong, but I still think, given the subject matter, that it's important to continue to try and get that fact through dann's mind. I'll probably give up at some point, I'm sure, but until I get so frustrated I reach that point, I intend to keep trying.

Ron_Tomkins 17th July 2018 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabrina (Post 12364407)
No you were clear, and I don't necessarily think you're wrong, but I still think, given the subject matter, that it's important to continue to try and get that fact through dann's mind. I'll probably give up at some point, I'm sure, but until I get so frustrated I reach that point, I intend to keep trying.

Aahh, I see. Well, that's where you and I disagree, because I don't think Dann is interested in having an actual discussion to find out the actual truthful answer to his question. My personal rule of thumb is, if a poster still doesn't get it after more than 4 pages, it's a pointless battle. Good luck, though :)

Sabrina 17th July 2018 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins (Post 12364972)
Aahh, I see. Well, that's where you and I disagree, because I don't think Dann is interested in having an actual discussion to find out the actual truthful answer to his question. My personal rule of thumb is, if a poster still doesn't get it after more than 4 pages, it's a pointless battle. Good luck, though :)

Well to be fair, I AM coming into this discussion seven or eight pages in; I wasn't participating in the earlier discussion. ;)

dann 17th July 2018 09:17 AM

That you never participated in the earlier discussion is the one thing you have in common with Ron Tomkins. Maybe you should ask him to tell you "the actual truthful answer" to my question, you know, the "it" that I still don't "get" "after more than 4 pages". :)

dann 17th July 2018 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins (Post 12350987)
So, have we yet figured what is the internal cerebral mechanism that makes someone want to have sex with unwilling partners, and that would allow Dann to finally understand/accept that it is possible for other people to want to have sex with unwilling partners, so that he can finally get some sleep and peace of mind?


Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12351085)
It was obvious from the very beginning that my question bothered (not only) Ron Tompkins' peace of mind immensely but that of many others too, which is why I specifically asked people to avoid the strawman that he now finds it necessary to repeat: "… would allow Dann to finally understand/accept that it is possible for other people to want to have sex with unwilling partners."

So Ron, could you at least attempt to make it probable that I don't understand or accept the possibility of people wanting to have sex with unwilling partners?
(That it's not only a possbility but an actual fact that some people not only want to have sex with unwilling partners but insist on having it was the starting point of this thread!)


Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins (Post 12363713)
Quote:

So Ron, could you at least attempt to make it probable that I don't understand or accept the possibility of people wanting to have sex with unwilling partners?
Yes, of course. It was pretty obvious from the start that that's what this thread is all about. Glad you're finally starting to see it.


You are not even trying, Ron.

Sabrina 17th July 2018 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12365149)
That you never participated in the earlier discussion is the one thing you have in common with Ron Tomkins. Maybe you should ask him to tell you "the actual truthful answer" to my question, you know, the "it" that I still don't get after more than 4 pages. :)

I think I've already answered that in my post. It's that there IS no one, single, all-encompassing reason why anyone wants to engage in forced sex with another person. Apparently others have propositioned that idea several times in this thread, albeit probably using different language, and you've pooh-poohed the idea, perhaps? If so, can you explain WHY you don't think that's the correct answer to your question? If not, can you explain your reasons why you don't (if that is the case) ascribe to my theory that there is no all-encompassing reason for anyone raping another person?

dann 17th July 2018 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabrina (Post 12363790)
You missed my overall point. There IS no answer that will explain every single rapist. At this point, one can point out commonalities from rapist to rapist, yes, but every single case must also be approached from an individual standpoint. The reason The South Hill rapist raped is not the same reason as, say, Ted Bundy raped. There may be similarities, sure, but there really is no overarching answer that will explain why ALL rapists coerce or force sex from the unwilling. Given that, I don't think your question will ever be satisfactorily answered.


You seem to have missed my overall point - and you've already mentioned that you missed the whole discussion, and now you're guessing at what that discussion may have been.
You seem to think that my question in the OP was: Which one thing and one thing only makes some people want to have sex with unwilling 'partners'?
It wasn't.

