NationStates Jolt Archive

Why are persons often more offended by jokes concerning rape than jokes concerning murder (assuming the listener had not experienced a tragedy involving either, and that the jokes spoke of fictitious incidents)?

Out of curiosity, what persons are you refering to?

I think it might have to do with the nature of the jokes. Many rape jokes highlight the non-consensual nature of rape, making that the focus, the thing to laugh at. Murder jokes tend to be more in the line of consequences, or over-the-top reactions to things.


But it really depends on the joke. This one for example:

A man and his wife go to their weekend getaway in the mountains where the husband likes to fish and the wife likes to read
the husband came home early one day from fishing and went to bed

the wife decided now would be her chance to go out on the boat and read

so she did

she didn't know the lake very well so she just layed anchor anywhere and began to read

along came a officer and told her "what are you doing?"


"reading" said the woman


"this is a restricted fishing area"


"but i'm not fishing"


"that may be true but you have all of the equipment so i will have to take you in"


"if you do that i will charge you with rape" the woman says


"but i didn' touch you"


"this may be true but you have all of the right equipment"




Moral of the story is: never mess with a woman who knows how to read.


Not creepy.

Creepy jokes are creepy, how's that? And offensive, whether the punchline is about rape, or murder.

I think it might have to do with the nature of the jokes. Many rape jokes highlight the non-consensual nature of rape, making that the focus, the thing to laugh at. Murder jokes tend to be more in the line of consequences, or over-the-top reactions to things.


This. However, like all jokes, rape jokes included, it depends on the company the jokes are made in.

Out of curiosity, what persons are you refering to?

Those in general. Do you disagree with the statement that rape jokes are generally considered offensive?

Those in general. Do you disagree with the statement that rape jokes are generally considered offensive?

I think, like with any joke, the audience matters. Close friends that know you well are less likely to find a rape joke offensive. They might not laugh, but they wont usually shun you.

Just like I wont make jokes about Catholic Priests to a bunch of Catholics.*

There is also something about rape that makes people uncomfortable that no other crime does. It tends to be viewed as the most repulsive of crimes.

*- Interestingly enough, while many may find rape jokes offensive, its amussing that Priest jokes about touching kids seem to be socially acceptable.

I think it might have to do with the nature of the jokes. Many rape jokes highlight the non-consensual nature of rape, making that the focus, the thing to laugh at. Murder jokes tend to be more in the line of consequences, or over-the-top reactions to things.

This is true; but humor involving murder is still considered more acceptable as "black humor". Let us, for instance, examine Tom Lehrer's song I Hold Your Hand In Mine; this song is considered in bad taste by some, but if it were about rape it would probably disgust a great many more.

Creepy jokes are creepy, how's that? And offensive, whether the punchline is about rape, or murder.

Yes, but no rape or murder took place it the joke.

How many babies does it take to paint a wall?

1, if its well trained.

1, if its well trained.

you got the number right...

The correct Answer however was, "One, if you throw it Hard Enough" ;)

well trained, splattered against a wall, either way, its a special kid.
btw: is that/this a rape joke?

well trained, splattered against a wall, either way, its a special kid.
btw: is that/this a rape joke?

No, but its the closest thing I had to one, lol...

One more and Ill call it a night for baby jokes...

Whats worse than 5 babies in a Dumpster?

George Carlin once argued that. He said rape jokes can be funny.

Imagine Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd.

George Carlin once argued that. He said rape jokes can be funny.

Imagine Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd.

buda-buda-buda-buda-buda-buda-.. anal.

Partly because rape is a great deal more common than murder. I can virtually guarantee that everyone reading this thread knows someone - probably multiple someones - who has been raped. How many murder victims do you know?

Heres a good example of a rape joke that was actually kind of funny. Does anyone watch South Park? Did you see the one that made fun of the new Indiana Jones? Where they kept showing Lucas and Spielberg literally raping Indie?

That episode was one big, half hour long, rape joke.

And it was hilarious.

Most rape jokes just aren't funny. They're like racist jokes, or any number of other jokes where the "humor" comes from cruelty directed at someone.

And I do like good slapstick and black humor, but those are based upon absurdity or a generally surreal take upon the situation. The cruelty is there, but it is secondary.

none. I dont know any rape victims, though. A similar possibility could be that there are many more depictions of violence than rape that people can associate with, so any recollection of rape, via joke or not, would bring up a real person. Violence in this case, is generic, and easier to laugh at.

Partly because rape is a great deal more common than murder. I can virtually guarantee that everyone reading this thread knows someone - probably multiple someones - who has been raped. How many murder victims do you know?

One of my Ex's been raped.


Not by me...just to stop that question in it's tracks.

How many murder victims do you know?
Several. But they don't talk much, so it is easy to forget that they're here.

Most rape jokes just aren't funny. They're like racist jokes, or any number of other jokes where the "humor" comes from cruelty directed at someone.

And I do like good slapstick and black humor, but those are based upon absurdity or a generally surreal take upon the situation. The cruelty is there, but it is secondary.

Indeed. It's silly to compare a joke where the "humor" is "ha ha, some bitch got raped" to something like "I Hold Your Hand In Mine," where the humor is not "ha ha, some bitch got murdered" but rather parodying a typical, formulaic love song by singing it to a dismembered corpse. The butt of the joke is not murder victims but crappy ballads, and crappy ballads are a perfectly fair target.

Several. But they don't talk much, so it is easy to forget that they're here.

/thread

I dont know any rape victims, though.

If you know more than five women, yeah, actually, you probably do.

Indeed. It's silly to compare a joke where the "humor" is "ha ha, some bitch got raped" to something like "I Hold Your Hand In Mine," where the humor is not "ha ha, some bitch got murdered" but rather parodying a typical, formulaic love song by singing it to a dismembered corpse. The butt of the joke is not murder victims but crappy ballads, and crappy ballads are a perfectly fair target.

Even if the song's subject was rape, it could still have parodied love ballads.

If you know more than five women, yeah, actually, you probably do.

Agreed. Many instance rape goes unreported to the authorities.

If you know more than five women, yeah, actually, you probably do.

1 in 6 women are have been raped?

I still stand by my statement...

I think its just that tasteless jokes are not funny. And rape jokes are almost always tasteless. It takes some real finess to make a non-tasteless rape joke (see my South Park example).

1 in 6 women are have been raped?

1 in 4 have been sexually assualted. 1 in 6 might not be too far off (I think its something more like 1 in 10).


But keep in mind, we're only talking those that are reported.

1 in 6 women are have been raped?

Yes, approximately.

Well, to my knowledge, I dont know any rape victims...However I do know someone who was accused of raping someone...

I dont really know if she was telling the truth or not...she never reported anything to anyone other than her friends who spread the rumor, so, Idk...

1 in 4 have been sexually assualted. 1 in 6 might not be too far off (I think its something more like 1 in 10).


But keep in mind, we're only talking those that are reported.

You know, I still find that statistic extremely counter-intuitive.

You know, I still find that statistic extremely counter-intuitive.

How so?

How so?

Seconded.

If someone laughs at it, it's funny. Funny is relative.

If someone laughs at it, it's funny. Funny is relative.

Yea, but as my Dad always said, if you're the only one laughing, it's not funny.

Yea, but as my Dad always said, if you're the only one laughing, it's not funny.

No, thats not true. If youre the only one laughing, that means that youre the only one with a sophisticated sense of humor and your superior intellect went over everyone else's head:p

Yea, but as my Dad always said, if you're the only one laughing, it's not funny.

That's not true. I'm fucking hilarious, it's just that 99% of the people in the world are too stupid to get my jokes.

That's not true. I'm fucking hilarious, it's just that 99% of the people in the world are too stupid to get my jokes.

Beat ya to it:D

No, thats not true. If youre the only one laughing, that means that youre the only one with a sophisticated sense of humor and your superior intellect went over everyone else's head:p

So that what goes through drunk people's mind.

Yea, but as my Dad always said, if you're the only one laughing, it's not funny.

My Dad taught me "you can laugh at anything, as long as that includes yourself."

So that what goes through drunk people's mind.

You are under the mistaken impression that I need to be drunk to think that way.

You are under the mistaken impression that I need to be drunk to think that way.

Arrogance can also do it.

Beat ya to it:D

I'm typing with one hand. (no not like that, I have a broken wrist)

I heart rape jokes.

How so?

I'm not saying it isn't true, but if the number is so high, then it's a bit strange that I've never met, or even know about as a friend of a friend or something, a single man who was convicted of rape, if the number is true it would suggest that a significant portion of men I know are rapists. Likewise, I have only met one woman that I know has been raped, again, if the figure was true, I would suspect it to be more.

I heart rape jokes.

You know, I would love it if they actually did have a "Horror Channel" on TV.

That would rock, that would be my most favorite channel ever!

I'm not saying it isn't true, but if the number is so high, then it's a bit strange that I've never met, or even know about as a friend of a friend or something, a single man who was convicted of rape, if the number is true it would suggest that a significant portion of men I know are rapists. Likewise, I have only met one woman that I know has been raped, again, if the figure was true, I would suspect it to be more.

Well, you assume that they would tell you that they were rape/convicted of rape, for starters. That, and I just gave you the US statistic. I am ignorant of the UK one.

I'm not saying it isn't true, but if the number is so high, then it's a bit strange that I've never met, or even know about as a friend of a friend or something, a single man who was convicted of rape, if the number is true it would suggest that a significant portion of men I know are rapists. Likewise, I have only met one woman that I know has been raped, again, if the figure was true, I would suspect it to be more.

