NationStates Jolt Archive

Many on these forums seem to treat rape by a stranger as "real rape" and other rape as "date rape." As explained in this article, there are many dangerous and odious assumptions being made about rape. The idea that there are gray areas allows more rapes to occur.

All Rape Is 'Real' Rape

By Alice Vachss
Originally published in The New York Times, OP-ED, August 11, 1993


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This summer, when "whirlpooling" replaced "wilding" as the latest media-designated sex crime, the peer group that spawned such gang assaults rallied to their defense. It blamed the victims ("girls have to know how to take care of themselves!") and excused the offenders ("this was just innocent horseplay!"). I toured this country recently and learned again that such prejudices pollute far more than New York City's public swimming pools.

Only one in 100 victims of forcible rape sees her attacker sent to prison, according to a report released in June by the Senate Judiciary Committee—hardly a group notable for a feminist stance. Our criminal justice system has sent a near-universal message. For victims, the message signifies betrayal, and for rapists the message is one of endorsement.

With mounting evidence and urgency, it is becoming apparent that we need to go to war against sexual assault. And just as at the brink of World War II, the more evident the need for conflict, the more strident the calls for appeasement.

It is no longer socially acceptable to openly condone sexual assault, so many (while facilely characterizing rape as "the worst thing that could happen to a woman") distinguish between "real" rape and what they insist are "gray areas" such as "date rape."

Those who make the distinction are, in effect, collaborators. To them, "real" rape can happen only between strangers. Their prototypical rapist is virtually an alien life form whose acts bear no resemblance to "normal" human behavior. The victim is always readily identifiable by her conduct, demeanor and life history as someone we would welcome into our own family. The "real" rapist strikes only at night, armed with weapons that would put Rambo to shame; nonetheless, the victim fights him to near-death and suffers multiple visible injuries. "Real" rapes take place in full view of upstanding eyewitnesses so that it is never simply "her word against his" and even then the eyewitness testimony must be buttressed by ample forensic evidence of trauma, semen, blood typing and DNA analysis. "Real" victims report the crime immediately. "Real" rapists, the products of excess testosterone, eventually confess.

It is hardly a surprise that few criminal assaults meet these criteria. It is a fact (and a disgrace) that, with rare exceptions, only those crimes that do are prosecuted successfully, from investigation to conviction to significant imprisonment.

Those who cling most tenaciously to the myth of "real" rape dismiss the overwhelming statistics to the contrary as the ravings of lunatic feminists. It may well be that feminists have their own agenda, but rape is not a feminist issue—it is a women's issue, and a human one.

When sexually violent young men prey on those closest and most vulnerable to them, collaborators say that "boys will be boys." They proclaim that "date rape" is synonymous with ungentlemanly conduct. Collaborators demand that we look primarily at the victim's conduct: What was she wearing? Did she lead him on? Was she asking for it? Rape seems to be the only crime that establishes performance criteria for victims.

We need to start looking at criminality, not victimology. Anyone who finds sexual gratification in the degradation, humiliation and pain of another human being is a predatory sadist. Whether or not he knew the victim, whether or not he used a weapon, if he used force (including extortion) to achieve sex, he crossed a line—a line collaborators would have us believe is blurred to the point of invisibility.

In the absence of significant consequences, such behavior will escalate. The incidence of stranger-to-stranger rape is directly proportional to the tolerance with which society treats acquaintance rape. And the incidence of all rape is directly proportional to our response to rapists.

Pollsters can argue about the number of unreported rapes. But no one can argue about their existence. "Date rape" is an unfortunate term in that it implies an inaccurate scenario of how rape occurs between people who know each other. "Sexual harassment" has been applied indiscriminately to describe acts ranging from coarse language to gunpoint sodomy.

All of this is true, but it does not change the basic truth: The deeper rape collaboration penetrates societal consciousness, the more the climate promotes sexual violence. Given the extraordinarily high rate of recidivism among rapists, the only thing "inevitable" about rape is its recurrence.

We know we have unacceptable levels of sexual violence. We ratify that truth every time we lock our doors at night, every time we worry about a loved one who doesn't arrive home when expected. Every woman who steps into an elevator alone or who must retrieve her car from a desolate parking lot knows the fear of sexual assault.

What we must also understand is that our fears are legitimate, and that the situation is one of our own making. We aid and abet rapists every time we settle for "treatment" (instead of prison) for the priest or the basketball coach who molests our children; every time we applaud a college football star even though we know he routinely beats up his girlfriend; every time we euphemize incest as "family dysfunction"; every time we acquit a rapist because his victim had too much to drink or asked him to use a condom.

We have allowed prosecutors to hide behind conviction rates instead of evaluating their performance in all cases of sexual assault, not just those they choose to prosecute. The myth of "real" rape permits them to decline to prosecute most rapists and offer probation or minimal sentences to more than half of those who are prosecuted.

We have a choice. We can believe the people who insist that things are not so bad—that "real" rape is the only form of sexual assault and that there is really not so much of that. Or we can start demanding change.

Sexual assaults flourish in a climate of "gray areas." So long as the myth of "real" rape survives, rapists will thrive. And we will all pay for their evil entertainment.

Real rape and somehow fake rape is the distinction between coerced sex and roleplayed coerced sex between partners who are in reality willing and in agreement on the matter.

Real rape and somehow fake rape is the distinction between coerced sex and roleplayed coerced sex between partners who are in reality willing and in agreement on the matter.

You appear to have missed entirely the point of both my comments and the article.

As a first year Law student, I recently had to prepare a review of a journal criticising the distinctions made between stranger/acquaintance rape (heavily punishable) and relationship/marital rape (leniently punished). I was shocked at how behind the Law is in this regard. Rape is rape, no matter what the circumstances.

You appear to have missed entirely the point of both my comments and the article.
No, I got it. I was merely pointing out an example in which in the concepts "real" and "not real" can be applied to rape.

Only one in 100 victims of forcible rape sees her attacker sent to prison

thats pathetic. i cant believe that many escape punishment

thats pathetic. i cant believe that many escape punishment

How can prosecuters get more convictions if women don't report it ever happened?

Statutory rape isn't.:p

it seems from reading the recent rape threads here that there is "real rape" and rape that women bring on themselves by being too attractive.

How can prosecuters get more convictions if women don't report it ever happened?
Its not reported because the judicial system is stuck in the past. Its basically a catch 22 situation. They need more women to come forward to change the law, but women won't because the system is so inefficient. As for men who are raped, I imagine even fewer will report it.

it seems from reading the recent rape threads here that there is "real rape" and rape that women bring on themselves by being too attractive.
Yep, so lets make all women ugly. :rolleyes: That'll make the world a safer place. Please...

Statutory rape isn't.:p

Um. Usually it is.

How can prosecuters get more convictions if women don't report it ever happened?

who says they didnt report it?

What about virtual rape? Like in this story (http://www.juliandibbell.com/texts/bungle.html) (based on a real incident).

Yep, so lets make all women ugly. :rolleyes: That'll make the world a safer place. Please...
we all know how much men appreciate women who dont try to be attractive and who treat all men as potential rapists (after all, if we believe our posters here, men are pretty much unable to control themselves once they enter a state of extreme lust)

Originally published in The New York Times, OP-ED, August 11, 1993

Such a timely article! :p

who says they didnt report it?

From everything I'm told the majority of women never report being raped to the police so it would make it difficult to put the guys in prison.

when women dress provacatively and get drunk and pass out at parties then it is there fault, they need to make sure they arent put in the situation where they are able to be raped like that. and when they claim it was rape long after the fact when it really wasnt just pisses me off. rape is not 100% because of men and people have to learn that. if women dress provacatively, who cares. but if they then go and gret drunk or high and say yes then it is their fault. if it is forced then yes it is the womans fault but there are many things that women can and dont do to protect themselves. think about how easy it would be for someone to rape you if when they are about to rape you, you kick them in the crotch, they would probly have an erection and everything and that would definitely take them out for a few minutes at least.

when women dress provacatively and get drunk and pass out at parties then it is there fault, they need to make sure they arent put in the situation where they are able to be raped like that.
It's more the responsibility of other people not to take advantage of them.

and when they claim it was rape long after the fact when it really wasnt just pisses me off.
Well, yes. That is annoying. However, for the sake of justice, all accusations have to be heard and judged.

rape is not 100% because of men and people have to learn that.
Come on, we all know that already.

if women dress provacatively, who cares. but if they then go and gret drunk or high and say yes then it is their fault.
No, it's still solely the fault of the person who thought, "Oh boy... this woman's barely conscious, so I can do whatever I want!" instead of thinking, "This woman is barely conscious. I'd better not mess around, because that would make me a rotten human being."

if it is forced then yes it is the womans fault
How is it not forced if you are barely conscious and someone tries to fuck you?

but there are many things that women can and dont do to protect themselves. think about how easy it would be for someone to rape you if when they are about to rape you, you kick them in the crotch, they would probly have an erection and everything and that would definitely take them out for a few minutes at least.
Of course, if they have a gun or a knife at hand, you probably would be very afraid of dying.

when women dress provacatively and get drunk and pass out at parties then it is there fault, they need to make sure they arent put in the situation where they are able to be raped like that. and when they claim it was rape long after the fact when it really wasnt just pisses me off. rape is not 100% because of men and people have to learn that. if women dress provacatively, who cares. but if they then go and gret drunk or high and say yes then it is their fault. if it is forced then yes it is the womans fault but there are many things that women can and dont do to protect themselves. think about how easy it would be for someone to rape you if when they are about to rape you, you kick them in the crotch, they would probly have an erection and everything and that would definitely take them out for a few minutes at least.
how old are you???

when women dress provacatively and get drunk and pass out at parties then it is there fault, they need to make sure they arent put in the situation where they are able to be raped like that. and when they claim it was rape long after the fact when it really wasnt just pisses me off. rape is not 100% because of men and people have to learn that. if women dress provacatively, who cares. but if they then go and gret drunk or high and say yes then it is their fault. if it is forced then yes it is the womans fault but there are many things that women can and dont do to protect themselves. think about how easy it would be for someone to rape you if when they are about to rape you, you kick them in the crotch, they would probly have an erection and everything and that would definitely take them out for a few minutes at least.
If she says no, and it is forced, it is rape. Nothing less. If she consents, but was taken advantage of, perhaps due to being raped, then she may be somewhat responsible. However, a woman has the right to dress however she wants and has the right to say no. If she says no, that is where the line is drawn. Anything from there on is rape.