Quote:

It could be childhood abuse, it could be a chemical imbalance, it could be they're just wired wrong, there could be a genetic component we haven't isolated yet... I mean, the list goes on. We'll likely never figure it out in this lifetime.

No, it couldn't be childhood abuse. No, it couldn't be a chemical imbalance, it couldn't have been that they're just wired wrong (whatever that's supposed to mean) and it couldn't have been a genetic component that we (?!) haven't isolated yet ... unless you have some valid reason to assume that any of these things make people enjoy raping. But it's a waste of time asking you to come up with links to research that renders any of those ideas at least probable. I already asked you to do so (post 287), but you prefer to repeat yourself instead.

And this is what your guessing game looks like:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabrina (Post 12365188)
I think I've already answered that in my post. It's that there IS no one, single, all-encompassing reason why anyone wants to engage in forced sex with another person. Apparently others have propositioned that idea several times in this thread, albeit probably using different language, and you've pooh-poohed the idea, perhaps?


Come on! You want me to explain to you why I may have "pooh-poohed" an idea that others apparently probably have propositioned? No, I think that you should read the thread before you come up with any more hypoteses about it.

Quote:

If so, can you explain WHY you don't think that's the correct answer to your question? If not, can you explain your reasons why you don't (if that is the case) ascribe to my theory that there is no all-encompassing reason for anyone raping another person?

At this stage your theory seems to be that I have demanded an "all-encompassing reason" in the first place. Your assumption is wrong, and you'd better start at the beginning!

Butter! 17th July 2018 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12365452)




No, it couldn't be childhood abuse. No, it couldn't be a chemical imbalance, it couldn't have been that they're just wired wrong (whatever that's supposed to mean) and it couldn't have been a genetic component that we (?!) haven't isolated yet ... unless you have some valid reason to assume that any of these things make people enjoy raping. But it's a waste of time asking you to come up with links to research that renders any of those ideas at least probable. I already asked you to do so (post 287), but you prefer to repeat yourself instead.

And this is what your guessing game looks like:




Come on! You want me to explain to you why I may have "pooh-poohed" an idea that others apparently probably have propositioned? No, I think that you should read the thread before you come up with any more hypoteses about it.

What the hell is this. Dann, if you think you are making sense, you are not. No offense intended. But seriously, you are mocking people for giving you answers you consider flippant while seemingly going out of your way to be as inscrutable as possible. The highlighter isn't helping matters.

dann 17th July 2018 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12363622)
That's the point of the thread! And I think that the NYT article about the minds of rapists already delivered some good answers.


You don't even know which NYT article I'm talking about, Sabrina, do you?!

JoeMorgue 17th July 2018 12:43 PM

Dann,

How many people exactly have to tell you that you aren't making sense before the possibility that, at very least, you aren't doing a perfect job of communicating it is at least something you'll consider?

dann 17th July 2018 02:14 PM

Your argument is just as persuasive as Ron's and Sabrine's. Does that answer your question?

dann 17th July 2018 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isissxn (Post 12365457)
What the hell is this. Dann, if you think you are making sense, you are not. No offense intended. But seriously, you are mocking people for giving you answers you consider flippant while seemingly going out of your way to be as inscrutable as possible. The highlighter isn't helping matters.


So you think that I'm mocking Sabine when I point out that she bases her idea on the discussion in this thread on Ron Tomkins' summary? This is his contribution to the discussion: post 108.

xjx388 17th July 2018 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12365579)
So you think that I'm mocking Sabine when I point out that she bases her idea on the discussion in this thread on Ron Tomkins' summary? This is his contribution to the discussion: post 108.



IMO, you aren’t making sense because a large number of your posts are 1)Borderline incoherent and 2)Argumentative and mocking -you just hand-wave away as wrong any earnest attempts to answer your question. It’s as if you don’t really want to have a discussion, which is non-sensical on a discussion forum.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Butter! 17th July 2018 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12365579)
So you think that I'm mocking Sabine when I point out that she bases her idea on the discussion in this thread on Ron Tomkins' summary? This is his contribution to the discussion: post 108.

Honestly? I have no idea. I have no idea what you're asking me.

I'm not being cheeky. You aren't making sense.