Well you gotta keep in mind, this is reported. If we got a true sample of rape victims, it would probably be higher, or (unlikely) be lower.

I tell you one thing though, false rape report really do hurt the true rape victims.

Well, you assume that they would tell you that they were rape/convicted of rape, for starters.

I'm not assuming that, I'm assuming that more than one would have told me or told someone else with the info eventually getting to me. Certainly not all of them would tell anyone.


That, and I just gave you the US statistic. I am ignorant of the UK one.

I'd imagine it's probably quite similar.

I just want to create the most vile, offensive joke that has ever been created. I want to mix The Aristocrats with the most egregious content involving racism, homophobia, brutal rape of all orifices, sexism, anti-Semitism, the Holocaust, 9/11, and the disabled and just let it flow from there. Anyone who survives that, humor intact, deserves to be enthroned as the greatest person that has ever lived.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics

The wiki article would suggest you need to take the statistics with a pinch of salt.

George Carlin once argued that. He said rape jokes can be funny.

Imagine Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd.

Yes, George joked about anything: Rape, Murder, Terrorism, Suicide, War, Necrophilia, Auto Erotic Asphyxia and just about anything else people normally don't joke about.

All part of his belief that you can joke about anything with properly constructed jokes.

I'm not saying it isn't true, but if the number is so high, then it's a bit strange that I've never met, or even know about as a friend of a friend or something, a single man who was convicted of rape, if the number is true it would suggest that a significant portion of men I know are rapists. Likewise, I have only met one woman that I know has been raped, again, if the figure was true, I would suspect it to be more.

Only something like 1-7% of rapists are ever convicted.

Also, how many of my "real life" friends do you think I've told about my assault? (Hint: you can count them on the fingers of no hands.)

I tell you one thing though, false rape report really do hurt the true rape victims.

The FBI reports that less then 2% of all rape accusations are false.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics

The wiki article would suggest you need to take the statistics with a pinch of salt.

. A 2007 government report in England says "Estimates from research suggest that between 75 and 95 per cent of rape crimes are never reported to the police."

The FBI reports that less then 2% of all rape accusations are false.

Yea, but which one do you hear more about on TV?

Remember the Duke Lacrosse Case?

Only something like 1-7% of rapists are ever convicted.

Also, how many of my "real life" friends do you think I've told about my assault? (Hint: you can count them on the fingers of no hands.)

Still, I would find it difficult to accept, if the figure is true, that a significant proportion of my friends will one day rape someone. That is what I find completely counter-intuitive.

Yea, but which one do you hear more about on TV?

Remember the Duke Lacrosse Case?

The sensational ones? :(

Still, I would find it difficult to accept, if the figure is true, that a significant proportion of my friends will one day rape someone. That is what I find completely counter-intuitive.

Well, although I have no numbers, I once read Psychology magazine (albeit from like the 70s) that had a study, and with a male poll something like 70% would consider raping someone if they had 100% certainty they wouldn't get caught. Its not like rapists are deranged individuals. In fact, on one of my college dorm bulletins about sex, drugs and security it says blatantly that a good friend would prevent someone from becoming a rape victim, but also from becoming a rapist.

The Duke lacrosse team was a big story to try to take a shot at a bunch of rich white kids because America likes it when bad things happen to rich white kids.

Still, I would find it difficult to accept, if the figure is true, that a significant proportion of my friends will one day rape someone. That is what I find completely counter-intuitive.

I don't think it follows that a significant proportion of your friends are/will be rapists, as it seems overwhelmingly likely that many rapists rape multiple women, and that guys who are genuinely decent and respectful human beings are distinctly less likely to end up raping anyone.

Well, although I have no numbers, I once read Psychology magazine (albeit from like the 70s) that had a study, and with a male poll something like 70% would consider raping someone if they had 100% certainty they wouldn't get caught.

I am very sceptical that 70% of people in a statistical model would admit to such a thing. Or, if not using a direct survey, I am sceptical that it is possible to make a reliable extrapolation from any empirical study, resulting in this conclusion.

The Duke lacrosse team was a big story to try to take a shot at a bunch of rich white kids because America likes it when bad things happen to rich white kids.

There was also the fact that Nifong played up the race angle of the case too. Rich white kids rape poor black woman. He wanted to make sure he'd get the black vote, even if it meant going forward with the case with no evidence of actual rape.

Ah, gotta love election season, right?

I don't think it follows that a significant proportion of your friends are/will be rapists, as it seems overwhelmingly likely that many rapists rape multiple women, and that guys who are genuinely decent and respectful human beings are distinctly less likely to end up raping anyone.

I think rape by one of those serial rapist strangers actually makes up quite a small percentage of the overall amount of rapes that occur.

I am very sceptical that 70% of people in a statistical model would admit to such a thing. Or, if not using a direct survey, I am sceptical that it is possible to make a reliable extrapolation from any empirical study, resulting in this conclusion.

People admit crazy things in anonymous surveys. I honestly wish I had that magazine, but one of my high school teachers owned it. It was incredibly interesting.

Also yes, in response to the person above me, most rapes occur from someone the victim knows.

I think rape by one of those serial rapist strangers actually makes up quite a small percentage of the overall amount of rapes that occur.

I wasn't discussing serial rapist strangers. I was discussing the sort of guy who thinks it's okay not to stop when his girlfriend says no. Why would he magically become more respectful of the next girlfriend, or the next, or the next?

I wasn't discussing serial rapist strangers. I was discussing the sort of guy who thinks it's okay not to stop when his girlfriend says no. Why would he magically become more respectful of the next girlfriend, or the next, or the next?

Or the good friend who drops you off home drunk and knows the statistics on convictions? Or the friend's boyfriend who drops something in your drink and offers chivalrously to drop you home?

I wasn't discussing serial rapist strangers. I was discussing the sort of guy who thinks it's okay not to stop when his girlfriend says no. Why would he magically become more respectful of the next girlfriend, or the next, or the next?

Ok, but I still don't think that these people would have a sufficient amount of partners to stop the figure from being significant. But, I mean for me, even a number like 3, would be pretty damn significant.

If you know more than five women, yeah, actually, you probably do.

That's a big call.

Of course then it depends on how you define know. After all I know of women who have been raped, I know people who know people who have been raped but I wouldn't say I know women who have been raped. A man on the other hand I do know one.

Ok, but I still don't think that these people would have a sufficient amount of partners to stop the figure from being significant. But, I mean for me, even a number like 3, would be pretty damn significant.

Well, I suppose it depends on how you define "significant," as you've said. My essential point was that you can't translate the 1 in 6 figure directly from victims to perpetrators.

Again, too, assuming your friends are nice guys who treat women well, I have no doubt the proportion of rapists among them will be lower than in the population at large, anyway.

It's worth keeping in mind, though, that - to use my own life as an example again - a fair number of my friends are still quite close to my ex, and I have no doubt it has never crossed their minds that he sexually assaulted me, and that if someone accused him of such, they would not believe it. For that matter, I am quite certain he wouldn't believe it himself, because I have no doubt that in his head what he did wasn't assault, but rather that I didn't really mean "no" when I told him "no."

If someone made a comedic musical about rape I'd probably go see it.

RAPE - the musical
"...that is the man who grabbed me by the hand and dragged me off and stole my virginiy..."
Fun times.

Let me tell you about a girl I know
had a drink about an hour ago.
Sitting in a corner by herself in a bar in downtown Hell.
She heard a noise and she looked through the door.
And saw a man she'd never seen before.
Light skin light blue eyes a double chin and a plastic smile.
Well her eyebrow raised as he walked through the door
And took an empty seat next to her at the bar.
"My brand new car is parked right outside. How'd ya like to go for a ride?"
And she said."Wait a minute I have to think."
He said, "That's fine. May I please buy you a drink"
One drink turned into 3 or 4 and they left and got into his car
and they drove away someplace real far.

Now babe the time has come.
How'd ya like to have a little fun?
And she said." If we could only please be on our way, I will not run."

That's when things got out of control.
She didn't want to, he had his way.
She said, "Let's Go"
He said, "No Way!"
Come on babe it's your lucky day.
Shut your mouth, were gonna do it my way.
Come on baby don't be afraid,
if it wasn't for date rape I'd never get laid.

He finished up and he started the car
He turned around and drove back to the bar.
He said."Now baby don't be sad, in my opinion you weren't half-bad."
She picked up a rock.,threw it at the car, hit him in the head, now his got a big scar.
Come on party people won't you listen to me.
Date Rape Stylie.

The next day she went to her drawer, looked up her local attorney at law,
went to the phone and filed the police report and then she took the guy's ass to court.
Well, the day he stood in front of the judge he screamed, " She lies that little slut!"
The judge knew that he was full of shit and he gave him 25 years
And now his heart is filled with tears.

That night in jail it was getting late.
He was butt-raped by a large inmate, and he screamed.
But the guards paid no attention to his cries.

That's when things got out of control.
The moral of the date rape story, it does not pay to be drunk and horny.
But that's the way it had to be.
They locked him up and threw away the key.
Well, I can't take pity on men of his kind,
even though he now takes it in the behind.

That's the way it had to be.
They locked him up and threw away the key.
Well, I can't take pity on men of his kind,
even though he now takes it in the behind.

DATE RAPE

She didn't want to TAKE IT!