I believe women should be taught to defend themselves. All citizens should be taught how in fact. Defensive martial arts are effective and could save a woman from a rough situation.

From everything I'm told the majority of women never report being raped to the police so it would make it difficult to put the guys in prison.

i understand that there a lot of rape cases that dont get reported. still, many of the victims that do report it still see thier attackers going free.

Um. Usually it is.
Um, no it's not. Statutory rape is defined by age, NOT by consent. Also, I believe that people involved have to be within 5 years of age for it to be considered statutory rape. If one of the people involved cried foul, so to speak, it can no longer be considered statutory rape. Ergo, consent has been given, and they are within a certain age range of each other, I fail to see how this can be considered rape. Maybe one person is taking advantage of the other, but they aren't raping them.

In California in 2003 the state Supreme Court ruled that a man who engaged in sex with a woman, both of them seventeen years old, was guilty of rape when, during the act, which she had begun consentually after lying down on the bed prone without urging, the woman said "I should be going now," then "I need to go home." A minute and a half later the young man stopped and she went home. There was no physical struggle, and the woman did not say "no," "stop" or cry out at any time according to her own testimony. I have a position, but I will not state it. I believe, however, that this is an excellent case of where debate can easily begin about what really constitutes rape.

Amen, brother:D

Such a timely article! :p

The topic is still a relevant one and this is an extremely insightful article by a true expert.

So there :p

Um, no it's not. Statutory rape is defined by age, NOT by consent. Also, I believe that people involved have to be within 5 years of age for it to be considered statutory rape. If one of the people involved cried foul, so to speak, it can no longer be considered statutory rape. Ergo, consent has been given, and they are within a certain age range of each other, I fail to see how this can be considered rape. Maybe one person is taking advantage of the other, but they aren't raping them.

What I meant was that most statutory rape cases (i.e., case the authorities actually prosecute) do not actually involve consent. They are violent rapes. But the inability of the victim to consent takes away a primary defense strategy.

I wholly admit that in some states you can have a non-violent, sex act between two willing parties and have it called statutory rape.

(You have the age gap backwards. Usually statutes say it is only rape if one of the people involved is significantly older (3-5 years) than the other.)

The topic is still a relevant one and this is an extremely insightful article by a true expert.

So there :p

I might add that rape is not the only form of violence against women.

Women need to be taught to defend themselves. Perhaps as a component of PE lessons, kids should be taught martial arts.

Society also really needs to progress forward, and move out of the stone age.

What I meant was that most statutory rape cases (i.e., case the authorities actually prosecute) do not actually involve consent. They are violent rapes. But the inability of the victim to consent takes away a primary defense strategy.

(You have the age gap backwards. Usually statutes say it is only rape if one of the people involved is significantly older (3-5 years) than the other.)

Not in Illinois: http://www.ageofconsent.com/illinois.htm


(c) The accused commits criminal sexual abuse if he or she commits an act of sexual penetration or sexual conduct with a victim who was at least 13 years of age but under 17 years of age and the accused was less than 5 years older than the victim.

In California in 2003 the state Supreme Court ruled that a man who engaged in sex with a woman, both of them seventeen years old, was guilty of rape when, during the act, which she had begun consentually after lying down on the bed prone without urging, the woman said "I should be going now," then "I need to go home." A minute and a half later the young man stopped and she went home. There was no physical struggle, and the woman did not say "no," "stop" or cry out at any time according to her own testimony. I have a position, but I will not state it. I believe, however, that this is an excellent case of where debate can easily begin about what really constitutes rape.

There may be an exception to every rule.

But please provide a link or citation. I don't fully believe you got the facts correct.

Women need to be taught to defend themselves. Perhaps as a component of PE lessons, kids should be taught martial arts.

Society also really needs to progress forward, and move out of the stone age.

Situational awareness, a gun, and the training to use it. Until all men behave themselves.

I do think a lot needs to be done on the social and judicial side of things, but until then, as far as sexual assault goes, I advocate learning self-defense. Train up in the martial arts and/or acquire and learn to use firearms. If you have a gun and you are attacked, chances are you won't even need to fire it - just take it out and use it to warn the attacker off.

To avoid getting raped because you are high or drunk, just don't get that high or drunk. If you must, then only do it when you have friends around whom you can trust to watch you. At a party, to keep from being dosed with "roofies," make sure that you know where your drink is, and if you have left it alone and out of sight for any length of time, don't drink it. When you hold it, keep your hand over the top.

I don't have any advice for date rape. I think that's the scariest kind because it usually happens with people you think you can trust. That's an issue that can only be addressed by major, fundamental changes in the social and judicial system.

For those who are wondering, many women don't report rape because they may have been tricked into thinking that it wasn't rape; they may have been intimidated by their attacker and/or have low self-esteem; they may have been in a legally compromising state at the time (drunk, high); they might not be able to leave their bad marital situation; and of course, as this article points out, there is still a lot of social stigma attached to rape. Would you want to report getting raped if it would make you look weak or stupid, or prompt questions and remarks in the vein of "you were asking for it?" Even if you're a man, you can sympathize with that situation - if you got sexually assaulted (it can happen, and does, more than you'd think), would you report it?

Situational awareness, a gun, and the training to use it. Until all men behave themselves.
Guns are highly controversial as it is. Teaching women how to defend themselves is a much better solution. It will also help keep people fit, as martial arts tend to be highly physical, beyond their mental aspects.

when women dress provacatively and get drunk and pass out at parties then it is there fault, they need to make sure they arent put in the situation where they are able to be raped like that. and when they claim it was rape long after the fact when it really wasnt just pisses me off. rape is not 100% because of men and people have to learn that. if women dress provacatively, who cares. but if they then go and gret drunk or high and say yes then it is their fault. if it is forced then yes it is the womans fault but there are many things that women can and dont do to protect themselves. think about how easy it would be for someone to rape you if when they are about to rape you, you kick them in the crotch, they would probly have an erection and everything and that would definitely take them out for a few minutes at least.

These are exactly the type of myth -based attitudes that make people like yourself collaborators.

Please re-read the article and look at the following information:

http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/docs/MFSexViol.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/The%20Truth%20About%20Rape%20Final.pdf

Guns are highly controversial as it is. Teaching women how to defend themselves is a much better solution. It will also help keep people fit, as martial arts tend to be highly physical, beyond their mental aspects.

In principle I agree, but in a really dangerous situation you may not be in a good state of mind to put your blackbelt moves on an attacker. Also, considering that men tend to be stronger and heavier than women, a gun is somewhat more practical. Although learning both physical and firearms defense strategies would be the best idea.

I do think a lot needs to be done on the social and judicial side of things, but until then, as far as sexual assault goes, I advocate learning self-defense. Train up in the martial arts and/or acquire and learn to use firearms. If you have a gun and you are attacked, chances are you won't even need to fire it - just take it out and use it to warn the attacker off.
Or both. Learning martial arts will at least put women on an equal footing with men physically.

To avoid getting raped because you are high or drunk, just don't get that high or drunk. If you must, then only do it when you have friends around whom you can trust to watch you. At a party, to keep from being dosed with "roofies," make sure that you know where your drink is, and if you have left it alone and out of sight for any length of time, don't drink it. When you hold it, keep your hand over the top.
People should generally quit with the binge drinking. I can't see where the fun in losing your brain is. :rolleyes:

I don't have any advice for date rape. I think that's the scariest kind because it usually happens with people you think you can trust. That's an issue that can only be addressed by major, fundamental changes in the social and judicial system.

For those who are wondering, many women don't report rape because they may have been tricked into thinking that it wasn't rape; they may have been intimidated by their attacker and/or have low self-esteem; they may have been in a legally compromising state at the time (drunk, high); they might not be able to leave their bad marital situation; and of course, as this article points out, there is still a lot of social stigma attached to rape. Would you want to report getting raped if it would make you look weak or stupid, or prompt questions and remarks in the vein of "you were asking for it?" Even if you're a man, you can sympathize with that situation - if you got sexually assaulted (it can happen, and does, more than you'd think), would you report it?
Sadly, this is all too true.

I might add that rape is not the only form of violence against women.

Well, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that this is not the fun part of the game.

If I'd known that part of NationStates involved people unzipping their pants and waggling their pet political agendas around, I'd never have gotten involved. This is entertainment?

Who's in favor of rape? Nobody rational.

RAPE = BAD.

WE GET IT.

And I suppose next I'm going to hear that everything is a form of violence against women, even things as innocuous as drinking water or watching birds sing on a limb.

Human beings suck. What form do I fill out to resign from the species?

There are defence technologies apart from firearms. My personal favorite was the stun jacket: squeezing a button in the cuff starts a circuit that (supposedly) gives a painful jolt to anyone who touches the stripes.

Firearms, though, remain the most effective method of neutralizing a threat. Someone who's just had the equivalent of a fast sledgehammer blow to the chest isn't going to be messing around with anyone - he may, in fact, die, which presents a whole other can of worms.

In principle I agree, but in a really dangerous situation you may not be in a good state of mind to put your blackbelt moves on an attacker. Also, considering that men tend to be stronger and heavier than women, a gun is somewhat more practical. Although learning both physical and firearms defense strategies would be the best idea.
Martial arts like Aikido, the Krav Maga or Wing Chun Kung Fu are not about strength. They are technique and agility based mostly. State of mind is a good point to raise though. Thus, a combination of both guns and self defence would be good.

PS: All three martial arts I mentioned, and especially the Krav Maga, train you in situational awareness, and condition your mind to be stronger so as to resist fear. Once they are mastered, their execution is almost automatic. Of course, some individuals are better than others in them as they are more dedicated.

What form do I fill out to resign from the species?
The FPL Request Form, available at your local police station. The fee in New Jersey is $49.

Well, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that this is not the fun part of the game.

If I'd known that part of NationStates involved people unzipping their pants and waggling their pet political agendas around, I'd never have gotten involved. This is entertainment?

Who's in favor of rape? Nobody rational.

RAPE = BAD.

WE GET IT.

And I suppose next I'm going to hear that everything is a form of violence against women, even things as innocuous as drinking water or watching birds sing on a limb.

Human beings suck. What form do I fill out to resign from the species?


Fine. You've had your say - but if you don't like it, get off the message boards and stop whining.

Martial arts like Aikido, the Krav Maga or Wing Chun Kung Fu are not about strength. They are technique and agility based mostly. State of mind is a good point to raise though. Thus, a combination of both guns and self defence would be good.