AlaskaBushPilot 18th July 2018 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12365452)

No, it couldn't be childhood abuse. No, it couldn't be a chemical imbalance, it couldn't have been that they're just wired wrong (whatever that's supposed to mean) and it couldn't have been a genetic component that we (?!) haven't isolated yet ... unless you have some valid reason to assume that any of these things make people enjoy raping.

Count me in with the problem of incoherency.

WTF? Assume? That's the status of the science on the subject. Everyone else seems to get this "Rapist 101" science.

Earlier you also seemed to have a garbled view of what "nature" is. All the greats like Richard Kuklinsky (mob assassin), Ted Bundy (Sexual Sadist, murderer), Gary Ridgeway, Jeffrey Dahmer, etc. are "natural". Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao - all natural, and all mass murderers. Idi Amin, Jim Jones, and BTK: all natural. Sick and perverted but nevertheless natural.

We can speak in layman's terms, that "unnatural" means extremely rare in the population. But that doesn't negate the biological genetics of it.

The prototype personalities for serial rape, let alone the one-off offenders, are in the millions. Psychopaths alone are 1-2% of the population.

Rape as a military strategy isn't something that's come up yet, but there is also a whole literature on that. It is so straightforward at the core it hardly needs elucidation: kill the men, rape the women, enslave the kids and castrate the ones you don't want breeding.

You've already ignored the post I did on rape as a genetic propagation strategy, the most successful of all time being Genghis Khan. You've ignored history. Slaves could be legally raped. So owners raped them. droit du seigneur, same thing for vassals of the Feudal Lord. Without the sanction of society and law, there's a lot more rape. It is apparently enjoyable to a lot more people than we would like, and you have to put people in jail for it or else.

Sabrina 18th July 2018 05:32 AM

The exact title of this thread is, "What makes some people want to have sex with 'unwilling partners'?" I had assumed that was the question that dann was trying to have answered. I offered my theory(ies), and dann has apparently dismissed them without trying to offer any evidence as to WHY he/she thinks my theory(ies) are wrong.

Again, each rapist is most likely individual in their reason(s) for raping another. Some commonalities can be found across the board, but even with recent advances in medical science and the ability to scan the brain WE DO NOT KNOW ENOUGH to make any kind of determination as to an over-arching reason for why these individuals enjoy the process of forcing sex on another person. This is why I made that determination for myself, and thus far dann, you have provided exactly NO evidence to dispute my theory. To support mine though, I will point to the following:

A study by the NIH finding abnormalities in the brains of rapists.

A compilation of several studies which support my assertion that there is no one profile of rapists. Some of the key takeaways:

Quote:

No two sex offenders are exactly alike. In fact, one sexual assault expert said that ‘sex offenders
comprise an extremely heterogeneous population that cannot be characterized by single
motivational or etiological factors’ (Schwartz, 1995). However, sex offenders often exhibit some
similar characteristics:

-Men are more likely to commit sexual violence in communities where sexual violence goes unpunished. (National Sexual Violence Resource Center, 2004).

-Sex offenders minimize their number of victims. Speaking with 99 male sex offenders, court records showed 136 victims between them, but later during treatment, they eventually confessed to 959 victims between them (Slicner, 2007).

-Sex offenders are experts in rationalizing their behavior. (Slicner, 2007)

-There is no “typical profile” of a rapist. Many defense attorneys will talk about whether their client, the alleged assailant, either fits the profile of a rapist or doesn’t. This is an invalid argument because there is no typical profile of a rapist. This is why it is good to focus on that person’s behavior instead of who they are in their community (Maas, 2007).

-Example: Ted Bundy was an A student, volunteered for his university’s suicide prevention center, and was active in the church. Does this sound like someone who would ‘fit the profile’ of a violent person?
A Wikipedia summarization of causes of sexual violence. A couple of key takeways:

Quote:

Causes of sexual violence are debated and explanations of the cause include military conquest, socioeconomics, anger, power, sadism, sexual pleasure, psychopathy, ethical standards, laws, attitudes toward the victims and evolutionary pressures.