-Date Rape by Sublime....


A lesson all would-be rapists should take to heart...

Okay NSG, an honest question which has been bothering me on the statistics that so many women are raped. I'll just preface this by saying that rape is a heinous crime and that rapists should be imprisoned/shot/set on fire/your punishment of choice here.

However, why are the vast majority of women normal, well-adjusted, functioning members of society if so many of them have been subjected to this trauma? For example less than 1 in 10 women will ever be depressed (from all causes), which doesn't seem to mesh with 1 in 6 women being raped. Since reporting rates are so low it clearly can't be due to therapy. This seems to have unfortunate implications for judging the severity of rape.

Or am I not giving people enough credit for their ability to repress unpleasant memories?

okay I'm done please don't kill me

Well, although I have no numbers, I once read Psychology magazine (albeit from like the 70s) that had a study, and with a male poll something like 70% would consider raping someone if they had 100% certainty they wouldn't get caught. Its not like rapists are deranged individuals. In fact, on one of my college dorm bulletins about sex, drugs and security it says blatantly that a good friend would prevent someone from becoming a rape victim, but also from becoming a rapist.
I believe I've heard of this study. I also heard that with women, the figure was 50%, given the contingencies of ability, circumstances, not getting caught, appropriate victim choice, et cetera, the same sort of contingencies that applied to the 70% figure.

Here's a rape joke that'll even scar LG. Still not for kids. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FjuGf-1Jng)

Let me tell you about a girl I know
had a drink about an hour ago ....[snip]....
even though he now takes it in the behind.

DATE RAPE

She didn't want to TAKE IT!

-Date Rape by Sublime....


A lesson all would-be rapists should take to heart...

Because of this, I love you. Sublime is one of my favs

Prison rape jokes are common when prisons/criminals about to be caught/ect are being discussed.

Okay NSG, an honest question which has been bothering me on the statistics that so many women are raped. I'll just preface this by saying that rape is a heinous crime and that rapists should be imprisoned/shot/set on fire/your punishment of choice here.

However, why are the vast majority of women normal, well-adjusted, functioning members of society if so many of them have been subjected to this trauma? For example less than 1 in 10 women will ever be depressed (from all causes), which doesn't seem to mesh with 1 in 6 women being raped. Since reporting rates are so low it clearly can't be due to therapy. This seems to have unfortunate implications for judging the severity of rape.

Or am I not giving people enough credit for their ability to repress unpleasant memories?

okay I'm done please don't kill me

Define normal, well-adjusted, functioning members of society? Of the several friends I know who have been raped, most go to work, do their job, have functioning relationships. None have ever reported their rapes to police. Some never even went to therapy. But they all are still dealing with the fallout. In many cases, it's self-denial. Women don't want to admit how badly it affects them, they don't want to admit that they need help. So they act like it doesn't matter. But it's always there, at the back of their mind.

How would you know what these women do behind closed doors to cope? How many of them you can state with certainty don't self-injure, don't sleep with the light on, don't have anxiety attacks, panic attacks, etc.

Why are persons often more offended by jokes concerning rape than jokes concerning murder?
I have no idea really. Why do people get offended by rape at all? It's just some harmless vaginal stimulation. No physical harm done, only psychological inconvenience. So what if the guy doing it isn't as pretty or as rich as you wanted him to be? Really the women these days are way too picky. Just close your eyes and enjoy the show.

Why are persons often more offended by jokes concerning rape than jokes concerning murder (assuming the listener had not experienced a tragedy involving either, and that the jokes spoke of fictitious incidents)?

its entirely a cultural thing. people in christian dominated cultures are just naturally idiots. perhaps i should say pseudo-christian, as for the most part what they actually worship is corporate economic interests. something christ himself, i'm absolutely positive, would never in a zillion eternities have endorsed.

but i suppose that's getting off the subject. still it does have to do with pretensions of 'morality' and blind faith in expecting them to substitute for the real thing of avoidance of causing suffering.

Rape jokes are offensive because rapists are offensive. We all feel and understand anger: anger can turn to rage and rage to violence and violence to murder, potentially. So, while we don't murder, we can still relate. Rape, on the other hand, is not some impulse that's common to all of us. Rape is a kind of perversion that is foreign to all but a few of us, and things that are foreign make us uncomfortable. Just off the top of my head, that's my guess.

Rape jokes are offensive because rapists are offensive.
So are F/A-18 fighters, F/A-117 bombers, M1 tanks, M16 rifles, BGM-109 missiles. Why single out the rapists?


We all feel and understand anger [...] Rape, on the other hand, is not some impulse that's common to all of us.
Why do you feel so compelled to lie? I know everybody lies, but some people at least pretend to do it discreetly. Of course rape is an impulse that's common to all of us. Rape is sex. Just without asking for the permission first. And asking for the permission only became possible when we developed the language. Among some species of apes, consensual sex is rare, but among most, it's nonexistent. And just because we have bald skin and wear fancy suits doesn't change who we are.

Rape jokes are offensive because rapists are offensive. We all feel and understand anger: anger can turn to rage and rage to violence and violence to murder, potentially. So, while we don't murder, we can still relate. Rape, on the other hand, is not some impulse that's common to all of us. Rape is a kind of perversion that is foreign to all but a few of us, and things that are foreign make us uncomfortable. Just off the top of my head, that's my guess.
are you saying that not everyone gets horney? am i missing something here?

So are F/A-18 fighters, F/A-117 bombers, M1 tanks, M16 rifles, BGM-109 missiles. Why single out the rapists?



Why do you feel so compelled to lie? I know everybody lies, but some people at least pretend to do it discreetly. Of course rape is an impulse that's common to all of us. Rape is sex. Just without asking for the permission first. And asking for the permission only became possible when we developed the language. Among some species of apes, consensual sex is rare, but among most, it's nonexistent. And just because we have bald skin and wear fancy suits doesn't change who we are.

Don't be intentionally thick - rape is "offensive" to our sensibilities, not "offensive," as opposed to defensive, as in a weapon system.

Rape is not sex, even if it involves a sexual act. It's a particular kind of violence that treats a person as a sexual object, rather than as a threat to one's interests, as in murder. We do not all possess the impulse to violate others' rights in such a way. Whether other animals do it is immaterial.

9/10 people enjoy gang rape.

Rape is not sex, even if it involves a sexual act. It's a particular kind of violence that treats a person as a sexual object, rather than as a threat to one's interests.
When have you disposed of your body? Or is it so ugly that it can't possibly be sexy?

If not, it is a sexual object.

Rape is sex. Sex is rape. Consensus is just an explicit endorsement to go ahead. Some prefer the sweetness of partner's reaction, and some the deep ecstasy of vaginal convulsions, the kind that don't happen in consensual sex. All a matter of choice. In the animal kingdom, consensual and forced sex compete with each other with varying degrees of success. The only real purpose of sex is to reproduce the DNA - and that happens in both cases. Whether the female consented to it or not doesn't matter once her purpose is fulfilled.


We do not all possess the impulse to violate others' rights in such a way. Whether other animals do it is immaterial.
But we are animals.
We like to pretend we aren't, but we are. Different people just have different degrees of self-control. You know how many people would rather die from a bladder rupture than pee in public. Deep, ingrained self-control.

When have you disposed of your body? Or is it so ugly that it can't possibly be sexy?

If not, it is a sexual object.

Rape is sex. Sex is rape. Consensus is just an explicit endorsement to go ahead. Some prefer the sweetness of partner's reaction, and some the deep ecstasy of vaginal convulsions, the kind that don't happen in consensual sex. All a matter of choice. In the animal kingdom, consensual and forced sex compete with each other with varying degrees of success. The only real purpose of sex is to reproduce the DNA - and that happens in both cases. Whether the female consented to it or not doesn't matter once her purpose is fulfilled.

But we are animals.
We like to pretend we aren't, but we are. Different people just have different degrees of self-control. You know how many people would rather die from a bladder rupture than pee in public. Deep, ingrained self-control.

I said "other animals." I'm not disowning humans' status as animals, or human sexuality, and I don't feel any need to pretend I'm not a kind of animal. Rape involves a fundamental judgment of the victim as a sexual object to be used, disregarding their humanity, for one's benefit as an act of violence or threatened violence. That's distinct from ordinary sexuality, and not an impulse most people possess, even if it's present in abnormal human psychology. It's not a matter of self control, but of basic empathy.

That's distinct from ordinary sexuality, and not an impulse most people possess, even if it's present in abnormal human psychology. It's not a matter of self control, but of basic empathy.This I find highly debatable. Rape in a functioning society not experiencing any extraordinary circumstances is rare (Indeed, considerably rarer than many people think). But arguably, this isn't the result of people choosing not to rape, but of society at large disapproving of the behaviour, and the negative sanctions involved being a decent deterrent.

But change the circumstances. Say, a war*. With the soldiers fighting it being encouraged to rape to their heart's content, as was - and in many regions, still is - pretty much standard throughout history. No more negative sanctions. Why, look at that... Rape ratio jumps up a few orders of magnitude.

This is, of course, not specific to rape - it's true for every behaviour that's usually disapproved of in society at large, be it robbery, theft, 'Bullying' (Rather more extreme than the term implies, but I can't think of a better word at this time), whatever.

I'm willing to bet that of ten people who go omgrapethisishorriblehowcanthey?, nine would ultimately engage in it, come an opportunity where it's not just not punished, but indeed, part of the extant social code within the group they're with (I.e. a bunch of irregulars shooting stuff). They'll likely have some remorse after the fact, particularly after returning to normal life, but that'll be all.