A friend of mine has offered to teach me to use a pistol, although I may not be able to take her up on her offer for a couple of months. I used to be very pro-gun control, but I've reevaluated that stance lately. There aren't enough police in the country to defend you (and look what happened in New Orleans), so if you really want to be safe, get a gun, and for God's sake learn how to use it properly.

There are also sensible ways to keep kids from having accidents with a gun. Kids who are young enough not to know pbetter are hysically incapable of firing most guns anyway. Kids who are old enough should be taught early on to use one, and about the rules of firearms, so they understand fully what they're handling when they pick up mommy or daddy's .32 or what have you.

I agree here. We had such policies in South Africa, that one should be taught to use a gun early. Guns are highly effective weapons. I would welcome the development of alternative weapons, such as stun guns with increased duration of stunning. Until then, gun use must be allowed and their use taught. Equally though, martial arts should be learnt at a young age concurrently. You can learn them as an adult, yet its easier as a child. If all people were taught to defend themselves, there wouldn't be so many victims. This will eliminate the physical gap between weaker and stronger people (not just men and women).

i understand that there a lot of rape cases that dont get reported. still, many of the victims that do report it still see thier attackers going free.

Juies are idiots. I wonder if "reasonable doubt" now means whatever crazy theory the defense lawyer can come up with.

Man, I wish that Increase Size box on here worked for my johnson. I wouldn't need to rely on roofies then.

Seriously though, I fully grasp the main point that the thread starter made. Rape is rape. "Date" rape is no lesser of an evil than "real" rape. If the woman says no, that's no - whether you're married or dating or friends.

Now let me bust my rant: Sometimes "rape" in the courts of law is not rape at all. Imagine a 22,23-year-old guy in a bar. He sees a hottie drinking in the bar, plays his game, and closes the deal. She willingly gives it up to him. She's 15. He doesn't know it. Daddy finds out and cries "Rape!"
How in hell is that guy guilty of rape? He raped not at all, but he's doing time.

Next case scenario:guy and girl meet (both legal age). They hook up, willingly, but he can't get her off. Girlfriends find out she let him do her, so she cries "I didn't let him. Rape!" Again - bogus, bogus, bogus.

There should be no difference between date rape and rape, equal penalties for both. THERE SHOULD BE NO MEGAN'S LAW!!! The men in my scenarios will be persecuted for the rest of their lives for something that should not be considered crime. There is no need for these dumb laws. Rapists should serve hard time. The child rapists who these Megan Laws are for should NEVER get out of jail.

This "rape" sword is double-edged, ladies, sad but true.

What you say refers to cases where there is indeed no rape, and these do nothing to help the case of real rape victims. Hopefully, those involved in making the fake rape charges will stop doing so.

Many on these forums seem to treat rape by a stranger as "real rape" and other rape as "date rape." As explained in this article, there are many dangerous and odious assumptions being made about rape. The idea that there are gray areas allows more rapes to occur.
Rape is any non-consentual penetration. If she said "no," and he did it anyway, that's rape ... period!

Man, I wish that Increase Size box on here worked for my johnson. I wouldn't need to rely on roofies then.

Seriously though, I fully grasp the main point that the thread starter made. Rape is rape. "Date" rape is no lesser of an evil than "real" rape. If the woman says no, that's no - whether you're married or dating or friends.

Now let me bust my rant: Sometimes "rape" in the courts of law is not rape at all. Imagine a 22,23-year-old guy in a bar. He sees a hottie drinking in the bar, plays his game, and closes the deal. She willingly gives it up to him. She's 15. He doesn't know it. Daddy finds out and cries "Rape!"
How in hell is that guy guilty of rape? He raped not at all, but he's doing time.

Next case scenario:guy and girl meet (both legal age). They hook up, willingly, but he can't get her off. Girlfriends find out she let him do her, so she cries "I didn't let him. Rape!" Again - bogus, bogus, bogus.

There should be no difference between date rape and rape, equal penalties for both. THERE SHOULD BE NO MEGAN'S LAW!!! The men in my scenarios will be persecuted for the rest of their lives for something that should not be considered crime. There is no need for these dumb laws. Rapists should serve hard time. The child rapists who these Megan Laws are for should NEVER get out of jail.

This "rape" sword is double-edged, ladies, sad but true.

This is another invidious rape myth.

Studies by the FBI and others show that only about 2% - 8% of all rape reports are "unfounded." That is the same or lower for most other crimes.

Unfounded doesn't mean false. Only a small percentage of unfounded reports are actually false reports.

Studies do not support the hypotheses that women "cry rape" for revenge, to avoid embarassment, etc.

The chances of the type of scenario you describe resulting in a conviction are practically nil.

Europa, so maybe we work on common grounds. Those who falsely accuse rape should be punished, but so should the myth of "date" rape be exposed for the lie that it is and be punished as what it is, pure rape.

Rape is any non-consentual penetration. If she said "no," and he did it anyway, that's rape ... period!

Damn straight. :cool:

Europa, so maybe we work on common grounds. Those who falsely accuse rape should be punished, but so should the myth of "date" rape be exposed for the lie that it is and be punished as what it is, pure rape.
Indeed. True rape is a most heinous crime. Its continued practice is a scar on our society.

Damn straight. :cool:
We agree ... again! [ faints! ] ;)

Interesting figures. Really makes you wonder. I am beginning to believe the judicial system does little to take into consideration social sciences research. This is worrying, as law is a form of social control.
Social "science" is largely an oxymoron.

Social "science" is largely an oxymoron.
Would you prefer the term statistical research then?

No, it's not a message of endorsement.

If you'd paid attention to the buildup to the American Revolution in U.S. History, you would very likely have heard the term "Salutary Neglect" thrown around by the geeks who actually had an interest in history, learning, etc.

rape is rape.

We agree ... again! [ faints! ] ;)

Yeah. I'm glad to see you are shaping up. Keep working on it. ;) :p :D

Would you prefer the term statistical research then?
Not really. Social science is based on statistical analysis of data about people, programs and so on. The real world operates more on what people percieve as having worked in the past, on emotions, and sometimes on preconcieved notions. Social science needs to address these issues, rather than burying its head in the sand and hoping they will all go away.

Yeah. I'm glad to see you are shaping up. Keep working on it. ;) :p :D
LOL! You WISH! :D

Not really. Social science is based on statistical analysis of data about people, programs and so on. The real world operates more on what people percieve as having worked in the past, on emotions, and sometimes on preconcieved notions. Social science needs to address these issues, rather than burying its head in the sand and hoping they will all go away.
It will as it gradually evolves.

It will as it gradually evolves.
Well, while it's "evolving" perhaps you could understand why the rest of us studiously ignore it. :)

Ignorance of something is the worst form of critique. If it is to evolve, it must realise why those it intends to be used by reject it.

Its not reported because the judicial system is stuck in the past. Its basically a catch 22 situation. They need more women to come forward to change the law, but women won't because the system is so inefficient. As for men who are raped, I imagine even fewer will report it.

Men who are raped? I hope you meen by other men. Is it even physically possible for a man to get raped by a woman?

I think rapists should be put away for a long long time in a cell with extra horny inmates. Kinda like the song "Date Rape" by Sublime. If you havent heard it, i suggest you download it. Listen to the words.

The way i see it is this...

Rape is rape no matter what. Wether it be date rape, statutory rape or date rape. I will now explain what i mean:

I consider rape to be a form of sex where the victim has either not given consent or is in no state to give consent OR does not have the legal right to give consent.

In the majority of rape cases, the assailant has used OR threatened to use physical violence against the victim thus, forcing the victim to comply through fear wether they want to or not.

In date rape, the vicim is in no fit state to give there consent or in most cases say no. This gives the attacker massive control over the victim (which increases/decreases dependant on drug used). One of my friends was date raped after having rohypnerol administerd to her. I went balistic and beat the shit out of the assailant who was at the time a good mate (until this happened.) He is now serving time and ive just finished 350 hrs of community service for beating the shit outta him. (but i digress)

Now, statutory rape. I consider this rape because the girl, although she may want sex (and/or a sexual activity) CANNOT legally give her consent to the act (at least thats how is stands over here in england). I nearly got caught out by a 13 y/o last year (i was 20 at the time). Luckily she was the friend of a mates younger sister and he warned me and i told her to fuck off. But basically, statutory rape is rape.

NOW to anyone on here who says it is the womens fault they get raped... I loathe you from the bottom of my heart! IT IS NEVER THE WOMENS FAULT no matter how drunk they are or how they dress. Anyone who thinks they bring on tfhemselves by acting like sluts etc should be sent to prison along with the rest of the rapists etc. My reason for this is taht you are basically excvusing the actions of the rapist!! That in my eyes IS NOT ACCEPTABLE!!

Men who are raped? I hope you meen by other men. Is it even physically possible for a man to get raped by a woman?

I think rapists should be put away for a long long time in a cell with extra horny inmates. Kinda like the song "Date Rape" by Sublime. If you havent heard it, i suggest you download it. Listen to the words.

Approximately 92,700 men are raped each year in the U.S.

Indeed I do mean by other men. For a woman to rape a man she would have to use some tool (or body part) to penetrate him I guess. Given that some rapes are power rapes though, and have nothing to do with sexual gratification, I wonder if there are women out there who rape (men or other women) in this way :confused:

Men who are raped? I hope you meen by other men. Is it even physically possible for a man to get raped by a woman?

I think rapists should be put away for a long long time in a cell with extra horny inmates. Kinda like the song "Date Rape" by Sublime. If you havent heard it, i suggest you download it. Listen to the words.


That sir is a great song, and very relevant. The fucker in taht song deserved it :P

Men who are raped? I hope you meen by other men. Is it even physically possible for a man to get raped by a woman?

I think rapists should be put away for a long long time in a cell with extra horny inmates. Kinda like the song "Date Rape" by Sublime. If you havent heard it, i suggest you download it. Listen to the words.

Men can be raped as well. The numbers are lower and such, but it still exsts. I lack figures on it, but if someone has them, that'd be cool.

The way i see it is this...

Rape is rape no matter what. Wether it be date rape, statutory rape or date rape. I will now explain what i mean:

I consider rape to be a form of sex where the victim has either not given consent or is in no state to give consent OR does not have the legal right to give consent.

In the majority of rape cases, the assailant has used OR threatened to use physical violence against the victim thus, forcing the victim to comply through fear wether they want to or not.

