ED, An excellent comprehensive and objective scientific review of the subject!
Edgar On Feb 23, 2011, at 10:39 AM, ED wrote: > > > Audrey, below is an alternative perspective on the subject. > > --ED > > PS: I hold no position on this issue yet. > > > > Politics of Rape: > Debunking the Feminist Myth > > By Trayce Hansen, Ph.D. > > "Rape isn't about sex!" That's what feminists proclaim. And they've declared > it so continuously and persuasively over the last few decades, most of our > society have come to believe it. The fact is, it's not true—it's a myth. > > Rape used to be considered an act of sexual assault—"sexual" being the > operative word—perpetrated by a man of weak moral character and criminal > inclination. But this commonsense truth has been replaced with a > politically-motivated myth that has had long-reaching, negative effects on > both rape victims and society. > > The politicization of rape, and the denial of truth it required, was > spearheaded by feminists in the early 1970s. Since then they've worked > diligently to transform the way society views rape. Specifically, feminists > want rape to be seen as a politically motivated crime rather than a sexually > motivated one. And, to a significant extent they've been successful in their > effort. > > Susan Brownmiller first popularized the politicized view of rape in her 1975 > book Against Our Will—Men, Women and Rape. The back cover of Brownmiller's > feminist tome boldly states "it [rape] is not a crime of lust but of violence > and power." Brownmiller's contention, however, as well as the > rape-isn't-about-sex myth it helped propagate, had more to do with > ideological goals and political expediency than logic and scientific fact. > > > The feminists' re-defining of rape was, in part, a philosophical necessity > because of their belief in the interchangeability of personal and political > experiences (i.e., the personal is political). But there were other reasons > as well. > > Feminism's political redefinition of rape was driven by three basic > ideological tenets, and, more critically, by one strategic decision. > > First is feminism's ideological belief in "secular creation," a view held by > many on the left that presumes man is born a blank slate, only becoming that > which his culture teaches him to become. Hence, rapists are societal > creations whose tendencies can be eradicated once the "culture of rape" is > eradicated. Next is feminism's ideological belief that all male-female > interactions must, by definition, be viewed through the lens of power and > domination. Naturally then, rape also must be seen through this distorted > prism. Third is the feminists' denial of any difference between male and > female sexuality, because, in their lexicon, different means inferior. Thus, > since these feminist women couldn't identify in themselves a sexual urge to > rape, then rape by men must also be other than sexually motivated. Finally, > and most importantly, feminists strategically concluded that if rape was > perceived as motivated "only" by sex, then it would be of limited political > value, but if instead rape was seen as motivated by male desire to dominate > and control women, then it could be used as a powerful political tool for > radical cultural change. Specifically, feminists decided that if they could > convince society that male domination was the rapist's true motivation, then > the end of rape would necessarily require an end to the traditional > patriarchal culture said to support that domination. Rape would become the > symbolic sword that radical feminists hoped would help them slay what they > perceived as the evil dragon of "traditional" culture—their ultimate > sociopolitical objective. > > But feminism's ultimate sociopolitical objective is tragically ironic, > because it is living in a traditional patriarchal family that most protects > young women from the likelihood of rape, and young men from the likelihood of > becoming rapists. To put it simply, a young woman's vulnerability to rape is > greatly reduced if she lives with a father or husband, and a young man is far > less likely to become a rapist if he grows up with a father in his home. Yet > radical feminists apparently won't allow this truth to impinge upon their > political agenda. Because, to paraphrase nationally syndicated radio talk > show host Dennis Prager, feminists' psychological animus towards men, more > than their love and care of women, is what most ignites their sociopolitical > passions. > > Society's passions, however, must be ignited by truth. Even though the raping > behavior of a specific individual likely involves a complex intertwining of > motivations, the one common and overriding motivation of all rapists is > sexual. So let's examine some commonsense and empirical truths about rape > that debunk the feminist rape-isn't-about-sex myth and support the contention > that rape is about sex. > > First, rape is universal; it's universal across time, across cultures and > societies, and even across many species. This fact is clearly validated by > data in biologist Randy Thornhill and anthropologist Craig T. Palmer's book A > Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion. Specifically, > Thornhill and Palmer's documentation supports the contention that no > rape-free human society has ever existed and that many non-human animal > species do engage in raping behaviors. If rape were an act promoted or > encouraged by specific patriarchal or political environments, as feminists > assert, it's inconceivable that rape would be found in all societies > throughout