'Not an impulse most people possess' my ass. Mass-raping has been far too common throughout history for that idea to even be considered. Ultimately, the frequency of rape is to a large part the result of the surrounding social circumstance, and the vast majority of us has it in themselves.

* To use an extreme example.

This I find highly debatable. Rape in a functioning society not experiencing any extraordinary circumstances is rare (Indeed, considerably rarer than many people think). But arguably, this isn't the result of people choosing not to rape, but of society at large disapproving of the behaviour, and the negative sanctions involved being a decent deterrent.

But change the circumstances. Say, a war*. With the soldiers fighting it being encouraged to rape to their heart's content, as was - and in many regions, still is - pretty much standard throughout history. No more negative sanctions. Why, look at that... Rape ratio jumps up a few orders of magnitude.

This is, of course, not specific to rape - it's true for every behaviour that's usually disapproved of in society at large, be it robbery, theft, 'Bullying' (Rather more extreme than the term implies, but I can't think of a better word at this time), whatever.

I'm willing to bet that of ten people who go omgrapethisishorriblehowcanthey?, nine would ultimately engage in it, come an opportunity where it's not just not punished, but indeed, part of the extant social code within the group they're with (I.e. a bunch of irregulars shooting stuff). They'll likely have some remorse after the fact, particularly after returning to normal life, but that'll be all.

'Not an impulse most people possess' my ass. Mass-raping has been far too common throughout history for that idea to even be considered. Ultimately, the frequency of rape is to a large part the result of the surrounding social circumstance, and the vast majority of us has it in themselves.

* To use an extreme example.

I think the number is at the very worst, inverted. If we're each going to quote a number with no hard evidence at all, mine would be 1 in 10, rather than 9 in 10, who might rape in your extreme scenario of an anarchic war where rape would go unpunished - not that that number isn't horrifying and wouldn't produce an atrocity. It's true that in some cases, armies have used rape as a tool of mass control or terrorism - someone posted an article here a day or so ago about rape in an African civil war, where soldiers were explicitly ordered to rape. Abu Sayyaf, a Muslim separatist group active mainly in the Philippines, uses rape sporadically to increase their profile as an extremist group - the fear of being raped has military value, sadly enough. You can find examples in military history fairly frequently, but the extremes don't speak to your ordinary base rate, since a brain altered by war (and there are actual physical changes that can occur) is distinct from what most of us are born with. Violence of all kinds can be seen as more acceptable by someone who has been exposed to the extremes of brutality for an extended period, but rape, again, is not an impulse most of us possess under ordinary circumstances.

I think the number is at the very worst, inverted. If we're each going to quote a number with no hard evidence at all, mine would be 1 in 10, rather than 9 in 10, who might rape in your extreme scenario of an anarchic war where rape would go unpunished - not that that number isn't horrifying and wouldn't produce an atrocity. It's true that in some cases, armies have used rape as a tool of mass control or terrorism - someone posted an article here a day or so ago about rape in an African civil war, where soldiers were explicitly ordered to rape. Abu Sayyaf, a Muslim separatist group active mainly in the Philippines, uses rape sporadically to increase their profile as an extremist group - the fear of being raped has military value, sadly enough. You can find examples in military history fairly frequently, but the extremes don't speak to your ordinary base rate, since a brain altered by war (and there are actual physical changes that can occur) is distinct from what most of us are born with. Violence of all kinds can be seen as more acceptable by someone who has been exposed to the extremes of brutality for an extended period, but rape, again, is not an impulse most of us possess under ordinary circumstances.I wasn't quoting a number - I know perfectly well I pulled it out of my arse. Hence, 'I'd bet', not 'Statistical Research suggests that'.

You're right, of course - permanent exposure to violence results in distinct physical (Actually, hormonal) changes that make a person much more likely to engage in violent behaviour, and enjoying it. But I'd argue that this is, essentially, a part of (Or rather, caused by) the social environment I mentioned. For that matter, people are quite willing to engage in rather substantial violence without significant previous exposure to it. Granted, they'll usually hate it the first time around, and with rape in particular, the question is whether they'll, well... Get hard, but with some 1/5 to 1/3 of men having rape fantasies (With the addendum 'That's horrible to actually do' while living an ordinary life, but if circumstances change...), I strongly suspect that a decent number will.

In any case. Rape is far too widespread - not just among humans, but also among assorted other species - to not consider it a part of sexuality - we've plainly inherited it. Of course it's horrible and, well, evil. But that doesn't change it being there, and it wont make it go away. Our social norms do that (For the most part), not our nature*.

* Though I'll admit, I suspect individuals left on their own are probably less likely to rape for the hell of it than a crowd whose social norms were just subject to change. Make that 'Not just our nature'.

Define normal, well-adjusted, functioning members of society? Of the several friends I know who have been raped, most go to work, do their job, have functioning relationships. None have ever reported their rapes to police. Some never even went to therapy. But they all are still dealing with the fallout. In many cases, it's self-denial. Women don't want to admit how badly it affects them, they don't want to admit that they need help. So they act like it doesn't matter. But it's always there, at the back of their mind.

How would you know what these women do behind closed doors to cope? How many of them you can state with certainty don't self-injure, don't sleep with the light on, don't have anxiety attacks, panic attacks, etc.

Well, I'd probably go with 'mentally healthy' for a start. Mental illness and depression are certainly very common but I don't believe it's quite near 1/6 of people and obviously most of the cases will not be caused by rape.

So are you basically saying the answer to my last line is yes?

Here's a rape joke that'll even scar LG. Still not for kids. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FjuGf-1Jng)

So that's how mommy met daddy. :(

Why are persons often more offended by jokes concerning rape than jokes concerning murder (assuming the listener had not experienced a tragedy involving either, and that the jokes spoke of fictitious incidents)?
I'm generally "offended" by rape jokes because they aren't funny.

That's my requirement for all dark humor: if you're going to take a painful, serious subject and try to make a joke of it, then you damn well better make it a good joke.

This. However, like all jokes, rape jokes included, it depends on the company the jokes are made in.

So making a rape joke in front of Mcauley Caulkin wouldn't be a hot idea? oh wait thats molestation...damn. :(

I dont mind rape jokes. In fact I want to read some. Post away please!

Accoding to some NSG posters lying around here, Thems womens be always getting the raped. Ooooo-weee!

Now I know that the US has like 3% of the people behind bars but it rape was as common as all of that, there would be a whole heck of a lot more rapists in there and we might have like 1 in 10 folks behind bars instead of 1 in 33. Oooo-wee!

I said "other animals." I'm not disowning humans' status as animals, or human sexuality, and I don't feel any need to pretend I'm not a kind of animal.
We are no different from other animals, not fundamentally. Human and ape DNA have barely any difference. It's all in the social conditioning.


Rape involves a fundamental judgment of the victim as a sexual object to be used, disregarding their humanity,
What, they have humanity? Or is it a social construct?
For a long time, the Whites didn't consider the Blacks to be human. They didn't hate blacks, didn't have KKK attitudes yet, blacks simply were seen as a kind of African ape.

Females were never seen that way, but in the periods of strong patriarchal society, they weren't seen as equals either. They weren't supposed to have any humanity to disregard.


That's distinct from ordinary sexuality, and not an impulse most people possess, even if it's present in abnormal human psychology.
Oh yeah.

Do you even understand what sexuality is? It's not about pleasing the tip of your dick, or the areas in the brain associated with it. It exists as a biological imperative to pass down your DNA.

If you can pass it consensually to a quality female mate, you pass it that way, because it gives the highest chance of the child being successfully brought up. If you can't, you can either have your DNA die off or inject some females with it by force. That's still absolutely ordinary sexuality. Just the "Plan B". As long as she gives birth and keeps the child, you're like a cuckoo, cruel, but you've passed your DNA.

Now, if you kill the female, that is abnormal psychology. One can also argue that with the popularity of abortion these days, rape is losing its effectiveness as a reproductive method - that's perhaps why we find it more and more repelling. But it's still not in our genes yet.


It's not a matter of self control, but of basic empathy.
"Basic empathy" my ass.
It's evolution that determines what we feel.

Evolution isn't the moral high ground. It isn't even an intelligent force. It's a dumb, blind process. Some survive and some not, those traits that correlate with survival become more widespread and pronounced.
Everything we have, we owe to this simple process. Our basic morale, "empathy", non-violence against others of our own kind. Even higher impulses, it is argued, are part of the evolution; the environmentalists don't just like the trees, because nothing in the nature comes from nowhere - they feel that the destruction of the environment will reduce the ultimate spread of their genetic material. We only have morals because they increase the tribe's chance to survive. Those who had different morals have died. Mostly at our hand, by the way.

Consent isn't even something fundamental. It's a tool. It's a part of a method of selection by performing partner approval using the mate's brain, with a set of standard criteria. Females look for big muscles and physical fitness so the male can feed and defend them. Males look for long legs so the female can run away from danger, a big ass so she can birth more offsprings, and big tits so she can produce more milk.
Consensual monogamy is a compromise method which combines decent selectivity, good variance, and high productivity. It allows quality males to find quality females, yet low-quality females are still utilized in the reproduction process, mixing with subprime males, producing extended variance, and utilizing full reproductive capacity. And that's it.