In date rape, the vicim is in no fit state to give there consent or in most cases say no. This gives the attacker massive control over the victim (which increases/decreases dependant on drug used). One of my friends was date raped after having rohypnerol administerd to her. I went balistic and beat the shit out of the assailant who was at the time a good mate (until this happened.) He is now serving time and ive just finished 350 hrs of community service for beating the shit outta him. (but i digress)

Now, statutory rape. I consider this rape because the girl, although she may want sex (and/or a sexual activity) CANNOT legally give her consent to the act (at least thats how is stands over here in england). I nearly got caught out by a 13 y/o last year (i was 20 at the time). Luckily she was the friend of a mates younger sister and he warned me and i told her to fuck off. But basically, statutory rape is rape.

NOW to anyone on here who says it is the womens fault they get raped... I loathe you from the bottom of my heart! IT IS NEVER THE WOMENS FAULT no matter how drunk they are or how they dress. Anyone who thinks they bring on tfhemselves by acting like sluts etc should be sent to prison along with the rest of the rapists etc. My reason for this is taht you are basically excvusing the actions of the rapist!! That in my eyes IS NOT ACCEPTABLE!!

AMEN!!

Amen indeed :)

Indeed I do mean by other men. For a woman to rape a man she would have to use some tool (or body part) to penetrate him I guess. Given that some rapes are power rapes though, and have nothing to do with sexual gratification, I wonder if there are women out there who rape (men or other women) in this way :confused:

I know men who were raped by women. It is entirely possible.

yeah, my mate passed out at a party. Its not hard for a woman to stimulate a man even when hes unconscious. He awoke to find her ontop of her.. he cried rape and she did a runner from the party... i wonder why her friends dont speak to her ne more...

Yet much more infrequent I would gather. Some women also drug men by spiking their drinks and so on. Not nearly as many men who do it, but it happens.

yeah id say there probably are less women that rape men... statistics say that and generally speaking women have different psyches to men. It was written somewhere (but i cant remember where) that all men have the potential to be rapists and the though of raping a woman they know or some random in the street will pass through there head at least once in their life...:eek:

Disturbing, but I guess many people roleplay rape in consentual sex, so very likely. Roleplaying it at least stops some people from doing the real thing.

I think increasingly women are being driven to power rape. Female aggression and testosterone levels have risen considerably, and in the new century, I think many women are angry that they still are not treated as full equals. So they take out their aggression. Not sure, though I think this a possible reason.

Martial arts like Aikido, the Krav Maga or Wing Chun Kung Fu are not about strength. They are technique and agility based mostly. State of mind is a good point to raise though. Thus, a combination of both guns and self defence would be good.

PS: All three martial arts I mentioned, and especially the Krav Maga, train you in situational awareness, and condition your mind to be stronger so as to resist fear. Once they are mastered, their execution is almost automatic. Of course, some individuals are better than others in them as they are more dedicated.
Rock on! Krav Maga & Aikido are teh shizzle!

OTOH, Not ALL "rape" is Rape. There are too many cases of "regret-rape" out there. ("OMG! I slept with YOU!?!? - RAPE!") or other such BS.

Which does not mean women are responsible for violent attacks upon their persons, just that the concept of "all rape is Rape" creates the potential for abuse.

IMO if it ain't forced, it ain't rape... if it is, it is.

If it was forced - report it. If it wasn't, STFU.

Rock on! Krav Maga & Aikido are teh shizzle!

OTOH, Not ALL "rape" is Rape. There are too many cases of "regret-rape" out there. ("OMG! I slept with YOU!?!? - RAPE!") or other such BS.

Which does not mean women are responsible for violent attacks upon their persons, just that the concept of "all rape is Rape" creates the potential for abuse.

IMO if it ain't forced, it ain't rape... if it is, it is.

If it was forced - report it. If it wasn't, STFU.

I already disproved this myth. What evidence do you present to the contrary?

Yet much more infrequent I would gather. Some women also drug men by spiking their drinks and so on. Not nearly as many men who do it, but it happens.
Yah. Read Genesis & the story of Lot. Incest AND Rape! Gotta love the Bible! It's got examples of everything! :p

Rock on! Krav Maga & Aikido are teh shizzle!
As is Wing Chun Kung Fu. All three are excellent self defence arts for women.

In principle I agree, but in a really dangerous situation you may not be in a good state of mind to put your blackbelt moves on an attacker.

An excellent point. But nobody explained how to make it work. See, if you've just gone to a few "anti-date-rape" seminars, and you think when you're in the situation you'll remember to "SING - Shin Instep Nose Groin" (as per Miss Congeniality) ... ain't happening. You'll panic and do everything you were told not to do.

You have to train yourself to make it your instict to do it. It becomes part of you. It becomes your gut reaction. It's automatic. The thing is, if you're trained so it's your first reaction, there is no such thing as a "good state of mind" or "bad state of mind". You don't have to think, you just have to do it. In fact, no way do you have time to think about it if you're about to get raped. You have to just do it, and think later.

An excellent point. But nobody explained how to make it work. See, if you've just gone to a few "anti-date-rape" seminars, and you think when you're in the situation you'll remember to "SING - Shin Instep Nose Groin" (as per Miss Congeniality) ... ain't happening. You'll panic and do everything you were told not to do.

You have to train yourself to make it your instict to do it. It becomes part of you. It becomes your gut reaction. It's automatic. The thing is, if you're trained so it's your first reaction, there is no such thing as a "good state of mind" or "bad state of mind". You don't have to think, you just have to do it. In fact, no way do you have time to think about it if you're about to get raped. You have to just do it, and think later.
Indeed. Your body learns the moves so well its imprinted in your kinetic memory. Thus, execution of the moves is automatic. As such, teaching people how to defend themselves from a young age is an ideal solution.

Rock on! Krav Maga & Aikido are teh shizzle!
As is Wing Chun Kung Fu. All three are excellent self defence arts for women.

As are Hapkido and Aki-jiujitzu. And Jiujitzu, and pretty much anything that teaches close-in grappling combat instead of a long-distance guy-fight kind of combat. I mean, not that I don't enjoy doing head-high round house kicks, but I'd never dream of using them in a fight except to show off and intimidate my opponent. (Which, incidentally, works like a charm. That, and doing splits and cracking your neck. Not that I speak from experience or anything.....:eek: )

Do old people still have a chance to learn a martial art, or are they just too much of old farts? I don't know if geezers should follow Aikido, they might be dead before they even grasp its basics, but what about Tae Kwon Do?

Anyone can learn at any age. The more you practise though, the better you get.

That said, for Aikido, it takes 2 years the basics. Its a powerful art, yet difficult and complex. Incredibly effective though.

I already disproved this myth. What evidence do you present to the contrary?
Um... if you mean that in post #49 you mentioned "studies" that you do not cite directly, I hardly call that "disproving". (esp since many to most of the cases where this applies are in colleges which purposefully hide both genuine and "punitive"/"regret" rape incidents in closed student hearings...)

I simply mean that the blanket statemet "it's rape if the woman says it's rape" can be, and has been, misused.... not that it is a paradigm.

Of course, there is the Feminist Problem... If you are to insist that "I was drunk and he took advantage of me" is valid, you must also assume that Women are inherently inferior and unable to control themselves under the influence... :rolleyes:

Indeed. Your body learns the moves so well its imprinted in your kinetic memory. Thus, execution of the moves is automatic. As such, teaching people how to defend themselves from a young age is an ideal solution.

Agreed. Although I don't advocate starting too young - many kids start at 3 or 4 these days, and imo it can damage their joints as they are growing. And there is no time that is too late to start, as long as you can handle learning something where you'll feel like an idiot at first. You'll keep improving as long as you keep doing it, so you're never REALLY a master.

So which discipline should old geezers seek? I'm just asking on behalf of some old guy I know. (Ha ha, oldest cliche on the Web.) :)

Karate or Tae Kwon Do? And not for the ability to kick ass, for the ability to defend oneself so no ass need be kicked unless the fool just won't quit it.

Agreed. Although I don't advocate starting too young - many kids start at 3 or 4 these days, and imo it can damage their joints as they are growing. And there is no time that is too late to start, as long as you can handle learning something where you'll feel like an idiot at first. You'll keep improving as long as you keep doing it, so you're never REALLY a master.
From 10 years old and on would be a good age. 3 or 4 is way too young.

So which discipline should old geezers seek? I'm just asking on behalf of some old guy I know. (Ha ha, oldest cliche on the Web.) :)

Karate or Tae Kwon Do? And not for the ability to kick ass, for the ability to defend oneself so no ass need be kicked unless the fool just won't quit it.
Both the ones you mentioned focus heavily on your physical condition and are not defensive. You would be better off doing Aikido, Wing Chun or the Krav Maga. They are open to all ages and are extremely powerful martial arts, both defensively and offensively.

Thank you for the information.

As are Hapkido and Aki-jiujitzu. And Jiujitzu, and pretty much anything that teaches close-in grappling combat instead of a long-distance guy-fight kind of combat. I mean, not that I don't enjoy doing head-high round house kicks, but I'd never dream of using them in a fight except to show off and intimidate my opponent. (Which, incidentally, works like a charm. That, and doing splits and cracking your neck. Not that I speak from experience or anything.....:eek: )
Wunnerful book if you can find it: "Looking Forward to being Attacked" published in the early 1970s. Devistating non-"Martial Arts" Kick Butt for Women. I have a copy... I'm not sure it is available any more. I may just have to scan it in and post it on my Blog...

Oh, and I agree that all rape is rape.

I think that women are frequently "asking for it" I think women are often completely irresponsible. They go out dressed to get the men interested, they flirt, and get the men VERY interested, and then they get drunk, or high or whatever, and pass out, or worse, they just say no. So yes, they're asking for it. They're deliberately leading the guy on, and then shutting him down. Yes, that's "asking for it".

BUT that doesn't make it okay to rape them! In today's society it's acceptable for women to behave like. It happens ALL the time. Just because you're very interested, and she's encouraged your interest, does NOT mean she wants to complete that process. And it's still rape no matter how far you get, if she says no. Or for that matter, if she doesn't say yes, or put some form of ok on it.

Basically, the one action doesn't excuse the other action. I think they're both wrong, but there's no excuse to blame the rape on the victim.

Right now the Krav Maga is considered the most effective system for women to learn, as it includes situational and physical training. Wing Chun, Aikido, Hapkido etc. remain highly effective though.