Clinical psychologist Nicholas Groth has described several different types of rape. A detailed conceptual analysis shows that objectification might underlie denial of agency and personhood that leads to rape.

The research on convicted rapists has found several important motivational factors in the sexual aggression of males. Those motivational factors repeatedly implicated are having anger at women and having the need to control or dominate them.Additionally, As reported by several rapists thay they are finely attracted by the wearings of women.[28]

A study by Marshall et al. (2001) found that male rapists had less empathy toward women who had been sexually assaulted by an unknown assailant and more hostility toward women than non-sex-offenders and nonoffender males/females.[29]

The research on convicted rapists has found several important motivational factors in the sexual aggression of males. Those motivational factors repeatedly implicated are having anger at women and having the need to control or dominate them.Additionally, As reported by several rapists thay they are finely attracted by the wearings of women.[28]

The research on convicted rapists has found several important motivational factors in the sexual aggression of males. Those motivational factors repeatedly implicated are having anger at women and having the need to control or dominate them. Additionally, As reported by several rapists thay they are finely attracted by the wearings of women. A study by Marshall et al. (2001) found that male rapists had less empathy toward women who had been sexually assaulted by an unknown assailant and more hostility toward women than non-sex-offenders and nonoffender males/females. Meta-analyses indicate that convicted rapists demonstrate greater sexual arousal to scenes of sexual coercion involving force than do non-rapists.

There is evidence to suggest that sexual violence is also a learned behavior in some adults, particularly as regards child sexual abuse. Studies on sexually abused boys have shown that around one in five continue in later life to molest children themselves. Such experiences may lead to a pattern of behavior where the man regularly justifies being violent, denies doing wrong, and has false and unhealthy notions about sexuality. Childhood environments that are physically violent, emotionally unsupportive and characterized by competition for scarce resources have been associated with sexual violence. Sexually aggressive behavior in young men, for instance, has been linked to witnessing family violence, and having emotionally distant and uncaring fathers. Men raised in families with strongly patriarchal structures are also more likely to become violent, to rape and use sexual coercion against women, as well as to abuse their intimate partners, than men raised in homes that are more egalitarian.

Factors operating at a societal level that influence sexual violence include laws and national policies relating to gender equality in general and to sexual violence more specifically, as well as norms relating to the use of violence. While the various factors operate largely at local level, within families, schools, workplaces and communities, there are also influences from the laws and norms working at national and even international level.

Sexual violence committed by men is to a large extent rooted in ideologies of male sexual entitlement. These belief systems grant women extremely few legitimate options to refuse sexual advances. Some men thus simply exclude the possibility that their sexual advances towards a woman might be rejected or that a woman has the right to make an autonomous decision about participating in sex.

Males who under some circumstances used force may have had greater reproductive success in the ancestral environment than males who did not employ force. Sociobiological theories of rape are theories that explore to what degree, if any, evolutionary adaptations influence the psychology of rapists. Such theories are highly controversial, as traditional theories typically do not consider rape to be a behavioral adaptation. Some object to such theories on ethical, religious, political as well as scientific grounds. Others argue that a correct knowledge of the causes of rape is necessary in order to develop effective preventive measures. There is extensive research on sexual coercion.
There you go; several sources which support my theory(ies) regarding why some people want to have sex with unwilling partners (again; the title of this thread, so I am answering your question, dann). Basically, to sum this post if you're the TL;DR type, experts in the field are pretty much in agreement that each person who rapes (i.e. forces sex on an unwilling partner in any manner) has separate reason(s) why they rape another, although some commonalities can typically be found across cases, although those commonalities are not enough to build a profile of a so-called "typical rapist".

There. Refute that, if you can. And please don't just pooh-pooh the response and categorically deny it without offering contrasting evidence, please and thank you.

Ron_Tomkins 18th July 2018 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12365576)
Your argument is just as persuasive as Ron's and Sabrine's. Does that answer your question?

Who's Sabrine?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12365579)
So you think that I'm mocking Sabine

Who's Sabine?

Sabrina 18th July 2018 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins (Post 12366237)
Who's Sabrine?



Who's Sabine?

Suddenly I'm French; cool.