The biological purpose of consent in sex is simply to combine high-quality male DNA with high-quality female DNA in one of the possible reproduction schemes. One of the. Polygamy, for instance, uses high quality male DNA for all females. The methods have successfully competed for a while, but ultimately the monogamous Western tribes came ahead.

Since it's how our tribe reproduces, we might feel it to be basic and essential, but at its core, it's basically a result of historical coin toss. Were we born in some other, say highly patriarchal polygamous culture, we wouldn't even understand what "rape" means, because female wouldn't be seen as something able to give or refuse consent.
Like my computer doesn't consent to me typing this post. It sends it because I decide so, if the computer doesn't comply, it's broken and should be repaired, if it can't be repaired, it should be disposed of. That's how the alpha male in a highly patriarchal culture would feel about women. In his culture females don't make decisions. The eggs don't consent to being eaten, the cow doesn't consent to being milked, the woman doesn't consent to being fertilized. That's how his sexuality works. And remember, such human cultures have existed, so he's the same species, just different upbringing.

There are some theories that the bodies of women and men evolved to promote rape as a means of ensuring that strong men beget strong children through women. The hips of a woman seem to be designed in part to facilitate a strong man's ability to hold her from behind to keep her from escaping his lustful rapist clutches. Women are also weaker than men too so there you go. There are probably all kinds of other reasons why rape is ok from the uncivilized view of nature.

That being said I find Neil Hamburger's rapist joke hilarious.

If y'all cannot find humor in rape you are not trying hard enough. Go forth and develop your humors until you can find humor in anything.

Were we born in some other, say highly patriarchal polygamous culture, we wouldn't even understand what "rape" means, because female wouldn't be seen as something able to give or refuse consent.
Like my computer doesn't consent to me typing this post. It sends it because I decide so, if the computer doesn't comply, it's broken and should be repaired, if it can't be repaired, it should be disposed of. That's how the alpha male in a highly patriarchal culture would feel about women. In his culture females don't make decisions. The eggs don't consent to being eaten, the cow doesn't consent to being milked, the woman doesn't consent to being fertilized. That's how his sexuality works. And remember, such human cultures have existed, so he's the same species, just different upbringing.

You are helping me to appreciate the beauty of rape. I have been socially conditioned to abhor it. Now my mind has been opened. Your point also reminds me of the passage from the Old Testament when a Hebrew girl slept with a man from another tribe and the Hebrews killed him "because he treated her like a prostitute." I think that the miscegenating slutty mama was named Tamara or something like that. The point was never that the girl did not consent, the point was something else. I never was really sure but I think that you are on to something.

Only something like 1-7% of rapists are ever convicted.

Also, how many of my "real life" friends do you think I've told about my assault? (Hint: you can count them on the fingers of no hands.)

I'm curious about this figure. Do you have a source?

Do you even understand what sexuality is? It's not about pleasing the tip of your dick, or the areas in the brain associated with it. It exists as a biological imperative to pass down your DNA.
But is far more than that.

You can't just reduce everything to genetic advantage; that's ignoring, for a start, human psychology. Sexuality is as much 'about' "pleasing the tip of your dick" as it is passing on genes. You'd be a rather odd human indeed who only thinks of genetics while getting it on.

"Basic empathy" my ass.
It's evolution that determines what we feel.
I don't see how the two are mutually exclusive.

Even higher impulses, it is argued, are part of the evolution; the environmentalists don't just like the trees, because nothing in the nature comes from nowhere - they feel that the destruction of the environment will reduce the ultimate spread of their genetic material.
Bollocks; reductionism at its silliest.

99% of us don't think about genes 99% of the times, especially when considering potential action(s). Attributing all behaviour to genetics is implying something along the lines of some invisible, unconscious, guiding force of genetics that lies under all our psychology and motivates us to act.

Which is simply far too strong... unless you're positing some (sentient) ability of genes to guide action.

I always find any statistics about how only x% of rapes are reported to be quite shady. First of all, if they're not reported, obviously the authorities dont know about them. So how are the statistics obtained? Anonymous polling and extrapolation. Looking at the groups that often compile these statistics, I wouldn't be surprised if their anonymous polls are phrased in a way to make them as high as possible. The UN study quoted on wikipedia says that 40% of all rapes are reported, which makes a damn bit more sense than 4%.

I'm especially amazed by statistics like the "one in six women has been sexually assaulted." How did the poll define sexual assault? What was the methodology? I'm sitting in a room that has 60 people in it, about half of which are women. I somehow am highly doubtful that 5 of those women has been raped.

But is far more than that.
You can't just reduce everything to genetic advantage; that's ignoring, for a start, human psychology. Sexuality is as much 'about' "pleasing the tip of your dick" as it is passing on genes. You'd be a rather odd human indeed who only thinks of genetics while getting it on.
Of course. It would be a rather odd species who would have to think of genetics to reproduce.

That's not how biological imperatives work. If you had to study the biology textbook to understand why you need to reproduce and how to choose the right partner, the humanity would never make it to the point where it could write a biology textbook. Imperatives command, not explain.

Sexuality is all about passing on your genes - and to make you do it, your evolutionary design uses the mechanisms of pleasure. And some others too. But pleasure is never the evolution's purpose, it's evolution's tool.
If a species evolved to receive pleasure, it would long be extinct. Probably "if" is unnecessary, though, as I suspect there were billions of such species and subspecies. Or trillions. Ultimately a few of them survived - those who had their pleasure mechanisms linked with actions that help survival and reproduction.


99% of us don't think about genes 99% of the times, especially when considering potential action(s).
Are you intentionally pretending to be dense? Of course you don't. As a matter of fact, 200 years ago we didn't even know about genes. Neither we needed to. You don't need to know about nerves work to flinch your leg when your knee is hit by a hammer.
Our actions are dictated to us by the instincts. We have some of what we call "free will", which is use of our brain to find the best way to serve these instincts. Sometimes it works and sometimes it fails. But it has evolved for two purposes only, survive and reproduce. As a species, as a tribe, as an individual DNA line.


Attributing all behaviour to genetics is implying something along the lines of some invisible, unconscious, guiding force of genetics that lies under all our psychology and motivates us to act.
Evolution, not genetics - society and psychology are parts of evolution too.
And yes. It's the invisible, unconscious, unguiding force of evolution that lies beyond all out physiology and psychology. We are the way we are because we have killed those who weren't the way we are. If we didn't, they would kill us, but we were stronger. Thus we got to live on, and pass on our hardware (genes), firmware (basic upbringing) and software (advanced social conditioning). Everything we feel, everything we do, everything we are, is all simply a product of this process where some die off and others reproduce.

But is far more than that.
You can't just reduce everything to genetic advantage; that's ignoring, for a start, human psychology. Sexuality is as much 'about' "pleasing the tip of your dick" as it is passing on genes. You'd be a rather odd human indeed who only thinks of genetics while getting it on.
Of course. It would be a rather odd species who would have to think of genetics to reproduce.

That's not how biological imperatives work. If you had to study the biology textbook to understand why you need to reproduce and how to choose the right partner, the humanity would never make it to the point where it could write a biology textbook. Imperatives command, not explain.

Sexuality is all about passing on your genes - and to make you do it, your evolutionary design uses the mechanisms of pleasure. And some others too. But pleasure is never the evolution's purpose, it's evolution's tool.
If a species evolved to receive pleasure, it would long be extinct. Probably "if" is unnecessary, though, as I suspect there were billions of such species and subspecies. Or trillions. Ultimately a few of them survived - those who had their pleasure mechanisms linked with actions that help survival and reproduction.


99% of us don't think about genes 99% of the times, especially when considering potential action(s).
Are you intentionally pretending to be dense? Of course you don't. As a matter of fact, 200 years ago we didn't even know about genes. Neither we needed to. You don't need to know about nerves work to flinch your leg when your knee is hit by a hammer.
Our actions are dictated to us by the instincts. We have some of what we call "free will", which is use of our brain to find the best way to serve these instincts. Sometimes it works and sometimes it fails. But it has evolved for two purposes only, survive and reproduce. As a species, as a tribe, as an individual DNA line.


Attributing all behaviour to genetics is implying something along the lines of some invisible, unconscious, guiding force of genetics that lies under all our psychology and motivates us to act.
Evolution, not genetics - society and psychology are parts of evolution too.
And yes. It's the invisible, unconscious, unguiding force of evolution that lies beyond all out physiology and psychology. We are the way we are because we have killed those who weren't the way we are. If we didn't, they would kill us, but we were stronger. Thus we got to live on, and pass on our hardware (genes), firmware (basic upbringing) and software (advanced social conditioning). Everything we feel, everything we do, everything we are, is all simply a product of this process where some die off and others reproduce.

My software keeps crashing. :(

I always find any statistics about how only x% of rapes are reported to be quite shady. First of all, if they're not reported, obviously the authorities dont know about them. So how are the statistics obtained? Anonymous polling and extrapolation. Looking at the groups that often compile these statistics, I wouldn't be surprised if their anonymous polls are phrased in a way to make them as high as possible. The UN study quoted on wikipedia says that 40% of all rapes are reported, which makes a damn bit more sense than 4%.

I'm especially amazed by statistics like the "one in six women has been sexually assaulted." How did the poll define sexual assault? What was the methodology? I'm sitting in a room that has 60 people in it, about half of which are women. I somehow am highly doubtful that 5 of those women has been raped.This is a good point. Some of the polls in question, and the methodology applied to them are, lets say... Ridiculous. If going by the upper-limit stats, it's a safe bet to drop the actual frequency of rape by about an order of magnitude.