Um... if you mean that in post #49 you mentioned "studies" that you do not cite directly, I hardly call that "disproving". (esp since many to most of the cases where this applies are in colleges which purposefully hide both genuine and "punitive"/"regret" rape incidents in closed student hearings...)

I simply mean that the blanket statemet "it's rape if the woman says it's rape" can be, and has been, misused.... not that it is a paradigm.

Actually , I've alread linked to Department of Justice and Center for Disease Control information that contradicted the myth.

I can dig up the FBI data and the various studies, but I have the feeling you don't care. Here are a a few handy cites anyway:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/soo.txt
http://fap.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/11/3/341
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/db/protect.html
http://www.onlinelawyersource.com/criminal_law/sexual_assault/statistics.html

Of course, there is the Feminist Problem... If you are to insist that "I was drunk and he took advantage of me" is valid, you must also assume that Women are inherently inferior and unable to control themselves under the influence... :rolleyes:

There is no problem here. If a man or a woman is too drunk to consent to sex, then having sex with them is rape. The sex of the victim is irrelevant and there is no inferiority required to be a victim. If someone is drunk enough that they simply use poor judgment in deciding to have sex, they are not raped.

Oh, and I agree that all rape is rape.

I think that women are frequently "asking for it" I think women are often completely irresponsible. They go out dressed to get the men interested, they flirt, and get the men VERY interested, and then they get drunk, or high or whatever, and pass out, or worse, they just say no. So yes, they're asking for it. They're deliberately leading the guy on, and then shutting him down. Yes, that's "asking for it".

BUT that doesn't make it okay to rape them! In today's society it's acceptable for women to behave like. It happens ALL the time. Just because you're very interested, and she's encouraged your interest, does NOT mean she wants to complete that process. And it's still rape no matter how far you get, if she says no. Or for that matter, if she doesn't say yes, or put some form of ok on it.

Basically, the one action doesn't excuse the other action. I think they're both wrong, but there's no excuse to blame the rape on the victim.
Indeed, the rape is 100% inexcusable. Yet men act in a manner which can be seen as slutty, and they do not have to worry (usually) about being raped. In this way, they have more freedom than women, something which is unfair.

So which discipline should old geezers seek? I'm just asking on behalf of some old guy I know. (Ha ha, oldest cliche on the Web.) :)

I always recommend to people that they try out all the options in the area. Go watch a class or two, or if you can, join in. DON'T get roped into the first one by the special they offer to everyone who walks in off the street if they sign a contract that day. Martial arts are very highly dependant on the instructor, and some aren't exactly ideal.

Also, you want to try to pick one that is a "soft" style, like Aikido. Not a "hard" style, like Tae Kwon Do. As you age, just like when you're a kid, your joints can't handle the rough treatment, and you want something with circles in it instead of jolts on those joints.

I always recommend to people that they try out all the options in the area. Go watch a class or two, or if you can, join in. DON'T get roped into the first one by the special they offer to everyone who walks in off the street if they sign a contract that day. Martial arts are very highly dependant on the instructor, and some aren't exactly ideal.

Also, you want to try to pick one that is a "soft" style, like Aikido. Not a "hard" style, like Tae Kwon Do. As you age, just like when you're a kid, your joints can't handle the rough treatment, and you want something with circles in it instead of jolts on those joints.
I'd agree here. BTW, when the word "soft" is used it means its based more on technique/focus than physical condition. All martial arts which incorporate the concepts of ki/chi are a mixture of soft/hard styles, yet some are softer, and others harder. Soft ones require a lot of training, yet can be devastatingly powerful.

Oh, and I agree that all rape is rape.

I think that women are frequently "asking for it" I think women are often completely irresponsible. They go out dressed to get the men interested, they flirt, and get the men VERY interested, and then they get drunk, or high or whatever, and pass out, or worse, they just say no. So yes, they're asking for it. They're deliberately leading the guy on, and then shutting him down. Yes, that's "asking for it".

BUT that doesn't make it okay to rape them! In today's society it's acceptable for women to behave like. It happens ALL the time. Just because you're very interested, and she's encouraged your interest, does NOT mean she wants to complete that process. And it's still rape no matter how far you get, if she says no. Or for that matter, if she doesn't say yes, or put some form of ok on it.

Basically, the one action doesn't excuse the other action. I think they're both wrong, but there's no excuse to blame the rape on the victim.

Your second paragraph is disproven, dangerous drivel. The rest of your post is spot on.

it would be great if everyone could take some form of self defense classes or martial arts, but has anyone considered that they arent free? or are there some that are? because how many people have the money?

Actually , I've alread linked to Department of Justice and Center for Disease Control information that contradicted the myth.

I can dig up the FBI data and the various studies, but I have the feeling you don't care. Here are a a few handy cites anyway:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/soo.txt
http://fap.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/11/3/341
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/db/protect.html
http://www.onlinelawyersource.com/criminal_law/sexual_assault/statistics.html Cat, all I am saying, is that if it happens ONCE then it is not a myth. It may not be the rule, but it is not a myth. It happens. The CDC data also does not take into account the Universities propensity for "Student Diciplinary Council" star chambers.
There is no problem here. If a man or a woman is too drunk to consent to sex, then having sex with them is rape. The sex of the victim is irrelevant and there is no inferiority required to be a victim. If someone is drunk enough that they simply use poor judgment in deciding to have sex, they are not raped.The problem comes in adjudicating "too drunk to consent" vs. "poor judgement drunk". If you use the "All (declared) rape is Rape" rule, then differentiating between the two conditions becomes virtually moot because all the "victim" has to do is declare that s/he was "too drunk to consent" (who's going to admit to "poor judgement"?... :rolleyes: )

it would be great if everyone could take some form of self defense classes or martial arts, but has anyone considered that they arent free? or are there some that are? because how many people have the money?
Would be great if governments arranged for them to be taught as part of school curriculums.

Would be great if governments arranged for them to be taught as part of school curriculums.
Along with gun safety/handling. (one cannot be safe with a firearm unless one knows how to handle it... They do it for Automobiles, why not Firearms? :headbang: )

Agreed.

what about Christian, Private, cyber, and homeschoolers?

It would certainly be worth the tax dollars.. BUT FOR the catch 22 it would create.. if you train all people in self defence from school age upwards.. wouldnt the assailant know how to counter...

With the prices private schools charge, they can afford to make it part of their extra-curricular activities programme.

It would certainly be worth the tax dollars.. BUT FOR the catch 22 it would create.. if you train all people in self defence from school age upwards.. wouldnt the assailant know how to counter...
The defendant would not be completely helpless though.

It would certainly be worth the tax dollars.. BUT FOR the catch 22 it would create.. if you train all people in self defence from school age upwards.. wouldnt the assailant know how to counter...
Not really. Currently, an assailaint need only be more violent, not more skilled, than the "victim". If both are equally trained, then "more violent" is really immaterial - especially against "soft" arts like Aikido where it is to your disadvantage to attack...

Exactly. Aikido can actually be used for attacks by the way, but that requires a huge amount of training.

point conceded :)

Rape is any non-consentual penetration. If she said "no," and he did it anyway, that's rape ... period!

I will definitely agree with your definition. It is also that definition that gets acquittals in rape cases.

From Cat-Tribe's article that started this thread, 1 out of 100 sounds about what one would expect for rape convictions. For starters, in order to have a conviction, you have to have a perpetrator that can be identified and placed at the scene of the crime. Unless a woman has the presence of mind to make mental notes that will identify her attacker, if it is a stranger, he's not going to get caught. Barring that, forensic evidence in rape cases has to be collected almost immediately after everything is over. That is something women avoid, one, out of guilt that they allowed themselves to be raped and two, after a rape, the last thing they want is some other stranger poking around down there. In cases of theft, one can say a perpretrator was at the scene if they can find the perpretrator in posession of the goods reported stolen. With rape, chances of finding forensic evidence on the perpretrator is remote.

Ok, so stranger rape accounts for 31% of rapes. What about the other ones?
It all comes down to the matter of consent. In order for penetration to be non-consentual, one of two things have to be proven: 1)consent was never given or 2)consent was given and subsequently withdrawn. While "no" is explicitly a withdrawl of consent, what is considered granting consent is somewhat vague, considering I have never had a woman say to me "let's have sex". Typically, it's one thing leads to alother, clothes start flying, badda bing badda boom, and there you go.

Consent can be as little as going to a certain location. Sound rediculous? Say a woman goes to a dance club, picks up a guy and they have sex in the backseat of the car. If it seems like she's trying to protest, he just kisses her all the more passionately, effectively preventing her from saying "no". After he has blown his load and backs off, she pushes him off and says "can't you take a hint? All I wanted to do was fool around! I didn't want to have sex with you!" And it goes to court. Prosecution has it's say, and the defense lawyer gets up and starts asking questions:

"Ms. X, did you go to the dance club with the intention of possibly having sex with someone you had never met before?"

"er, well, yeah, the thought had crossed my mind..."

"and did you tell him 'no' prior to penetration and in such a way that he was able to hear and understand?"

"Well, not exactly, see..."

"No further questions."

Does this sound like that this is going to wind up with a conviction?

That takes care of the 35% of rapes from acquaintences.

Significant others? Those would fall in the second category, where consent was given and subsequently withdrawn. Many people are just not verbal during sex, so it may be too late to say no before penetration takes place.
Back to the defense attorney:

"Ms. X, in Mr. X's testimony, he stated that you tend to scream alot during sex, is this true?"

"Well, yes..."

"...and on this particular night, out of all the other times that you have had sexual relations, you expected him to be able to distinguish between screams of ecstacy and screams of terror?"

"er..."

"No further questions..."

That takes care of that 28%.

The main beef I have with the whole "women are not responsible for rape" idea is the implication that there is nothing a woman can or should do to prevent rape. It's like walking across the street. Even if you ignore your mother's advice and don't look both ways before crossing the street, you won't be prosecuted if you get hit by a truck, but it will not make you any less dead. The same thing goes for getting one's self into vulnerable situations: nobody is going to prosecute you for walking though dimly lit, isolated places, but it is not going to make you any less raped.

Exactly. Aikido can actually be used for attacks by the way, but that requires a huge amount of training.
Yah. AikiJutsu from the Sensi Gozo Shidoa school for one... OTOH, for most folks Shin Shin Toitsu is more than sufficient. It's awfully hard to recover from being (politely) introduced to a wall at 20+mph.... :D

I will not bring myself to agree with that notion PastureParty. If a woman gets raped, she is not to blame, no matter what the circumstances.