recorded time. Similarly, if rape were an act solely dependent > upon patriarchal cultural learning, one would find it difficult to explain > the prevalence of raping behaviors among animal species (other than > homo-sapiens) without such a cultural influence. Rape's universality thus > emphasizes the point that rape is "natural," though obviously not good, and > that it isn't created by any particular sociopolitical environment. > > Second, the behaviors and motives of rapists are comparable to that of other > criminal types and, when analyzed in this straightforward manner, the sexual > motivation of rapists becomes apparent. Consider this. If a criminal sees > your money and wants it, he takes it. If a criminal sees your car and wants > it, he takes it. If a criminal sees you and wants you sexually, he takes you. > These are amongst the immoral tendencies of criminals—they take what they > want with a callous disregard for their victims. If you ponder the > fundamental motivation behind these various criminal acts, a parallel analogy > holds true. The mugger is motivated by his desire for your money, the car > thief by his desire for your car, and the rapist by his desire for you > sexually. The primary motives of all criminal types, including rapists, are > easily discernable—no conspiratorial explanations are necessary. > > Third, most rapists use only enough force to accomplish their goal of sexual > access. If a rapist's goal was other than sex, such as a desire to inflict > violence upon his victim, why do most rapists not inflict high degrees of > physical injuries on their victims? They certainly have the opportunity to do > so. In 1991, Lee Ellis of Minot State University reported that studies of > "date" rapists clearly demonstrate that these men try many tactics first > (i.e., encouraging intoxication, professing love, verbally pressuring) before > they resort to physically coercive tactics. Based on these particular facts > it must be concluded that, at least for "date" rapists, a desire to have sex > is the motivating factor, and only after exhausting less coercive tactics did > these rapists resort to physical domination. As an aside, a small minority of > rapists are sadistic and therefore are additionally motivated by a desire to > violently aggress against, dominate, and humiliate their victims. But > sadistic rapists are the exception and not the rule and are readily > differentiated from most rapists by their tendency to mete out more violence > than is necessary to subdue their victim. The majority of rapists, however, > both stranger and "date," use only enough aggression to accomplish their > sexual goal. This is where feminists and others have become "confused"; > they've obscured the distinction between the tactics used and the goals > sought during rape. For the vast majority of rapists, aggression and control > are simply the means to the end, the end being sexual access. > > Fourth, a desire for sexual access is the only motive underlying rape that's > both necessary and sufficient. In contrast to this assertion, Palmer and > Thornhill point out that the feminist theory of rape holds that it's a > non-sexual motive that is both necessary and sufficient. But are any of the > motives feminists posit (i.e., political oppression, violent domination, > control, etc.) both necessary and sufficient? Ask yourself the following > questions (although you can substitute any motivation for the one chosen as > an example): Is it necessary for a man to have a desire to politically > oppress a woman before he can rape her? Is a rapist's political motive, in > the absence of any sexual motive, sufficient for a rape to occur? The answer > to both of these questions is no! > > On the other hand, it is necessary for a man to have some type of sexual > desire before he can rape. And a rapist's sexual motive, even in the absence > of all other motives, is sufficient for a rape to occur. Some desire for > sexual access is always necessary during rape and is even sufficient unto > itself; no other motive is both. > > Fifth, demographic data on rapists and rape victims point to a sexual motive > underlying rape. The majority of rapists are men between their teens and 20s, > a time of life during which men are the most sexually driven. Next, consider > the fact that the majority of rape victims are between the ages of 16 and 24, > the age group in which women are considered the most sexually attractive. The > result of this analysis is straightforward; the men who are most sexually > driven are the ones most likely to rape and they're most likely to rape women > who are generally considered to be the most sexually attractive. > Additionally, according to data in Thornhill and Palmer's book A Natural > History of Rape, rapists are more likely to engage in penile-vaginal > intercourse, as well as in multiple acts of intercourse, when the victim is > in this most-sexually-attractive age category. Coincidence? Does anyone > really believe that if a rapist were offered a roomful of women from which he > could select a rape victim, that every women in that room (old and young, > ugly and beautiful, thin and fat) would have an equal chance of being > "selected"? Of course not! > > Sixth, most rapists themselves say that sex was the motivating factor > underlying their crimes. Professor Lee Ellis of Minot State University wrote, > "Even among rapists who victimize strangers, self-reports have given little > indication that their real objective is to dominate their victims (or women > generally), except to the extent that doing so aids in gaining