I'm curious about this figure. Do you have a source?

http://www2.ucsc.edu/rape-prevention/statistics.html

http://www.rainn.org/statistics

I'm sitting in a room that has 60 people in it, about half of which are women. I somehow am highly doubtful that 5 of those women has been raped.

Good for you. Clearly, your doubts are persuasive evidence. :rolleyes:

http://www2.ucsc.edu/rape-prevention/statistics.html

http://www.rainn.org/statistics



Good for you. Clearly, your doubts are persuasive evidence. :rolleyes:

Well, when you take into consideration that theyre probably all sluts who were askin for it and leadin the poor guy on...

I agree with your eyeroll. I love the people here who are basically saying, "I doubt your statistics, despite how widely credible they are believed to be by almost everyone, law enforcement included. Therefore, they are false."

I have no idea really. Why do people get offended by rape at all? It's just some harmless vaginal stimulation. No physical harm done, only psychological inconvenience. So what if the guy doing it isn't as pretty or as rich as you wanted him to be? Really the women these days are way too picky. Just close your eyes and enjoy the show.

Well, should it ever happen to you (men have holes too, you know), I'll repeat the gist of this post if you ever complain.

Well, should it ever happen to you (men have holes too, you know), I'll repeat the gist of this post if you ever complain.

Dont feed the obvious troll.

Dont feed the obvious troll.

To be sure, I'm not breaking the rules. ;)

(For a Chaotic Neutral, I go into Lawful Evil mode with surprising ease.)

Well, should it ever happen to you (men have holes too, you know), I'll repeat the gist of this post if you ever complain.
You've skipped the latter posts which answer the rhetorical question asked. WHY do we get offended by rape. And that is because this leads to reproduction of DNA other than that of the husband, or very low quality rapist DNA in general.


Should it ever happen to me, which I hope it won't, what I'd be offended by is primarily damage to the intestine, rather than the lack of consensus thing. At least, the former would be an order of magnitude bigger concern than the latter.

You've skipped the latter posts which answer the rhetorical question asked. WHY do we get offended by rape. And that is because this leads to reproduction of DNA other than that of the husband, or very low quality rapist DNA in general.

I was under the impression that the offense in rape is because it denigrates another human being, it humiliates.

Cousin was raped multiple times by the same guy.

After the first two.. I stopped caring. Became her fault for letting it happen after that.

I was under the impression that the offense in rape is because it denigrates another human being, it humiliates.
It's the social interpretation. Rape isn't the only humiliating thing, however; imprisonment is as bad if not worse. Yet we consider one acceptable and the other almost worse than murder. This has underlying biological reasons going beyond simple humiliation (damage to the social structure).

It's the social interpretation. Rape isn't the only humiliating thing, however; imprisonment is as bad if not worse. Yet we consider one acceptable and the other almost worse than murder. This has underlying biological reasons going beyond simple humiliation (damage to the social structure).

But imprisonment for committing a crime is just, not denigrating. At least I don't see it that way, whereas rape, when it happens, is tragic.

Should it ever happen to me, which I hope it won't, what I'd be offended by is primarily damage to the intestine, rather than the lack of consensus thing. At least, the former would be an order of magnitude bigger concern than the latter.

Contrary to what this exchange may make one think, your anatomy includes other holes besides your anus.

I think I'm done with this thread. Ciao!

Contrary to what this exchange may make one think, your anatomy includes other holes besides your anus.
I would be highly displeased with such an occasion, but out of for instance losing a finger and this, wouldn't doubt for a second. Not that I wouldn't prefer to take my chances in a fight to either of this, but still.


But imprisonment for committing a crime is just, not denigrating. At least I don't see it that way, whereas rape, when it happens, is tragic.
It is still denigrating. Simply because someone has committed a crime doesn't make every harm done to them no longer a harm. It's socially accepted revenge, but locking a person up in some cage for years remains just as dehumanizing whether they are innocent or guilty of some crime. Not to mention that most times the "crime" is something like smoking pot.

We consider imprisonment acceptable because we've been brought up to consider it acceptable. We were told it's just, so it's just. Some other society could just as easily use rape as a means of punishment instead, and would consider it as justified as we consider imprisonment. And "some other" might not mean all that much, seeing as there exist people in this world, in this society, now, who like the idea of prison rape, considering it the proper justice.

It is still denigrating. Simply because someone has committed a crime doesn't make every harm done to them no longer a harm. It's socially accepted revenge, but locking a person up in some cage for years remains just as dehumanizing whether they are innocent or guilty of some crime. Not to mention that most times the "crime" is something like smoking pot.

We consider imprisonment acceptable because we've been brought up to consider it acceptable. We were told it's just, so it's just. Some other society could just as easily use rape as a means of punishment instead, and would consider it as justified as we consider imprisonment. And "some other" might not mean all that much, seeing as there exist people in this world, in this society, now, who like the idea of prison rape, considering it the proper justice.

Are you suggesting that if we were brought up the other way, we would find rape acceptable?

Are you suggesting that if we were brought up the other way, we would find rape acceptable?
As did our ancestors a while ago - as long as the rape is of someone considered enemy.

As did our ancestors a while ago - as long as the rape is of someone considered enemy.

Ah, I read sometime ago that the Egyptians engaged in this sort of practice eons ago.

Cousin was raped multiple times by the same guy.

After the first two.. I stopped caring. Became her fault for letting it happen after that.

Yeah I bet she loved it but then for some reason gets off by crying rape. Women like that are an insult to real rape victims.

Yeah I bet she loved it but then for some reason gets off by crying rape. Women like that are an insult to real rape victims.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Are you suggesting that if we were brought up the other way, we would find rape acceptable?

I think he did and he is probably right.

I think he did and he is probably right.

I rather keep having this exchange between Vault 10 and me.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

What is that supposed to mean? Do you believe that a woman would allow herself to be raped by the same guy over and over again if it was really unconsensual. It is not like his cousin was chained up in a basement. We had girls like that in college who every week went to the same frat house and that Sunday would whine about getting raped there. Then they would do the same thing the next weekend and so on ad infinitum. These women called themselves feminists and probably account for 99% of the reason why I cannot stand feminists.

I rather keep having this exchange between Vault 10 and me.

Where is the love? Fine, I will not intrude on your private and public conversation on a discussion board.

What is that supposed to mean? Do you believe that a woman would allow herself to be raped by the same guy over and over again if it was really unconsensual. It is not like his cousin was chained up in a basement. We had girls like that in college who every week went to the same frat house and that Sunday would whine about getting raped there. Then they would do the same thing the next weekend and so on ad infinitum. These women called themselves feminists and probably account for 99% of the reason why I cannot stand feminists.

You live in a very simple world, GF.

Where is the love? Fine, I will not intrude on your private and public conversation on a discussion board.

Bite. Your. Tongue.:wink:

I have no idea really. Why do people get offended by rape at all? It's just some harmless vaginal stimulation. No physical harm done, only psychological inconvenience. So what if the guy doing it isn't as pretty or as rich as you wanted him to be? Really the women these days are way too picky. Just close your eyes and enjoy the show.

WARNED. Advocating violence against any group is specifically against the rules. Rape is violence. Your comment condones it and is suggesting a violation of another's right to liberty and security of the person.

Rape is sex. Sex is rape. Consensus is just an explicit endorsement to go ahead. Some prefer the sweetness of partner's reaction, and some the deep ecstasy of vaginal convulsions, the kind that don't happen in consensual sex. All a matter of choice. In the animal kingdom, consensual and forced sex compete with each other with varying degrees of success. The only real purpose of sex is to reproduce the DNA - and that happens in both cases. Whether the female consented to it or not doesn't matter once her purpose is fulfilled.

A further condonation of sexual violence. Also noted.

You are helping me to appreciate the beauty of rape. I have been socially conditioned to abhor it. Now my mind has been opened. Your point also reminds me of the passage from the Old Testament when a Hebrew girl slept with a man from another tribe and the Hebrews killed him "because he treated her like a prostitute." I think that the miscegenating slutty mama was named Tamara or something like that. The point was never that the girl did not consent, the point was something else. I never was really sure but I think that you are on to something.

You're condoning one's advocacy of violence. It's against the rules. Warned on those grounds.

To the rest - the thread will remain open.

That's not how biological imperatives work.
No, it's not...

Imperatives command, not explain.
They don't command. If they did, no-one would ever commit suicide, everyone would procreate as much as possible as soon as possible, never using contraception, and no-one would ever do such activities as parachuting or rock-climbing.

We're not automatons, slaves to genes or 'biological imperatives'.

Sexuality is all about passing on your genes
You're doing it wrong.

Are you intentionally pretending to be dense? Of course you don't. As a matter of fact, 200 years ago we didn't even know about genes. Neither we needed to. You don't need to know about nerves work to flinch your leg when your knee is hit by a hammer.
But you aren't claiming nerves ultimately motivate us.

You are with genes/evolution, however.

Our actions are dictated to us by the instincts.
Again with the overly prescriptive language; we aren't "dictated" to, we have choice in the matter. Choice that is informed by far more than genes and instincts.

To quote Richard Joyce, who tackles this point brilliantly, you're committing "the basic blunder of confusing the cause of a mental state with its content... Suppose Fred is looking after his sick wife. When asked why he does so, he reports sincerely that he wishes to alleviate her suffering for her sake, because he loves her.