Aikido is a marvellous art indeed :)

I will not bring myself to agree with that notion PastureParty. If a woman gets raped, she is not to blame, no matter what the circumstances.I agree... so long as the (legal) definition of Rape is not simply her definition of rape...
Aikido is a marvellous art indeed :)
That's why I learned it AFTER learning Krav Maga... I found it is a far, far better thing (legally) to not Break People - even inself defense - if you can avoid it.

Being able to show, in a court of law, that the "move" you used to cripple someone could not be used unless the injured party was actively attacking you is a particularly effective... :eek: :D

When I mean rape, I mean any forced sex on a woman who says no and means it.

I love that about Aikido...it can be modified both to break bones and just to immobilise. :)

I will not bring myself to agree with that notion PastureParty. If a woman gets raped, she is not to blame, no matter what the circumstances.

Aikido is a marvellous art indeed :)
It is not my intention to blame women for rape. Blame is a stupid idea, the thinking being that if you hold someone accountable for something, they are going to accept responsibility and remedy the situation. Blame anyone you like for rape, but lightbulbs are still the only things that can be unscrewed.

Do women that take self-defense courses do it because they blame themselves for rape? Are women being sentenced to take self-defense courses because they were raped? Of course not! They are doing it because they don't want to be raped, or, unfortunately, don't want to be raped again.

That does not help prevent rape though (considering that most women do martial arts courses after being raped rather than to prevent it from happening in the first place). Those truly guilty of raping a woman must be convicted and accept full responsibility.

That does not help prevent rape though (considering that most women do martial arts courses after being raped rather than to prevent it from happening in the first place). Those truly guilty of raping a woman must be convicted and accept full responsibility.

There is a dilemma there though too. I would see nothing wrong with a husband going to jail if he raped his wife, but the wife may have second thoughts about what happens when her husband is thrown in jail, subsequently fired from his job and the wife is left with all the household expenses, loses the house, the car, and the standard of living she was accustomed to. Are the courts going to step in and compensate her for the husband's lost wages? Nope. Is the husband going to earn enough money in jail to maintain her standard of living? Nope again. Now, if you have a woman that has an income that can support her lifestyle with or without a husband, she wouldn't think twice, but I don't think that many women are in that position nowadays.

That does not help prevent rape though (considering that most women do martial arts courses after being raped rather than to prevent it from happening in the first place). Those truly guilty of raping a woman must be convicted and accept full responsibility.

learning some sort of self defense would protect a woman at least a little.

Perhaps they could form a new type of insurance that insures women under such circumstances. That would be the free market solution.

learning some sort of self defense would protect a woman at least a little.
Absolutely. And I encourage it 100%. Yet most people do not learn to defend themselves. It should, as I said, be taught in schools.

Perhaps they could form a new type of insurance that insures women under such circumstances. That would be the free market solution.

That would be interesting to see how that would work. I suppose if you have malpractice insurance, you could have malcontent insurance? Then again, it could run into the same problems as life insurance. I would say it's a given that everyone out on the streets could be thrown in jail if someone knew enough about them and pressed charges. Toss in a financial incentive for doing so and it's going to be a very messy world out there. Probably what would happen is that insurance of that type would come with a clause that it would only kick in if the beneficiary was not the person pressing charges, in which case those that were filing rape charges would be screwed.

Ok, not a good choice of words, but I can't think of a better one at the moment.

Its an alternative to allowing marital rape to go on though, isn't it? It would perhaps lead to fairer trials as well, as it would be well within an insurance agency's interests to ensure that the defendant is indeed guilty of the crime he/she is accused of. This way, more evidence will present itself.

I think such insurance would be about as acceptable as a prenuptual agreement: legally binding but the implications of taking it out on someone...

Anyway, best of luck with that one. Let me know how it turns out.

As normal, I've seem to come into this debate 9 pages in, and to be honest, I don't really have the time to read through all 9 pages at the moment, so I'm going to say my opinion according to the first post.

Rape is rape, and that is that. But I don't think I could say it better than this:

Every 45 seconds a woman is raped
Our sexist culture allows no escape
The is violent crime is far from obscurity
When the rate of victims is one in three
Society conditions men to be rapists
And our indifference perpetuates it
With derogatory language that tends to dehumanize
Making it easier for men to victimize
And the pornographic images that help portray
Women as legitimate sexual prey
When sexism is embedded in our judicial system
It's no surprise why the courts won't listen
And the role of attacker and survivor become distorted
So the majority of rapes are never reported
The threat of rape is always there
It's like a poison that saturates the air
A society stricken by a cancerous disease
Where men know they can do as they please
You tell me the punishment for rape
You tell me how much jail time it will take
When one out of three women will be raped
You tell me what it's going to fucking take
Do you see me in my low cut shirt
Or high heel shoes or a miniskirt
Woman is the victim you desire
You say you can't resist your predatory fire
You tell me why I stand guilty and accused
You tell me when I'm beaten an abused
When it's my body that's been raped and defiled
You tell me why I'm the one on trial
Defense attorney?: Do you know the man who "allegedly" attacked you?
Victim?: Yes I know the man who raped me.
Defense attorney?: And isn't this man a friend of yours?
Victim?: Well I thought he was a friend of mine.
Defense attorney?: And were you drinking that night he 'allegedly" attacked you?
Victim?: I had a drink or two but is that a crime?
Defense attorney?: I'll ask the questions if you don't mind!
-What were you wearing: How did you act?
Victim?: My wardrobe isn't an invitation for a man to attack.
-I didn't act in any way to bring this on. Why am I on trail? What did I do wrong?
Defense attorney?: Could you tell the jury why you let this happen?
Victim?: I was in shock. I couldn't stop him.
Defense attorney?: You claim that you were raped but how do we know?
Victim?: I said no, I said no, no, no!
Defense attorney?: Isn't it true you're just a woman scorned?
Victim?: I'm a woman who's been raped and torn.
Defense attorney?: Your honor, I demand that this case be dismissed,
-it all comes down to her word against his!
I may not have bruises all over my body
But when I went to his room I never would have guessed
That he would force my no to mean a yes
You tell me why I'm guilty of this crime
You tell me why the responsibility is mine
When women suffer a second rape during trial
Courts help rapists to violate and defile

Powerful piece.

Absolutely. And I encourage it 100%. Yet most people do not learn to defend themselves. It should, as I said, be taught in schools.

Oh, I agree. And not just to girls. I think if everyone were trained in martial arts, and a good number of people continued in it, it would have the same effect as if everyone is trained in firearms, and could be carrying. People tend to be much more polite. I mean, if I think there's a chance I could get counter-attacked, or worse, get my head blown off, the odds of me assaulting someone are much much lower. It raises the stakes in the game, and levels the playing field between strength differences. Some cute little petite woman could be an Aikido champion and my face could make friends with the pavement. Or the weak looking old guy I plan to relieve of his wallet, since he just looks too weak to carry it much father, could decide that his wallet is in that holster on his shoulder. And even if someone wasn't bright enough to think twice, at least some of the time we wouldn't have to worry about the death penalty. ;)

I also advocate for both defensive martial arts and gun use to be taught to the whole population within schools, from a relatively young age. Not too sure how parents would feel about education in gun use though.

That's a great article, and I am very glad that you took the time to post it. People like you make these forums worthwhile.

Rape is rape, and that is that.

Yep. Just don't go on with a big moralistic rant about how evil society is responsible for rapists actions.


But I don't think I could say it better than this:


doh...


Our sexist culture allows no escape
The is violent crime is far from obscurity
When the rate of victims is one in three
Society conditions men to be rapists

Oh, right. I keep forgetting what my conditioning is. Thanks for telling me.


And our indifference perpetuates it

So you are indifferent? Or by "our" did you actually mean, "everyones indifference but my own?"


With derogatory language that tends to dehumanize

My ass. Next thing you know you'll be wanting to censor speech to prevent rape.


Making it easier for men to victimize

Yep, it's a helluva lot easier for me to be a rapist now! Yay! Oh wait it ISNT. Because victimizers don't victimize because of how society's derogatory language 'conditions' them. When you try to make that point you are giving all rapists an excuse. They didn't do it - society and bad language made them do it! They weren't responsible - society and bad language were! So maybe YOU are the one "conditioning" potential rapists since you're giving them handy excuses.


And the pornographic images that help portray
Women as legitimate sexual prey

Ah yes. Voluntary actresses in legal films faking orgasms is the same thing as portraying women as legitimate rape victims. Well, at least now we can blame "society, bad language" and "pornography" for rape! Yes, anything but rapists are to blame!


When sexism is embedded in our judicial system
It's no surprise why the courts won't listen
And the role of attacker and survivor become distorted
So the majority of rapes are never reported

I've often wondered how they come up with how many rapes are not reported.


The threat of rape is always there
It's like a poison that saturates the air
A society stricken by a cancerous disease
Where men know they can do as they please

Evil men again and their collective approval of rape. Way to generalize. Yeah, I'll just go a-raping today. That's what I do! First I masturbate to porn, then I swear a lot, and then society makes me go out and rape because I know that rapists never go to prison or jail.

Brilliant.


You tell me the punishment for rape
You tell me how much jail time it will take
When one out of three women will be raped

How much jail time it takes has nothing to do with how many women are raped.


You tell me what it's going to fucking take
Do you see me in my low cut shirt
Or high heel shoes or a miniskirt
Woman is the victim you desire
You say you can't resist your predatory fire
You tell me why I stand guilty and accused
You tell me when I'm beaten an abused
When it's my body that's been raped and defiled
You tell me why I'm the one on trial
Defense attorney?: Do you know the man who "allegedly" attacked you?
Victim?: Yes I know the man who raped me.
Defense attorney?: And isn't this man a friend of yours?
Victim?: Well I thought he was a friend of mine.
Defense attorney?: And were you drinking that night he 'allegedly" attacked you?
Victim?: I had a drink or two but is that a crime?
Defense attorney?: I'll ask the questions if you don't mind!
-What were you wearing: How did you act?
Victim?: My wardrobe isn't an invitation for a man to attack.
-I didn't act in any way to bring this on. Why am I on trail? What did I do wrong?
Defense attorney?: Could you tell the jury why you let this happen?
Victim?: I was in shock. I couldn't stop him.
Defense attorney?: You claim that you were raped but how do we know?
Victim?: I said no, I said no, no, no!
Defense attorney?: Isn't it true you're just a woman scorned?
Victim?: I'm a woman who's been raped and torn.
Defense attorney?: Your honor, I demand that this case be dismissed,
-it all comes down to her word against his!
I may not have bruises all over my body
But when I went to his room I never would have guessed
That he would force my no to mean a yes
You tell me why I'm guilty of this crime
You tell me why the responsibility is mine
When women suffer a second rape during trial
Courts help rapists to violate and defile

I wonder what Cat-Tribe would have to say about attourneys and courts helping rapists. I know what I say: you're blaming the surgeon for the disease. But hey, nice poem, nothing like combining art and politics.

