Rape

Was it always a crime?

Discussions about society in general and social activity.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Rape

#21  Postby Doubtdispelled » Dec 27, 2012 2:13 pm

advaitya wrote:To expound further, the way rape was outlawed first positioned man as the victim whose property was wrongfully desecrated.

Whether that is correct or not, I cannot say, but even just typing that sentence ought to have given you some insight into just how twisted and inhumane society's historical attitudes to women have been. Those attitudes are what have led to women being indoctrinated into feeling any blame, shame or guilt.

advaitya wrote:
Doubtdispelled wrote:
advaitya wrote:Is it possible that women suffered forced sex like we suffer toothache today - without guilt?

What does does guilt have to do with being raped?


Visit the JSTOR network or any other respectable psychology journal and you'll discover reams of study documenting rape victims experiencing both guilt (blaming themselves) and shame. I am surprised (and disappointed) despite being a woman you singularly fail to empathize with rape victims who've historically been conditioned to blame themselves.

I fail to see how what I said shows a lack of empathy. Your 'disappointment' means nothing because it is misplaced.

advaitya wrote:You're imposing the extant norms and discourses on rape that shape your current feelings and attitudes on women who were subjected to forcible sex before they came to be seen as chattels. Did those women have the ideological sophistication to separate a rape from toothache?

That you can even think about asking that question highlights a severe lack of any understanding with regards to women, and a total lack of empathy too.
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

― Mark Twain
Doubtdispelled
 
Posts: 11836

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Rape

#22  Postby Doubtdispelled » Dec 27, 2012 2:18 pm

Agrippina wrote:
advaitya wrote:
Agrippina wrote:

I missed that.

I don't think that rape can be compared to toothache. The pain of a toothache is easily relieved and easily forgotten. I doubt that anyone ever forgets, or gets over, being raped.


You're imposing the extant norms and discourses on rape that shape your current feelings and attitudes on women who were subjected to forcible sex before they came to be seen as chattels. Did those women have the ideological sophistication to separate a rape from toothache?


I'm not imposing anything.

I happen to know a little about the history of humankind. Women have always been seen as chattels, even in societies where they were the rulers. There's some mythology in ancient Greece of a race of "amazon" women but that's all it is, mythology. Women have until fairly recently in the west always been treated as goods to be traded and subject to whatever men chose to do to them. There's no history of a time "before they came to be seen as chattels." The reason for it is a fairly simple one. Until science uncovered the actual physiology of female reproduction, the whole process of maturation and reproduction was treated as something to be feared and sometimes revered, but mostly as something "unclean." Until quite recently, menstruation was known as being "unwell." In fact there are still people who refer to it as such.

Because women have always (as I said until fairly recently) been seen as trade goods, the only reason that rape was frowned on was when the thing to be traded was violated and not because of her sensitivity towards unwanted attention, but because she could possibly bear a child that was not that of the man who really owned her. I also do not know of any time in history when women saw rape as something that could be brushed aside as easily as a toothache. Because someone accepts her fate and doesn't talk about it and appears to be going on with life as if it didn't happen, it doesn't mean that she's not feeling violated.

Women have historically behaved as subjects, and been submissive simply because they were not valued enough as people. Don't mistake submissiveness and a quiet demeanour as a sign of not feeling pain.

Rape has never been about sex. It is and always has been about power. Which is why men in positions of authority, who are not homosexual, will rape other men. It's not because they find the other man attractive and want to have a relationship with him, it's because of the same motivation that causes men to rape women. Women have always known this, and they still do.

In under-developed societies, even today, women will submit to men simply because resisting could cause them to be killed. The attack on women in India has nothing to do with lustful young men looking for a good time, it has everything to do with men resenting the fact that women are now able to live full lives without men to tell them what to do and because, especially in countries like India, they are moving away from being mere brood mares who are handed over by their fathers to whoever he pleases to give them to.

I don't understand how you can make a comparison between something as trivial as a toothache and the intimate violation of a person's most personal body functions. That is the only "extant norms and discourses on rape" that I'm imposing on this discussion.