An evolutionary psychologist", or you, "might then tell us that it is to Fred's reproductive advantage to look after his spouse, fo then he will have help raising his offspring, adding that the love that Fred feels for his wife is the output of a proximate mechanism by which natural selection ensures that a person helps his mate when she needs it. Thus an evolutionary explanation has been provided for a cognitive/emotional/behavioural phenomenon: Fred's love for his wife. But this explanation reveals nothing about the content of Fred's motivations, and doesn't show he 'really' cares about his reproductive fitness and only derivetavely cares about his wife's welfare...

When we explain a person's behaviour and mental states by appealing to the fact that his genes have replication-advancing characteristics, we are giving reasons for his mental states and behaving in this way. But to conclude that these are therefore his reasons - the considerations in light of which he acts - is a gross mistake... I am not claiming that a person's reasons must always be obvious and apparent to her; all I am saying is that they are not all 'ultimately' concerned with genetic replication."

(The Evolution of Morality, pp.17-18; author's emphasis)

Thus, statements such as:

Everything we feel, everything we do, everything we are, is all simply a product of this process where some die off and others reproduce.

are completely misguided and misleading. While statements such as:

The only real purpose of sex is to reproduce the DNA - and that happens in both cases. Whether the female consented to it or not doesn't matter once her purpose is fulfilled.
are pure shite.

Why are persons often more offended by jokes concerning rape than jokes concerning murder (assuming the listener had not experienced a tragedy involving either, and that the jokes spoke of fictitious incidents)?

it's all personal. some rape jokes are tasteless, some jokes about murder are tasteless.

Some ethnic jokes are tasteless.

it really depends on the joke itself and the person listening to it.

OK, serious non-rhetorical question. If you say that "only x% of rapists are convicted" (for some x), then on what grounds do you consider them rapists?

Obviously you disagree with the courts, who found them not guilty, so what is your alternative means of determining guilt?

OK, serious non-rhetorical question. If you say that "only x% of rapists are convicted" (for some x), then on what grounds do you consider them rapists?

Obviously you disagree with the courts, who found them not guilty, so what is your alternative means of determining guilt?

Well, people ACCUSED him... :p

OK, serious non-rhetorical question. If you say that "only x% of rapists are convicted" (for some x), then on what grounds do you consider them rapists?

Obviously you disagree with the courts, who found them not guilty, so what is your alternative means of determining guilt?

Um, basic math. If, in a given place, in a given year, 100 rapes occur, and 2 people are convicted on rape charges, it isn't too very difficult to figure out that approximately 98% of the people who raped someone that year were never convicted of it.

Um, basic math. If, in a given place, in a given year, 100 rapes occur, and 2 people are convicted on rape charges, it isn't too very difficult to figure out that approximately 98% of the people who raped someone that year were never convicted of it.

You are assuming that every rape is committed by a different rapist. More likely, each rapist is responsible for many rapes, and the ones who are eventually caught and convicted were responsible for many of the unsolved cases, although they aren't convicted for those.

Um, basic math. If, in a given place, in a given year, 100 rapes occur, and 2 people are convicted on rape charges, it isn't too very difficult to figure out that approximately 98% of the people who raped someone that year were never convicted of it.

OK, but how do you know these 100 rapes have occurred?

I can honestly say that if someone asked me how many rapes had occurred in a given area, I would not be able to provide them with that information.

The only real purpose of sex is to reproduce the DNA - and that happens in both cases. Whether the female consented to it or not doesn't matter once her purpose is fulfilled.

You are being overly teleological. Evolution has no purpose and the results of evolution may be maladaptive to current environments


Do you even understand what sexuality is? It's not about pleasing the tip of your dick, or the areas in the brain associated with it. It exists as a biological imperative to pass down your DNA.

Sex and reproduction have always been less connected when compared to other animals. Women are always potentially sexually responsive rather than having periods of estrus. Add birth control, abortion and infantcide amd the two are even less linked.

"Basic empathy" my ass.
It's evolution that determines what we feel.

Social condition doesn't affect things?

Evolution isn't the moral high ground. It isn't even an intelligent force. It's a dumb, blind process. Some survive and some not, those traits that correlate with survival become more widespread and pronounced.
Everything we have, we owe to this simple process. Our basic morale, "empathy", non-violence against others of our own kind. Even higher impulses, it is argued, are part of the evolution; the environmentalists don't just like the trees, because nothing in the nature comes from nowhere - they feel that the destruction of the environment will reduce the ultimate spread of their genetic material. We only have morals because they increase the tribe's chance to survive. Those who had different morals have died. Mostly at our hand, by the way.

Morality is not to my knowledge a biological trait unless one is extremely broad. I'd also like to know how those who advocate childlessness either from a pragmatic perspective or moral position are trying to better pass on their genetic material. You are over simplifying human behavior which has many causes.


Sexuality is all about passing on your genes - and to make you do it, your evolutionary design uses the mechanisms of pleasure. And some others too. But pleasure is never the evolution's purpose, it's evolution's tool.
If a species evolved to receive pleasure, it would long be extinct. Probably "if" is unnecessary, though, as I suspect there were billions of such species and subspecies. Or trillions. Ultimately a few of them survived - those who had their pleasure mechanisms linked with actions that help survival and reproduction.

Sexuality, like evolution, has no innate purposes. It is used by people for various reasons and desire including those which serve no reproductive.

Evolution, not genetics - society and psychology are parts of evolution too.
And yes. It's the invisible, unconscious, unguiding force of evolution that lies beyond all out physiology and psychology. We are the way we are because we have killed those who weren't the way we are. If we didn't, they would kill us, but we were stronger. Thus we got to live on, and pass on our hardware (genes), firmware (basic upbringing) and software (advanced social conditioning). Everything we feel, everything we do, everything we are, is all simply a product of this process where some die off and others reproduce.

LOL. A vast oversimplification of evolution and psychology.

You've skipped the latter posts which answer the rhetorical question asked. WHY do we get offended by rape. And that is because this leads to reproduction of DNA other than that of the husband, or very low quality rapist DNA in general.

We don't get offended because there are/were selection pressures to get offended at rape. I don't know any mechanisms for such.

Still, I would find it difficult to accept, if the figure is true, that a significant proportion of my friends will one day rape someone. That is what I find completely counter-intuitive.

Bad math, too. Since you could be friends with 10 girls who had been raped, and they might all share a common rapist.

You are assuming that every rape is committed by a different rapist. More likely, each rapist is responsible for many rapes, and the ones who are eventually caught and convicted were responsible for many of the unsolved cases, although they aren't convicted for those.

I'm assuming no such thing. If I were, why would I have used the word "approximately"?

That said, as already discussed in this thread, it is highly unlikely that each rapist is responsible for the rape of multiple victims each year, given that approximately 3/4 of rapes are committed by someone the victim knows - often a friend, a boyfriend, or a husband. How many wives and girlfriends do you think those guys have at a time? Some very possibly are - hence the "approximately," as I said.

OK, but how do you know these 100 rapes have occurred?

I can honestly say that if someone asked me how many rapes had occurred in a given area, I would not be able to provide them with that information.

....yes, and if someone were to ask me about the mating habits of the giant squid, I wouldn't be able to provide them with that information, either. That's why they should probably ask a marine biologist about it, rather than saying, "Poliwanacraca doesn't know anything about squid sex, so why should we believe squid sex occurs?" Similarly, when trying to determine how many rapes have occurred, most people go with the "consult experts who collect statistics on that sort of thing, you know, the very statistics you're inexplicably arguing with" method rather than the "ask Flammable Ice" method. There are assorted methodologies for determining those statistics, and those methodologies will vary from source to source; hence why the figures I gave were approximate. Why don't you follow the links I provided and, y'know, read about them?

You've skipped the latter posts which answer the rhetorical question asked. WHY do we get offended by rape.

Why are we offended by torture? it just produces a harmless nerve signal.

....yes, and if someone were to ask me about the mating habits of the giant squid, I wouldn't be able to provide them with that information, either. That's why they should probably ask a marine biologist about it, rather than saying, "Poliwanacraca doesn't know anything about squid sex, so why should we believe squid sex occurs?" Similarly, when trying to determine how many rapes have occurred, most people go with the "consult experts who collect statistics on that sort of thing, you know, the very statistics you're inexplicably arguing with" method rather than the "ask Flammable Ice" method. There are assorted methodologies for determining those statistics, and those methodologies will vary from source to source; hence why the figures I gave were approximate.
Whoa big word count! I should have clarified that I'm not trying to discredit you or anything - no need to go on the defensive.

Why don't you follow the links I provided and, y'know, read about them?
Because I'm lazy and only on NationStates to relax. Since you'd already posted several comments in the thread, I assumed you wouldn't mind providing another couple of sentences.

In a long-winded way, however, you have answered that statisticians provided you with that information. I shall, due to the aforementioned laziness, assume that the statisiticians possessed an average level of competence and bias.

Again, I reiterate, due to the abundance of heated debate on NS, that I am making no attacks here, simply trying to obtain information through a casual, conversational means.

Whoa big word count! I should have clarified that I'm not trying to discredit you or anything - no need to go on the defensive.


Because I'm lazy and only on NationStates to relax. Since you'd already posted several comments in the thread, I assumed you wouldn't mind providing another couple of sentences.

In a long-winded way, however, you have answered that statisticians provided you with that information. I shall, due to the aforementioned laziness, assume that the statisiticians possessed an average level of competence and bias.