Oh, I agree. And not just to girls. I think if everyone were trained in martial arts, and a good number of people continued in it, it would have the same effect as if everyone is trained in firearms, and could be carrying. People tend to be much more polite. I mean, if I think there's a chance I could get counter-attacked, or worse, get my head blown off, the odds of me assaulting someone are much much lower. It raises the stakes in the game, and levels the playing field between strength differences. Some cute little petite woman could be an Aikido champion and my face could make friends with the pavement. Or the weak looking old guy I plan to relieve of his wallet, since he just looks too weak to carry it much father, could decide that his wallet is in that holster on his shoulder. And even if someone wasn't bright enough to think twice, at least some of the time we wouldn't have to worry about the death penalty. ;)

If everyone knew martial arts, then martial arts would not give anyone an edge, it would only make them equal and we would still be where we are today. Nothing would change.

If everyone knew martial arts, then martial arts would not give anyone an edge, it would only make them equal and we would still be where we are today. Nothing would change.
Not really. Defensive martial arts let you defend yourself at an advantage, but attack another person at a disadvantage. Read the relevant posts. BTW, currently we are not equal, some people are physically weaker than others. As many martial arts are technique rather than strength based, they would help level the playing field.

Martial Arts cannot help if you don´t have the courage to use them....
I think CO2 is better

Martial Arts cannot help if you don´t have the courage to use them....
I think CO2 is better
Sigh...you practise them to the point that courage is no longer an issue. To the point that they are an automatic reaction, not an action. You need courage to use a gun as well, or any weapon. To overcome this, it must become an instinctual reaction.

Not really. Defensive martial arts let you defend yourself at an advantage, but attack another person at a disadvantage.

I have never heard of a martial art that teaches you how to defend better but fight less effectively. In fact, that doesnt even make sense. Can you name some of the specific styles you are speaking of?

Read the relevant posts. BTW, currently we are not equal, some people are physically weaker than others. As many martial arts are technique rather than strength based, they would help level the playing field.

No, they would help raise the base level. There would still be people who are stronger than others. There will also be people who practice more than others. Martials Arts is utterly useless unless you practice it to the point that it becomes your normal reaction to a situation. If you dont practice it to that point and end up having to think about what move to do, it simply isnt going to work. How many people will really put in the practice required? Do you propose the introduction of mandatory training laws? Unless you practice it until it becomes instinct, it remains useless. There will still be just as much unbalance, just that the base will be raised. This is the same principle you run into when a new military technology spreads for example. The sub machine gun was a great invention, but it doesnt give anyone an edge since everyone has it.

I have never heard of a martial art that teaches you how to defend better but fight less effectively. In fact, that doesnt even make sense. Can you name some of the specific styles you are speaking of?
Aikido is one such art. It relies on the attacker making the first move. You then deflect the blow, either immobilising or badly damaging the attacker, depending on whether or not you choose to use force. Its a complex art, yet its highly efficient and devastating. Its also very difficult to initiate attacks with it, unless you train in specific forms of it, which require very high levels of mastery. It has absolutely no reliance on strength, only technique.


No, they would help raise the base level. There would still be people who are stronger than others. There will also be people who practice more than others. Martials Arts is utterly useless unless you practice it to the point that it becomes your normal reaction to a situation. If you dont practice it to that point and end up having to think about what move to do, it simply isnt going to work. Unless you practice it until it becomes instinct, it remains useless. There will still be just as much unbalance, just that the base will be raised. This is the same principle you run into when a new military technology spreads for example. The sub machine gun was a great invention, but it doesnt give everyone an edge since everyone has it.
Hardly. Some martial arts have absolutely no basis in strength. They are concerned with technique and minimising any need for it. Strength is not power. Indeed, if someone practises more than another person, they may be better, but then again, some people are more driven than others anyway.

If one practises martial arts from childhood, then their application becomes instinctual.

"All rape is real rape"
Well this not very clever!
What is rape and more how can someone prove a rape?
Most posters expresed their disgust about rape. I also despise rapists.
The most important thing about rape is consent. The difficult part is usually to prove that consent was not given.
If there is phisical trauma things are easier, but if everything happens without violence between two alone people...
She says: "I said no"
He claims: "she did not say anything"
When you here about a rape think about the evidence like you are a judge.
"probatio incubit actori"= "one who makes a claim must prove it"
Even the prove that a sexual act took place is not usefull because gives no indication about consent.
Only marks of violence and such are of any use.

Indeed, the rape is 100% inexcusable. Yet men act in a manner which can be seen as slutty, and they do not have to worry (usually) about being raped. In this way, they have more freedom than women, something which is unfair.

So then the real problem here is that women can't overpower men and force them to have sex? The arguement seems to be that men don't have to worry about women taking advantage of them when they act like teases, but women do. Therefore, it should be alright for women to act irresponsibly, because men can?

Unfortunately the reality of the world we live in is that some people will try to take advantage of you if you are in a compromising position. Since we are all aware of this, it is our own responsiblity to make sure that we don't find ourselves in a compromising position. If we do allow ourselves to be compromised, and something bad happens to us, we need to take responsiblity for our own actions. The victim must take personal and moral (not legal as everyone seems to think is implied) responsibility for not taking reasonable actions to keep themselves safe. The attacker must take personal, moral, and legal responsibility for violating another person.

If you go out and drink yourself into a stupor, I refuse to feel bad for you if you get hurt. Whether someone robs you, or rapes you, or kills you... Whether you are a man or a woman... If you did something obviously stupid to make it more likely, I will not feel bad for you. I will not console you. I will not tell you not to blame yourself for putting yourself in such a stupid situation. I will however insist that the person who violated you be prosecuted to the furthest extent of the law.

I'm male. I don't think I'm safe going to a party with people I don't know and getting so drunk or high that I can't defend myself. So I don't do that. If you're a woman, and you are worried about your safety. Take steps to protect yourself. Don't get so drunk or high that you can't tell who you are having sex with. Don't get so drunk or high that you can't tell someone 'no' when they try to have sex with you.

If you get stupid drunk and try to walk a tight rope and fall it's your fault. You knew gravity was out there, and you did nothing to protect yourself from it's effects. In fact, you did something to make it more likely something bad would happen to you. If you (likely a female, though it could be a male) get stupid drunk at a party, and start flirting heavily with the guys there, then go pass out, how can you be considered totally without fault if you get raped? You knew there are guys out there who might try and rape you, and you did nothing to protect yourself. In fact, you did some things that made it more likely something bad would happen to you. If you know that there are people who can't be trusted, it is not OK to act like everyone can be. Shame on you for being so foolish.

As normal, I've seem to come into this debate 9 pages in, and to be honest, I don't really have the time to read through all 9 pages at the moment, so I'm going to say my opinion according to the first post.

Rape is rape, and that is that. But I don't think I could say it better than this:

Every 45 seconds a woman is raped
Our sexist culture allows no escape
The is violent crime is far from obscurity
When the rate of victims is one in three
Society conditions men to be rapists
And our indifference perpetuates it
With derogatory language that tends to dehumanize
Making it easier for men to victimize
And the pornographic images that help portray
Women as legitimate sexual prey
When sexism is embedded in our judicial system
It's no surprise why the courts won't listen
And the role of attacker and survivor become distorted
So the majority of rapes are never reported
The threat of rape is always there
It's like a poison that saturates the air
A society stricken by a cancerous disease
Where men know they can do as they please
You tell me the punishment for rape
You tell me how much jail time it will take
When one out of three women will be raped
You tell me what it's going to fucking take
Do you see me in my low cut shirt
Or high heel shoes or a miniskirt
Woman is the victim you desire
You say you can't resist your predatory fire
You tell me why I stand guilty and accused
You tell me when I'm beaten an abused
When it's my body that's been raped and defiled
You tell me why I'm the one on trial
Defense attorney?: Do you know the man who "allegedly" attacked you?
Victim?: Yes I know the man who raped me.
Defense attorney?: And isn't this man a friend of yours?
Victim?: Well I thought he was a friend of mine.
Defense attorney?: And were you drinking that night he 'allegedly" attacked you?
Victim?: I had a drink or two but is that a crime?
Defense attorney?: I'll ask the questions if you don't mind!
-What were you wearing: How did you act?
Victim?: My wardrobe isn't an invitation for a man to attack.
-I didn't act in any way to bring this on. Why am I on trail? What did I do wrong?
Defense attorney?: Could you tell the jury why you let this happen?
Victim?: I was in shock. I couldn't stop him.
Defense attorney?: You claim that you were raped but how do we know?
Victim?: I said no, I said no, no, no!
Defense attorney?: Isn't it true you're just a woman scorned?
Victim?: I'm a woman who's been raped and torn.
Defense attorney?: Your honor, I demand that this case be dismissed,
-it all comes down to her word against his!
I may not have bruises all over my body
But when I went to his room I never would have guessed
That he would force my no to mean a yes
You tell me why I'm guilty of this crime
You tell me why the responsibility is mine
When women suffer a second rape during trial
Courts help rapists to violate and defile

Would not the best solution be to make rape a crime against the state aswell as against the victim.This would guarentee that the victim was leagaly represented and as such prevent this sort of badgering.Also making it a crime against the state would send the message that rape is not accepted in society as a whole.Remember rape is so grevious that it is considered to be a war crime.

It seems that things have now moved on how to prevent rape, and the majority of solutions that I've read over seem to be eiher (A) teach kids how to fight, martial arts or otherwise or (B) train and equip everyone with a gun. Well, I would have to agree with LazyHippies:
If everyone knew martial arts, then martial arts would not give anyone an edge, it would only make them equal and we would still be where we are today. Nothing would change.
Not only that, but if everyone was equipped with a gun, or a weapon of some type, a man would be more likely to rape someone. Not only would rapes increase, but wouldn't murder increase also? Hypothetical situation: A man, armed with a gun, is about to rape a woman. Upon attacking her, the woman attempts to fight back with her weapon of choice (be it a gun, knife, whatever), so the potential rapist discharges his gun, now becoming an attempted rapist and a murderer.
Guns and violence don't solve problems, they cause problems.