Sabrina 19th July 2018 05:10 AM

No response? Nothing?

Usually get something faster than this.

Sabrina 22nd July 2018 01:52 PM

Well, either dann has taken a minor hiatus from the board, or I answered his/her question finally.

sphenisc 22nd July 2018 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins (Post 12366237)


Who's Sabine?

The perpetrators names live on in infamy. How quickly we forget the victims...

qayak 22nd July 2018 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabrina (Post 12366147)
The exact title of this thread is, "What makes some people want to have sex with 'unwilling partners'?" I had assumed that was the question that dann was trying to have answered. I offered my theory(ies), and dann has apparently dismissed them without trying to offer any evidence as to WHY he/she thinks my theory(ies) are wrong.

Again, each rapist is most likely individual in their reason(s) for raping another. Some commonalities can be found across the board, but even with recent advances in medical science and the ability to scan the brain WE DO NOT KNOW ENOUGH to make any kind of determination as to an over-arching reason for why these individuals enjoy the process of forcing sex on another person. This is why I made that determination for myself, and thus far dann, you have provided exactly NO evidence to dispute my theory. To support mine though, I will point to the following:

A study by the NIH finding abnormalities in the brains of rapists.

A compilation of several studies which support my assertion that there is no one profile of rapists. Some of the key takeaways:



A Wikipedia summarization of causes of sexual violence. A couple of key takeways:



There you go; several sources which support my theory(ies) regarding why some people want to have sex with unwilling partners (again; the title of this thread, so I am answering your question, dann). Basically, to sum this post if you're the TL;DR type, experts in the field are pretty much in agreement that each person who rapes (i.e. forces sex on an unwilling partner in any manner) has separate reason(s) why they rape another, although some commonalities can typically be found across cases, although those commonalities are not enough to build a profile of a so-called "typical rapist".

There. Refute that, if you can. And please don't just pooh-pooh the response and categorically deny it without offering contrasting evidence, please and thank you.

Yours, and ABP's, are excellent posts. Too often genetics are left out of the equation. The same thing that makes us men causes a certain percentage to be rapists under the right curcumstances. From a female point of view it is all about power. But studies show that from a male point of view it is mostly about pleasure.

It's easy to comprehend the monster who rapes but harder to comprehend the "good guy" who does the same. You can't do much about the genetics but you can nip most of it in the bud by changing the environment.

dann 23rd July 2018 03:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot (Post 12365994)
Count me in with the problem of incoherency.

WTF? Assume? That's the status of the science on the subject. Everyone else seems to get this "Rapist 101" science.


Everyone seems to get what?!

Quote:

Earlier you also seemed to have a garbled view of what "nature" is. All the greats like Richard Kuklinsky (mob assassin), Ted Bundy (Sexual Sadist, murderer), Gary Ridgeway, Jeffrey Dahmer, etc. are "natural". Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao - all natural, and all mass murderers. Idi Amin, Jim Jones, and BTK: all natural. Sick and perverted but nevertheless natural.

Did anybody claim that they were robots or AIs?

Quote:

We can speak in layman's terms, that "unnatural" means extremely rare in the population. But that doesn't negate the biological genetics of it.

It also doesn't confirm that it's a question of genetics, which appears to be what you think.

Quote:

The prototype personalities for serial rape, let alone the one-off offenders, are in the millions. Psychopaths alone are 1-2% of the population.

And so what?

Quote:

Rape as a military strategy isn't something that's come up yet, but there is also a whole literature on that. It is so straightforward at the core it hardly needs elucidation: kill the men, rape the women, enslave the kids and castrate the ones you don't want breeding.

And what does that do to your natural/genetical idea?

Quote:

You've already ignored the post I did on rape as a genetic propagation strategy, the most successful of all time being Genghis Khan.

No, I don't think I did. But I think that you should familiarize yourself with the "Genghis Khan" meme.

Quote:

You've ignored history. Slaves could be legally raped. So owners raped them.

No, some owners raped them, others weren't really into that kind of thing - even when it was legal. (And again: What does that do to your natural/genetical argument? Do you argue that legislation is genetical?)