copulatory > access." Thornhill and Palmer concur with Professor Ellis and specifically > mention a doctoral dissertation authored by S. Smithyman that found 84% of > rapists reported that sex, in whole or part, was the motivating force behind > their actions. Contradictory research, often referred to by feminists, which > claims that rapists report power and control as their motivation, frequently > contain serious flaws. For example, many were done with incarcerated rapists, > or other rapists who'd already been "re-educated" to give the "correct" > response, while still others were done with rapists who may have believed > that proclaiming a non-sexual motive was more likely to lead to their being > deemed enlightened and thus "cured." Although self-reporting is by definition > biased, the least confounded proclamations by rapists supports the contention > that sex is the driving force behind the act of rape. > > Finally, and perhaps most empirically supportive of the hypothesis that sex > is the fundamental motivation behind rape, are the results of surgical and > chemical castration research. > > John Bradford, M.D. authored a chapter in Sexual Deviance: Theory, > Assessment, and Treatment where he summarized results of surgical castration > research. Although surgical castration studies are unreplicatable today due > to "ethical" considerations, they are theoretically important because, as > Bradford writes, surgical castration's "mechanism of action … is the > reduction of plasma testosterone, the principal hormone for the maintenance > of sexual behavior in males and the hormone involved in sexual drive." > Surgical castration studies therefore can shed considerable light on the > degree to which a rapist's sex drive is involved in his raping behavior. > Bradford reviewed several studies that examined both pre- and post-surgical > castration recidivism rates of sexual deviants, mostly rapists and child > molesters. The results of these studies (which included large numbers of > subjects over long periods of time) reported significant reductions in sex > offender recidivism rates ranging from more than 70% precastration to under > 5% postcastration. Regardless of how one looks at it, these are truly > impressive success rates and do indeed offer illuminating clarity. > > A fair amount of research has also analyzed the effects of chemical > castration on rapists and other sexual offenders. Chemical castration works > similarly to surgical castration through its impact on male sexual hormone > levels. Professor Lee Ellis wrote that "Various [chemical castration agents] > have been shown to reduce testosterone and thereby diminish self-reported > libido in men … including men involved in various sex offenses." Thornhill > and Palmer described results of other long-term chemical castration studies > specifically done with rapists and wrote there is "considerable evidence to > suggest that [chemical castration agents] reduce sexual crimes." John > Bradford summarized the whole of chemical castration research by writing > "Long-term outcome studies have shown that [chemical castration] reduces > sexual offender recidivism and compares favorably with the surgical > castration studies." > > Results of both the surgical and chemical castration research demonstrate > that when the sexual drive of rapists is dramatically reduced, the likelihood > that they will rape again is dramatically reduced. Sexual drive must > therefore be considered the motivating force underlying the behavior of those > rapists. > > Ashamedly, most feminists do not support the use of any type of castration > for rapists. This isn't surprising because to support castration would > necessitate admitting that rape is sexually driven. This incredible fact once > again points out that radical feminists allow their ideological agenda to > trump scientific evidence—even if the application of that science would help > protect other women from rape. > > But what of the "evidence" gathered by feminists and other so-called social > scientists in support of their rape-isn't–about-sex hypothesis? Two > psychology professors at the University of Texas in Austin, Del Thiessen and > Robert Young, decided to take a look. Professors Thiessen and Young analyzed > the bulk of this literature and reported their findings in a 1994 issue of > the journal, Society. Their analysis of 1,610 abstracts of sexual coercion > studies (with sexual coercion defined as rape, date rape, acquaintance rape, > sexual harassment, sexual abuse, and incest) published between 1982 and 1992, > revealed unscientific and politically biased studies. For instance, Thiessen > and Young reported that only 10 percent of the studies they analyzed had > sought to uncover the causes or motivations of sexual coercion, often because > the "cause" (i.e., male oppression) had been assumed, though not proven. They > also found that only 1.5 percent of the studies examined had even applied a > statistical test to a research question. And, significant due to their near > complete absence (.002 percent), were studies that addressed biological > issues because, as the authors noted, biological theories are considered > taboo in the feminist world because they call into question foundational, > ideological tenets of feminism. Perhaps most tragic was Thiessen and Young's > observation that little or no progress had been made in understanding sexual > coercion because of the unscientific nature of the overwhelming majority of > studies in this area. > > In a scathing summary of their analysis, Theissen and Young wrote "The > possibility