And with a brief response to Santa Barbara: Don't go on a moralistic rant about how evil society is. Check. There's no need to go through and nitpick at everything, unless you feel that's how your point has to be made. But, yes, I do believe that society is sexist and could condition men to be potential rapists. Just yesterday I read this in a High School psychology book (it's concening male/female roles in society, and how they are taught to children): "Men should show aggressiveness... women should show emotion, not ambition." Sounds like conditioning and sexism to me, especially since it is stating that is what children are/should be taught in order to learn their socially acceptable role.
And by the way, the "poem" isn't something I wrote.

If everyone knew martial arts, then martial arts would not give anyone an edge, it would only make them equal and we would still be where we are today. Nothing would change.
You only say that because you have NO clue what you're talking about. Martial arts are NOT based on strength. Attacking ALWAYS puts you at a disadvantage. I'm not a big woman, and I can wipe the floor with huge guys who attack me. Even ones who are more skilled than I am. Martial arts gives the defender the edge. And everyone being trained would make people more reluctant to attack because you'd never know if the person you were attacking was one of those who was more inclined to train and might just damage you.
I have never heard of a martial art that teaches you how to defend better but fight less effectively. In fact, that doesnt even make sense. Can you name some of the specific styles you are speaking of?
You're right - they all teach you to fight more effectively. But it is always easier to react than act. To attack someone, I wouldn't even really know how to begin. To defend, I feel I have almost infinite options. An attacker knowing that the defender had the advantage and would likely know how to hurt him might just act as a deterrent.
There would still be people who are stronger than others.
Yes of course there are. But there are two ways to think about that which make it irrelevant. First, in many arts, as in Aikido, you use your attacker's strength against him. For instance, if someone punches at you, you simply make it keep going past you. The harder he punched, the harder he goes down. The stronger he is, the more strength goes into damaging him, because it's his own force that is hurting him. Second, you use big muscles against little muscles. That is, I don't care HOW strong you are - if I use my biceps against your lil wrist muscles, I'm stronger than you are. It's hard to explain an example of that in type, but that's how it works in grappling, which is what would be involved in a rape situation. You can't just push your arms straight against his, or he'll win pretty much every time. But if you just move a little in a certain way, suddenly you're fighting his little muscles with your big ones, and *poof* he loses. And the only way for him to muscle back out of it is generally to seriously damage himself.

Finally let me just say that an armed and trained society is a polite society. Rapists rape because they think they can get away with it. If they think there's a good liklihood that they'll be killed instead, they'd think again. Not to say they'd stop entirely, but the incidence would be a lot less. And then they'd be dead, which would be even more of a deterrent to others who come in their wake. And y'know, imo if they were trying to rape someone and got killed in the process, that's just a very swift justice, and would be considered self-defence.

Finally let me just say that an armed and trained society is a polite society. Rapists rape because they think they can get away with it. If they think there's a good liklihood that they'll be killed instead, they'd think again. Not to say they'd stop entirely, but the incidence would be a lot less. And then they'd be dead, which would be even more of a deterrent to others who come in their wake. And y'know, imo if they were trying to rape someone and got killed in the process, that's just a very swift justice, and would be considered self-defence.
SHHH! You aren't allowed to talk sense. Remember: Women are not supposed to be violent because Violence is a Male thing and Men are Bad.

Women are not allowed to defend themselves - only hope they survive to file charges - so that the Male Dominated LawEnforcement System can Protect them.

Remember That's the Feminist Way! :rolleyes:

SHHH! You aren't allowed to talk sense. Remember: Women are not supposed to be violent because Violence is a Male thing and Men are Bad.

Women are not allowed to defend themselves - only hope they survive to file charges - so that the Male Dominated LawEnforcement System can Protect them.

Remember That's the Feminist Way! :rolleyes:

This "Feminist Way" must be a voice in your head, because otherwise it is imaginary.

This "Feminist Way" must be a voice in your head, because otherwise it is imaginary.
And Yet, that is why NOW has so much information on their site on how women should best defend themselves from attack(s) :rolleyes:

Europa Maxima you said all citizens should be taught martial arts, so that women could defend themselves in case of rape, uhhhm, aren't the rapists also citizens, so they would know how to block the woman's move, counter it, and still rape her.

And it is impossible to train only women in self defense or specifically women, due to something called equality, so in PE the boys would learn it too.

Europa Maxima you said all citizens should be taught martial arts, so that women could defend themselves in case of rape, uhhhm, aren't the rapists also citizens, so they would know how to block the woman's move, counter it, and still rape her.

And it is impossible to train only women in self defense or specifically women, due to something called equality, so in PE the boys would learn it too.
No, it wouldn't. Aikido is a very strange art. Its nearly impossible to disrupt the moves when you are defending. Its based on physics. Very powerful art. You counter the offence, but countering the defence is theoretically impossible. Many aikido moves distance the opponent from you as soon as possible, so its not even possible to break them. I recommend you either speak to various masters at local martial arts academies (Aikido, Wing Chun and Krav Maga are the prime examples of defensive arts), look it up on the net or read up on martial arts.

And, if you read my past few posts, you would realise I said ALL citizens should learn. :rolleyes:

Qwysteria is correct in all her arguments, yet I will add something. Aikido can in fact be used offensively, but this is a different branch of it, and very specialised. You need a great deal of skill. In most of its forms, its defensive. Yet, when used offensively, then Aikido can be countered by someone who knows the system. This does not hold true of its defensive form. Strength is not even an issue in offensive versions of some martial arts, like the Krav Maga, Wing Chun or Aikido. They are based on technique, focus and physics. Very intelligent, very scientific.

It seems that things have now moved on how to prevent rape, and the majority of solutions that I've read over seem to be eiher (A) teach kids how to fight, martial arts or otherwise or (B) train and equip everyone with a gun. Well, I would have to agree with LazyHippies:

Not only that, but if everyone was equipped with a gun, or a weapon of some type, a man would be more likely to rape someone. Not only would rapes increase, but wouldn't murder increase also? Hypothetical situation: A man, armed with a gun, is about to rape a woman. Upon attacking her, the woman attempts to fight back with her weapon of choice (be it a gun, knife, whatever), so the potential rapist discharges his gun, now becoming an attempted rapist and a murderer.
Guns and violence don't solve problems, they cause problems.
That is why I favour alternative weapons, such as high powered stun guns. I am more in favour of women (and men) learning defensive martial arts, which diffuse violent situations, they don't escalate them.

And with a brief response to Santa Barbara: Don't go on a moralistic rant about how evil society is. Check. There's no need to go through and nitpick at everything, unless you feel that's how your point has to be made. But, yes, I do believe that society is sexist and could condition men to be potential rapists. Just yesterday I read this in a High School psychology book (it's concening male/female roles in society, and how they are taught to children): "Men should show aggressiveness... women should show emotion, not ambition." Sounds like conditioning and sexism to me, especially since it is stating that is what children are/should be taught in order to learn their socially acceptable role.
And by the way, the "poem" isn't something I wrote.
A book saying what men and women should show? :rolleyes: Psychology explains human behaviour and remedies problems, yet suggesting activities which would enhance them, this is something new to me. :headbang:

No, it wouldn't. Aikido is a very strange art. Its nearly impossible to disrupt the moves when you are defending. Its based on physics. Very powerful art. You counter the offence, but countering the defence is theoretically impossible. Many aikido moves distance the opponent from you as soon as possible, so its not even possible to break them.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful here, but... this sounds a little too pat - a form of fighting that's only any use in _defence_? Sounds too good to be true, really. I mean, I'll take your word for it, but cautiously! I suppose the only way to be convinced is to actually see it done live, right in front of you, or better yet try it for yourself (though obviously not exactly practical :p)

Simplified self-defence classes focusing on the basics, taught in childhood, makes sense, though; any learning about self-defence is better than none.

Elgesh']I'm not trying to be disrespectful here, but... this sounds a little too pat - a form of fighting that's only any use in _defence_? Sounds too good to be true, really. I mean, I'll take your word for it, but cautiously! I suppose the only way to be convinced is to actually see it done live, right in front of you, or better yet try it for yourself (though obviously not exactly practical :p)

Simplified self-defence classes focusing on the basics, taught in childhood, makes sense, though; any learning about self-defence is better than none.
Aikido is one such art, perhaps the best example. Look it up on the net. It focuses nearly completely on defence (except for advanced forms I mentioned). I have seen it being performed, and its amazing. Police forces use it because it allows you to opt between crushing your attacker's bones or simply immobilising them. A form of aikido everyone has seen is when the offender tries to attack the defender, the defender grabs their wrist, and and throws them to the ground, using nearly no force at all.

Aikido should not be simplified. Doing so weakens the victim's efficiency in fighting.

So then the real problem here is that women can't overpower men and force them to have sex? The arguement seems to be that men don't have to worry about women taking advantage of them when they act like teases, but women do. Therefore, it should be alright for women to act irresponsibly, because men can?

*snip*

Ideally, yes. In this regard men enjoy excessive freedom, or one could say women suffer from a deprivation of freedom.

Women can overpower men and force them to have sex. Some through their size (bigger women), others through offensive martial arts (eg offensive forms of aikido, krav maga and so on, where strength is irrelevant), others via use of a dangerous weapon. The motive would be power rape. This is hardly the problem. And it is not even what I meant. Men can even be raped by other men. This is not the issue.

My point was that rape is inexcusable, and should be punishable, whether or not the woman (or man) acted foolishly. Lets not try and protect true criminals.

Real rape and somehow fake rape is the distinction between coerced sex and roleplayed coerced sex between partners who are in reality willing and in agreement on the matter.

I seem to recall a story in Reuter's "Oddly Enough" column about a reported kidnapping. Someone called the police and told them that a woman had been ambushed by 3 men and dragged into a van which sped off. Police found the van very quickly and the woman who was ambushed yelled at them, "you idiots, it took me a month to set this up." She was trying to live out her "kidnapped and raped" fantasy. No charges were pressed, but the police told her to try to confine her fantasies to the bedroom in the future, or at least out of sight of would-be good Samaratins. I can't find the link now though.

The topic is still a relevant one and this is an extremely insightful article by a true expert.

So there :p

I'm only 26, but when I saw the date I was like, wait a minute this article is old, that means I'm getting old! :eek:

Who are these people that would think being raped by someone you know is better than being raped by someone you don't know?