Quote:

droit du seigneur, same thing for vassals of the Feudal Lord. Without the sanction of society and law, there's a lot more rape. It is apparently enjoyable to a lot more people than we would like, and you have to put people in jail for it or else.

And are things you have to put people in jail for natural/genetical? Do you have a point?

dann 23rd July 2018 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabrina (Post 12366147)
The exact title of this thread is, "What makes some people want to have sex with 'unwilling partners'?" I had assumed that was the question that dann was trying to have answered. I offered my theory(ies), and dann has apparently dismissed them without trying to offer any evidence as to WHY he/she thinks my theory(ies) are wrong.


You never really offered any theories, you offered words like "chemical imbalance". When I asked you to come up with evidence for your 'theories' (a couple of times, so far), you gave us nothing.

Quote:

Again, each rapist is most likely individual in their reason(s) for raping another. Some commonalities can be found across the board, but even with recent advances in medical science and the ability to scan the brain WE DO NOT KNOW ENOUGH to make any kind of determination as to an over-arching reason for why these individuals enjoy the process of forcing sex on another person. This is why I made that determination for myself, and thus far dann, you have provided exactly NO evidence to dispute my theory. To support mine though, I will point to the following:

A study by the NIH finding abnormalities in the brains of rapists.

A compilation of several studies which support my assertion that there is no one profile of rapists. Some of the key takeaways:

So again your point seems to be to prove that there is no "over-arching reason", i.e. that there is "no one profile of rapists". Now all you have to do is to come up with a reference to me claiming, highlander style, that there can be only one!

Quote:

A Wikipedia summarization of causes of sexual violence. A couple of key takeways:


There you go; several sources which support my theory(ies) regarding why some people want to have sex with unwilling partners (again; the title of this thread, so I am answering your question, dann). Basically, to sum this post if you're the TL;DR type, experts in the field are pretty much in agreement that each person who rapes (i.e. forces sex on an unwilling partner in any manner) has separate reason(s) why they rape another, although some commonalities can typically be found across cases, although those commonalities are not enough to build a profile of a so-called "typical rapist".

Yes, and those commonalities are what we're looking for, those of us who are actually interested in this question. (And there was a very good NYT article about it a couple of pages ago, but for you this thread appears to be tl;dr, right?!)

Quote:

There. Refute that, if you can. And please don't just pooh-pooh the response and categorically deny it without offering contrasting evidence, please and thank you.

Refute what exactly? Your theory or your theories? That there can be only one? (i.e. your own strawman)

dann 23rd July 2018 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qayak (Post 12370800)
Yours, and ABP's, are excellent posts. Too often genetics are left out of the equation. The same thing that makes us men causes a certain percentage to be rapists under the right curcumstances.


So the male genitalia are to blame?!

Quote:

From a female point of view it is all about power. But studies show that from a male point of view it is mostly about pleasure.

"... studies show …??!

Quote:

It's easy to comprehend the monster who rapes but harder to comprehend the "good guy" who does the same. You can't do much about the genetics but you can nip most of it in the bud by changing the environment.

You'll just love xjx388's situational callousness … I think that he considers the situation to be the environment, but you'll have to ask him since he's the one who coined the phrase.

Sabrina 23rd July 2018 05:27 AM

So we're back to ignoring the evidence presented then? Not even going to click links to read and try to refute?

Ron, apparently I owe you an apology. You were right.

Roboramma 23rd July 2018 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabrina (Post 12371130)
So we're back to ignoring the evidence presented then? Not even going to click links to read and try to refute?

To refute what? If I am reading his last post correctly dann is saying that you haven't actually disagreed with anything he's said.

I might be misinterpreting him, but if that's the case, there'd be no reason for him to attempt to refute the things you've said, as he doesn't disagree with them, he only disagrees with your characterisation of his argument.

qayak 23rd July 2018 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12371054)
So the male genitalia are to blame?!




"... studies show …??!




You'll just love xjx388's situational callousness … I think that he considers the situation to be the environment, but you'll have to ask him since he's the one who coined the phrase.

You seem to have an agenda to further. Facts are facts, dude. Your opinion on the subject doesn't hold up to the slightest scrutiny.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-19, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.