Again, I reiterate, due to the abundance of heated debate on NS, that I am making no attacks here, simply trying to obtain information through a casual, conversational means.

Haha, fair enough. My apologies if I sounded a little cranky - there's been some dumb comments in this thread, and so you probably got a bit of the leftover frustration from "rape is harmless," "no one I know could possibly have been raped, because obviously they would have told everyone they've ever met about it," "rape victims are only upset when their attackers aren't handsome and wealthy," and "those figures are wrong because...um...because I said so." :p

Haha, fair enough. My apologies if I sounded a little cranky - there's been some dumb comments in this thread, and so you probably got a bit of the leftover frustration from "rape is harmless," "no one I know could possibly have been raped, because obviously they would have told everyone they've ever met about it," "rape victims are only upset when their attackers aren't handsome and wealthy," and "those figures are wrong because...um...because I said so." :p

No worries. I expect it, to be honest :) - trying to get the facts when everyone else just wants to win.

it's all personal. some rape jokes are tasteless, some jokes about murder are tasteless.

Some ethnic jokes are tasteless.

it really depends on the joke itself and the person listening to it.

/Threadwin.

A person can have a variety of reasons for committing murder, some justifiable, some at least understandable. Rape, on the other hand, can never be justified.

I always find any statistics about how only x% of rapes are reported to be quite shady. First of all, if they're not reported, obviously the authorities dont know about them. So how are the statistics obtained? Anonymous polling and extrapolation. Looking at the groups that often compile these statistics, I wouldn't be surprised if their anonymous polls are phrased in a way to make them as high as possible. The UN study quoted on wikipedia says that 40% of all rapes are reported, which makes a damn bit more sense than 4%.

I'm especially amazed by statistics like the "one in six women has been sexually assaulted." How did the poll define sexual assault? What was the methodology? I'm sitting in a room that has 60 people in it, about half of which are women. I somehow am highly doubtful that 5 of those women has been raped.

It's usually just extrapolated from the difference between self-report and compiled data (the FBI crime statistics database, for example). You're right to be skeptical, though, I think. Statistics like those are tricky - the same problem is present in surveying non-users of some service you're promoting to diagnose flaws. That was something I had to do at my last job that was no fun at all, but most people don't question your results, even if you're relying on nonprobability sampling. It's kind of disturbing, if you think about it. :tongue:

Also, kudos to Chumbly for wading through some mind-bogglingly absurd logic these lase few pages. I wish I had your patience. :p

Statistics like those are tricky

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics. - Mark Twain

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics. - Mark Twain

Ain't that the truth. There really ought to be a week or to on statistics included in college-level critical thinking courses. People get away with so much, it's silly.

Ain't that the truth. There really ought to be a week or to on statistics included in college-level critical thinking courses. People get away with so much, it's silly.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/correlation.png

Credit to www.xkcd.com

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/correlation.png

Credit to www.xkcd.com

Heh. That's pretty good. :tongue:

Partly because rape is a great deal more common than murder. I can virtually guarantee that everyone reading this thread knows someone - probably multiple someones - who has been raped. How many murder victims do you know?

Too many and one.

What is that supposed to mean? Do you believe that a woman would allow herself to be raped by the same guy over and over again if it was really unconsensual. It is not like his cousin was chained up in a basement. We had girls like that in college who every week went to the same frat house and that Sunday would whine about getting raped there. Then they would do the same thing the next weekend and so on ad infinitum. These women called themselves feminists and probably account for 99% of the reason why I cannot stand feminists.

And they wouldn't even look at you, I bet, those whores! They sure got what they deserved.

I'm especially amazed by statistics like the "one in six women has been sexually assaulted." How did the poll define sexual assault? What was the methodology? I'm sitting in a room that has 60 people in it, about half of which are women. I somehow am highly doubtful that 5 of those women has been raped.

1. Sexual assault does not always mean "rape". Child molestation, unconsented fondling, groping, kissing, threatening to rape--those are all forms of sexual assault.

2. What makes you "highly doubtful"? Do you often engage these women in personal conversations about their history of sexual assault?

And they wouldn't even look at you, I bet, those whores! They sure got what they deserved.

I dont know if they looked at me or not. I did not want anything to do with them. They were feminists and I am not into that. Even if I did like them, if they seduced me, they would probably cry that I raped them or something. The last time I ever tried to talk to them I said "Good morning, ladies." and they replied that they were not ladies but women and I am not sure but they may have said that they were women spelled with a y or something but I am not sure about that part.

rape jokes are only funny bcuz of shock value any1 who thinks about anything wouldnt laugh

rape jokes are only funny bcuz of shock value any1 who thinks about anything wouldnt laugh

You never heard any good rape jokes?

You never heard any good rape jokes?

"I'll take The Rapists for 400."
<pause>
"That's Therapists, not The Rapists."

"I'll take The Rapists for 400."
<pause>
"That's Therapists, not The Rapists."

There you go. Lets hear it for Sean Connery and SNL. Also there are plenty of good rape jokes. People on NSG can be too serious.

"I'll take The Rapists for 400."
<pause>
"That's Therapists, not The Rapists."
Actually, that remids me of a good joke that's sort of about rape, Tobias' criossing of analysist and therapist in Arrested Development:

http://the-op.com/images/episode/303/000051_sm.jpg

Though these jokes aren't about rape, they're about being perceived as a rapist; an obviously Bad Thing.

I had 2 freinds go to jail for Sexual Assault because they "Party Boyed" some chick.

She better hope they arent pissed when they get out.

I had 2 freinds go to jail for Sexual Assault because they "Party Boyed" some chick.

She better hope they arent pissed when they get out.

What is party boying?

I had 2 freinds go to jail for Sexual Assault because they "Party Boyed" some chick.

She better hope they arent pissed when they get out.

Yeah, how dare victims report crimes to the police? Damn uppity women, acting like they're actual people...

Yeah, how dare victims report crimes to the police? Damn uppity women, acting like they're actual people...

Yes, because making suggestive 'dance' moves near someone is a crime.

Yes, because making suggestive 'dance' moves near someone is a crime.

I guess it depends how suggestive it is.

Yes, because making suggestive 'dance' moves near someone is a crime.

Something tells me that if the evidence in their trial simply indicated that they were dancing near her, they probably wouldn't have been convicted of sexual assault.

Something tells me that if the evidence in their trial simply indicated that they were dancing near her, they probably wouldn't have been convicted of sexual assault.

She was trying to get them for rape, but seeing as how it wasnt.. It ended up being Sexual Assault.

She was trying to get them for rape, but seeing as how it wasnt.. It ended up being Sexual Assault.

They were trying to get her for more than dancing, but seeing how she wasnt.. It ended up being Sexual Assault.

She was trying to get them for rape, but seeing as how it wasnt.. It ended up being Sexual Assault.

...yes, and sexual assault is a crime. Which brings me back to my initial point of "How dare victims report crimes to the police?!" :rolleyes:

I dont know if they looked at me or not. I did not want anything to do with them. They were feminists and I am not into that.

I know, right?

People wanting equality? Bastards.

...yes, and sexual assault is a crime. Which brings me back to my initial point of "How dare victims report crimes to the police?!" :rolleyes:

In which I responded..

They were just dancing.

They were trying to get her for more than dancing, but seeing how she wasnt.. It ended up being Sexual Assault.

I'm a bit puzzled as to how this girl was "trying to get them for rape," anyway, unless the girl in question was the local DA.

Personally, I like Helen Keller jokes.

Why couldn't Helen Keller drive?

In which I responded..

They were just dancing.

Clearly... not.

In which I responded..

They were just dancing.

Apparently, the girl, the DA, twelve of their peers, and the actual evidence disagree. But hey, why let facts like that stop you from making threats against someone for daring to report a crime?

Apparently, the girl, the DA, twelve of their peers, and the actual evidence disagree. But hey, why let facts like that stop you from making threats against someone for daring to report a crime?

I didnt make a threat against anyone. I just know how they are.

Either way it doesnt matter much. Got the thread off topic.

Sorry Folks..

In which I responded..

They were just dancing.

I know that's what you said. Here's the thing though. We don't believe you.

I didnt make a threat against anyone. I just know how they are.


And how 'are' they?

The sort of people that would carry out some sort of revenge for being held to account for these actions?

I know that's what you said. Here's the thing though. We don't believe you.

I'm fully aware that it doesn't matter if I believe him or not. Far more important - the people who heard the case didn't believe, either.

And how 'are' they?

The sort of people that would carry out some sort of revenge for being held to account for these actions?

Yes, thats what I was going for.

Seems pretty shitty when you look at it (Since its their fault for the whole thing).

Yes, thats what I was going for.

Seems pretty shitty when you look at it (Since its their fault for the whole thing).

If they are in jail for a sexual assault at the moment, they may find their perspective somewhat changed upon their release, since they may have had some occasion to rethink the victim position.

If they are in jail for a sexual assault at the moment, they may find their perspective somewhat changed upon their release, since they may have had some occasion to rethink the victim position.

Possibly.

Possibly.

You kind of have to hope so, for their own sakes.

Not just because they'd be better human beings if they'd learned the lesson... but because any kind of recidivist action in the wake of their current situation, is likely to come back down on them like a ton of bricks.

Oh, by the way...

party boy

verb- to party boy
to hump someone while yelling "unntz unntz unntz" and taking off your clothes