exists that feminist interests enforce the orientation of > published studies … and reflects the political perspectives of its advocates. > … There is a near-total disregard for rigorous testing of hypotheses, > quantification of data and possible biological mechanisms. Many studies > appear anti-scientific in conception, execution, and interpretation. … But in > the politicized arena of `women's issues,' social expressions are valued > beyond scientific progress." > > Theissen and Young's comprehensive analysis revealed the fact that the vast > majority of sexual coercion studies are more ideological proselytizing than > they are scientific analysis of research hypotheses. Charles Leslie of the > University of Delaware made similar observations when he wrote of the social > sciences in general, "Non social scientists generally recognize the fact that > the social sciences are mostly ideological, and that they have produced in > this century a very small amount of scientific knowledge. … Our claim to > being scientific is one of the main intellectual scandals of the academic > world." So not only have feminists and their social science compatriots > blurred the line between the personal and the political, they've also blurred > the line between ideology and science. This blurring may be good for > promoting the feminist agenda but it's anathema to scientific discovery and > truth finding. > > When the commonsense and empirical evidence concerning rape motivation are > examined in their entirety, without the distorting lens of a political > agenda, it's quite difficult to conclude that rape is anything but an act > principally motivated by sex. This conclusion is not good or bad—it's just > inescapably true! > > It's obvious, then, that radical feminists aren't believers in truth; they're > "true believers." Even though routinely confronted with contradictory logic > and objective data concerning the motivation of rapists, the feminists' > fanatic faith never seems to falter. That's because their faith, like that of > all "true believers," emanates emotionally and psychologically rather than > intellectually. Moreover, as radicals, these feminists believe that their end > justifies their means. Hence, if erroneous myths must be promulgated in order > to bring an end to the traditional patriarchal culture they despise, then so > be it. > > The goal of a moral society, as opposed to that of radical feminists, must be > the search for truth. This is why our society can't allow the feminist > sociopolitical agenda to blind us to the fundamental truth of the causes and > motivation underlying rape. Rape is not a political act of male domination > and patriarchal control, as feminists conspiratorially allege. It's a heinous > act rooted in sexual desire that's perpetrated by an immoral, > criminally-inclined individual. > > Radical feminists, and misguided others, obviously have the right to despise > traditional culture and to wish to vanquish it. But, like the rest of us, > they must make their case in an up-front manner, employing intellectual and > moral persuasion and not, as they've been doing for nearly three decades, > through the backdoor with fear-mongering, gender-baiting, and > pseudo-scientific mythmaking. It's long past time to debunk once and for all > the destructive rape-isn't-about-sex myth propagated by radical feminists and > shed much needed light on what appears to be their real agenda—the toppling > of traditional culture. > > > REFERENCES > > Bradford, J. (1997). In Laws, D.R., & O'Donohue, W. (Eds.), Sexual Deviance: > Theory, Assessment, and Treatment. (pp.449-464). > > Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape. > > Ellis, L. (1991). A synthesized (biosocial) theory of rape. Journal of > Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59(5), 631-642. > > Leslie, C. (1990). Scientific racism: Reflections on peer review, science and > ideology. Social Science and Medicine, 31(8), 891-912. > > Theissen, D., & Young, R.K. (1994). Investigating sexual coercion. Society, > 60(March/April), 60-63. > > Thornhill, R. & Palmer, C.T. (2000). A Natural History of Rape: Biological > Bases of Sexual Coercion. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of > Technology. > > > http://www.drtraycehansen.com/Pages/writings_politics.html > > ### > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > > > Rape is primarily about satisfying sexual desire when it can't be achieved > otherwise. Complete power over a woman can be a very strong aphrodisiac. > Especially where violence or injury is involved it can also be combined with > the man's desire for revenge against women for perceived psychological injury > previously suffered at the hands of a woman or women in general by the rapist. > > Edgar > >> >> >> >> Hi Audrey - >> >> Yours is an assertion that conforms to the usual feminist position. It may >> be true or it may not. Has the truth of the assertion been confirmed by say >> neurophysiologists and neuropsychologists? >> >> Thanks, ED >> >> >> >> --- In [email protected], "audreydc1983" <audreydc1983@...> wrote: >> > >> > I will beg to differ on one point: Rape has little to do with sexual >> > desire. It is about power, control, and victimization. >> >> > Those of us who believe sex is a natural product of lust, sexual desire, >> > and love often will assume that rape, since it is a sexual act, is >> > associated in some way with these feelings. >> >> > This assumption couldn't be further from the truth. If there is any desire >> > in rape, it is the desire to control/victimize. >> > >> > ~Audrey >> >> > > > > >