:clap: Excellent post, Aggie!
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

― Mark Twain
Doubtdispelled
 
Posts: 11836

Print view this post

Re: Rape

#23  Postby Agrippina » Dec 27, 2012 2:59 pm

Thanks DD. :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
 
Posts: 36690
Age: 110
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Rape

#24  Postby I'm With Stupid » Dec 27, 2012 3:46 pm

I'd also point out that it seems completely natural for any father to want to kill any male who comes within two feet of his teenage daughter too, so it's not just a case of rival males fighting over females.
Image
User avatar
I'm With Stupid
 
Posts: 9632
Age: 36
Male

Country: Malaysia
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Rape

#25  Postby Doubtdispelled » Dec 27, 2012 7:37 pm

It occurs to me that it's pretty pointless attempting to discuss the criminalisation of rape with someone who tries to equate the experience of it with suffering a toothache. Especially when that person also demonstrates some kind of bias by replying objectively when responding to a poster of gender either unspecified or known to be male, and then immediately personalising the discussion when replying to a poster known to be female with comments such as 'you're probably being emotional....', or 'you are not being empathic...'.

:roll:
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

― Mark Twain
Doubtdispelled
 
Posts: 11836

Print view this post

Re: Rape

#26  Postby Beatsong » Dec 27, 2012 8:21 pm

Agrippina wrote:Rape has never been about sex. It is and always has been about power.


That's been a widely accepted truism among feminists, sociologists and psychologists of the last few decades. However it's worth noting that it's far from an established fact, and some specialists in the field are coming round to accepting the most obvious explanation: that at least some rapists rape because they want sex, and can't get it any other way.

In particular, I suspect women tend to favour the "always about power" theory because they (naturally) don't understand the male sex drive.
User avatar
Beatsong
 
Posts: 7027

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Rape

#27  Postby laklak » Dec 27, 2012 8:22 pm

Hell, I don't understand the male sex drive and I am one.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20878
Age: 67
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Rape

#28  Postby Agrippina » Dec 28, 2012 4:00 am

I'm With Stupid wrote:I'd also point out that it seems completely natural for any father to want to kill any male who comes within two feet of his teenage daughter too, so it's not just a case of rival males fighting over females.


In a sense it is, if you work from the point of view of the animal part of us. Your teenage daughter, in the primitive part of your brain is something to bargain with for higher status in the herd. So protecting her from violation keeps her valuable until the partner of your choice comes along. I'm not talking about a society where she can choose her own mate, however, even in a society where she chooses her own mate, the father would still approve of the choice of the one of which he approves.

To respond to what Beatsong says, in a situation where a man is desperate for sex, he would rather pay for it than just take it, if power wasn't part of the motivation. Which is why I don't agree that prostitution is exploitation of women. To a degree it is, if you see exploitation of an opportunity to earn money from a commodity that can be sold to people who can't obtain it freely. Also I don't imagine that prostitutes ever enjoy their work, but there have always been prostitutes and men who are prepared to pay them. For me, legalising prostitution and recognising that criminalising it makes it a dangerous choice of occupation, is the right thing to do. It will never be eradicated as long as there are men who can't get sex any other way, and women who are prepared to be paid for it.
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
 
Posts: 36690
Age: 110
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Rape

#29  Postby TMB » Dec 31, 2012 2:56 pm

Advaitya, you said,

Saying that society decides what to criminalize is trivial. Like beatsong noted about patriarchy, society is too big an umbrella word to usefully illuminate the causes for criminalization of rape. A society has its own inner logic and power structures and serves specific interests. My intrigue was about what kind of society would decide to outlaw rape. I am hypothesizing that welfare of women was not what led to it being outlawed. I am further suggesting that rape became a crime after women came to be seen as chattels belonging to men.


Rape, or non-consensual sex is common in non human species, just as is incest, killing etc. In the case of rape, it is easy to see that any society will create mechanisms to prevent or limit rape if it threatens the integrity of that society. You are suggesting that rape became a crime because women, as the property of men, were being violated and so were protected. In any animal society they will defend their territorial or reproductive assets against anything that threatens this. However, without looking at the context of this typical behavior of all lifeforms, you risk missing the fact that both men and women will protect the things that give them benefit. This applies to the ideal of monogamy, something humans do not do well, but socially pressure is put as a way to protect the asset of people who have some power to enact them. Human morals define rape as a moral wrong, just as adultery used to be in the past for a nation like Australia. I would say that reproductive access to women would have meant that social protection against rape within a defined society has been around for longer than we have been human. Men and women leverage each other as resources to achieve their reproductive ends, rape is specifically a man on woman behavior, and so protection against it from predatory males would be as old as there have been predatory males, and that comes from prehuman times.
TMB
 
Posts: 1197

Print view this post

Previous

Return to Sociology

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest