The morals of sexuality

[Xev]

James R:

When did this become a discussion about you? I have at no time stereotyped you, and in fact have specifically denied doing so. You personalise things far too much.

Let's not get sidetracked. I was not referring specifically to myself, only making a point.

Can you show me it is not that thing?

Shifted burden of proof fallacy.

Ad hominem at whom? Foucault? I didn't attack him at all.

M. Foucault is wrong because he may or may not have been a feminist? This is a fallacy, luv.

Now, before we play logic games (and my latin is ever so rusty), do you care to cite actual evidence?

 

[James R]

Xev:

<i>Let's not get sidetracked. I was not referring specifically to myself, only making a point.</i>

What was your point, exactly? Forgive me. I am but a prudish geek.

<i>Shifted burden of proof fallacy.</i>

Let's review this, shall we? You said:

<i>You've labelled the defenders of one idea (rape primarily a power function) as a certain thing (militant feminist).</i>

In fact, what I said was that militant feminists believe rape is solely a power thing. I then asked you:

<i>Can you show me it is not that thing?</i>

All you need to do is to provide some examples of militant feminists who do not think rape is a power thing, and you will have effectively refuted my argument. But the best you can do is:

<i>Shifted burden of proof fallacy.</i>

In fact, I am not shifting the burden of proof on you to prove a negative. I am asking whether you have any counter-evidence. You have asked me to present support for my claim. I have not yet done so because I don't have the relevant references at hand. However, off the top of my head, I can refer you to a book called <i>A Natural History of Rape</i>. I forget the author. Also well worth looking at on this issue is Steven Pinker's recent book <i>The Blank Slate</i>, which you can take as my primary source in this particular instance if you wish to pin me down to one thing.

<i>M. Foucault is wrong because he may or may not have been a feminist? This is a fallacy, luv.</i>

It would be, if I had ever said that. But I didn't.

 

[Asguard]

why should anyone give a dam what feminists think rape is about???????

surly if you actully want to know you should be asking a pycologist\pyciatrist who works with rapists

i doubt even if the victioms would be able to answer it

hell the rapists probably couldnt

so i dont see how a group of winging woman would (the feminists NOT the rape victoms)

 

[James R]

Asguard,

You're undervaluing feminism. Feminism has given women the vote and is working towards things such as equality of pay and opportunity for women. Feminist commentary on rape is certainly worthwhile.

There seems to be a misunderstanding of my position here. I support equality feminism. I think gender feminism is counter-productive and in some cases just plain wrong.

 

[Asguard]

i HATE feminists because they work for the best for themselves

i like PEOPLE who work to TRUE equality for EVERYONE

 

[Absurd]

Originally posted by The Marquis
If you subscribe to this theory, doesn't this mean that a low-status male, not having the power in a social situation to get sex, then take it by force? in other words, power is an integral part of this situation, rather than it being "not at all about power". The desire for sex is only a prelude to a power issue.

Maybe, maybe not, depending on how you construe "power". If rape is an adaptation, then rape is clearly about sex insofar as it was selected for because it allows males to reproduce in otherwise unfavorable circumstances. In and of itself, this does not amount to a power relation. Qui bono in the forced mating behavior? Not the male, but the male's genes. Reproduction need not be useful to the individual organisms that reproduce, and the male is not in any sense empowered by the behavior.

So males rape because rape is an adaptation to an environment where it is difficult to reproduce.

The reason why I say that this is no good, and why I agree with you that "the desire for sex is only a prelude to a power issue" is that this is an idealized scenario that excludes from the analysis the most significant aspect of the human phenotype - culture. We humans will necessarily incorporate aspects of our biology into our way of life. We will attach meanings and values to them that Darwinian selection could not. Sometimes this will reinforce the biology, and other times this will overpower it (culture will always be on Wilson's leash, but the leash is infinitely long). One can easily imagine a primitive society that places high value on reproduction: a society where the amount of progeny influences social standing, say. Males disposed to rape (for mindless evolutionary reasons) will quickly discover positive reinforcement for their behavior, and the rape-power relationship will develop from that point on.

 

[Absurd]

Originally posted by James R

You've got your causation around the wrong way. I am not saying that everyone who thinks rape is about power is a militant feminist. I'm saying that everyone who is a militant feminist thinks that rape is about power. See the difference?

This will not do. Let's refresh our memory of your comments:

First you say,

"Power as it relates to sex is perhaps currently over-rated, mostly as a result of militant feminism."

Next you say, in reply to "rape is the ultimate expression of power through sex,"

"Militant feminists would have us believe that rape is only about power."

Now you may act indignant and insist that all you wanted to contribute to the discussion was the trivial and largely irrelevant fact that "everyone who is a militant feminist thinks that rape is about power," but apparently, me, Xev, and Marquis see what looks to be an obvious implication to the effect that only, or mostly militant feminists believe this, or at the very least, that anyone who believes this must have been influenced by militant feminists. So we all voice our disagreement.

Another poor choice of words on your part, I guess.

<i>There are many banal reasons why rape cannot be "only about power". ... If some rapist honestly tells you, "I fucked her because I was horny," this does not mean that the rape was "about sex".</i>

Yes it does. I'm not claiming that power is irrelevant - just that it is not the <b>only</b> thing which is relevant, as some people seriously try to claim.

I think we can all agree that in the majority of cases, there is no rape without sex, but again, this seems like a trivial point to me. Perhaps we could frame the question as, "what is it that distinguishes men who rape from men who do not?" I doubt "wanting sex" will sound like a plausible answer then.

 

[James R]

Absurd:

Let's review your review.

I said: "Power as it relates to sex is perhaps currently over-rated, mostly as a result of militant feminism." and "Militant feminists would have us believe that rape is only about power."

You say:

<i>Now you may act indignant and insist that all you wanted to contribute to the discussion was the trivial and largely irrelevant fact that "everyone who is a militant feminist thinks that rape is about power,"...</i>

Look again at what I did contribute (see above). I said that militant feminists think rape is only about power. I note you conveniently miss the point yet again by ignoring the most important word: "only". Obviously, if my point was "trivial and largely irrelevant" we wouldn't be having this discussion, would we?

<i>...but apparently, me, Xev, and Marquis see what looks to be an obvious implication to the effect that only, or mostly militant feminists believe this, or at the very least, that anyone who believes this must have been influenced by militant feminists.</i>

I agree that anybody who believes rape is <b>only</b> about power has been influenced by militant feminism. It is a pity that you, Xev and Marquis didn't read carefully enough to note the word "only".

<i>Another poor choice of words on your part, I guess. </i>

Not at all. My words were chosen very carefully. Poor reading on your part.

<i>Perhaps we could frame the question as, "what is it that distinguishes men who rape from men who do not?" I doubt "wanting sex" will sound like a plausible answer then.</i>

Wanting sex is part of the answer, just not the whole answer. Admitting that sex comes into it is a starting point which you should consider.

 

[Xev]

James R:

In fact, I am not shifting the burden of proof on you to prove a negative. I am asking whether you have any counter-evidence. You have asked me to present support for my claim. I have not yet done so because I don't have the relevant references at hand. However, off the top of my head, I can refer you to a book called A Natural History of Rape. I forget the author. Also well worth looking at on this issue is Steven Pinker's recent book The Blank Slate, which you can take as my primary source in this particular instance if you wish to pin me down to one thing.

I don't have the time to read the book, although I've heard of it. Do you have any evidence?

I cited chimps, which often ritualize sex as a relation of dominence. I'd also note the language in popular culture ("fuck you"). I'd also wager that I'm nowhere near alone in thinking of sex so heavily in terms of power relations.

However, I'm quite willing to stipulate that power is not always a primary motivation, just that it likely often is.

 

[James R]

Xev:

Remember that I am arguing against the view that rape is <b>only</b> about power here. I am not and have not claimed it is not at all about power. Bearing that in mind...

Pinker makes two points:

1. Men often want to have sex with women who don't want to have sex with them.
2. Some men use violence to get what they want.

I doubt many people would dispute either of these points. Put them both together and we shouldn't be surprised that some men use violence to get sex. Yet, strangely, militant feminists dispute that rape has anything to do with sex, other than in a purely mechanical sense. For them it is only about power. It is that view which I find unsustainable.

 

[Adam]

James R

Personally I think much of the talk about rape being about power stems from rape counsellors and self-help books trying to convince victims. Rather than the power idea having anything to do with the attacker, it is because the victim feels powerless after the event, and there is an industry built around that feeling.

I have no doubt that some rapists want power over their victim. But I suspect the primary urge is sexual.

 

[James R]

Adam, you're welcome to that view, but for the benefit of others who are already confused, I'd like to note here that I do not agree with you that the prime motive for rape is necessarily sexual. It is probably more complex than that.

 

[Adam]

James R

Think about our millions of years of evolution. Think about the role rape might have played in it. Whether you believe humans lived in packs with an alpha male, or lived always with pairings, rape would have been the method by which those normally without the opportunity to breed got their chance.

 

[The Marquis]

OK, This I find interesting.

Originally posted by Absurd

Maybe, maybe not, depending on how you construe "power". If rape is an adaptation, then rape is clearly about sex insofar as it was selected for because it allows males to reproduce in otherwise unfavorable circumstances. In and of itself, this does not amount to a power relation. Qui bono in the forced mating behavior? Not the male, but the male's genes. Reproduction need not be useful to the individual organisms that reproduce, and the male is not in any sense empowered by the behavior.

So males rape because rape is an adaptation to an environment where it is difficult to reproduce.

If we look at this in evolutionary terms, why would rape become an adaptation in the first place though? A species reproduces by sex. In some adaptations this leads to an "Alpha Male" being the only one allowed to reproduce, which according to evolutionary theory might have come about to propagate the genes of the most "suitable" male. Would this same species then evolve again in order to allow the lower males to reproduce as well, via rape? Does evolution circle back on itself in this way? I'm still thinking my way through this. I'm trying to find a situation in which rape would have "evolved" in this way without finding ourselves in a situation as described above, where we appear to have an adaptation occuring to cancel the effects of a previous adaptation.

*edit to add - Would it be possible that rape has evolved as a social answer to a genetic adaptation? Or am I getting confused in assuming that the "alpha male" didn't evolve as a social adaptation to a biological imperative in the first place?

The reason why I say that this is no good, and why I agree with you that "the desire for sex is only a prelude to a power issue" is that this is an idealized scenario that excludes from the analysis the most significant aspect of the human phenotype - culture. We humans will necessarily incorporate aspects of our biology into our way of life. We will attach meanings and values to them that Darwinian selection could not. Sometimes this will reinforce the biology, and other times this will overpower it (culture will always be on Wilson's leash, but the leash is infinitely long). One can easily imagine a primitive society that places high value on reproduction: a society where the amount of progeny influences social standing, say. Males disposed to rape (for mindless evolutionary reasons) will quickly discover positive reinforcement for their behavior, and the rape-power relationship will develop from that point on.

I see your point here, I don't really have much argument with it. But I think we're getting a little sidetracked from the main issue. Originally, when I stated that rape is about power, I was not really paying much attention to the why's of this, but more to the fact that it is. To me, it doesn't matter much for the purposes of this discussion why rape evolved in the first place (although that is proving to be an interesting topic as well). As it has evolved, it is now an expression of power, in the sense that the male is taking something which he is, for whatever reason, otherwise denied.

I think we can all agree that in the majority of cases, there is no rape without sex, but again, this seems like a trivial point to me. Perhaps we could frame the question as, "what is it that distinguishes men who rape from men who do not?" I doubt "wanting sex" will sound like a plausible answer then.

Yes, exactly.

 

[Tyler]

"Of course it helps. We can't examine an action like rape and hope to determine causes without considering why rapists think they do it, surely?"

Hardly, and I won't dispute that. I mearly point out that it is not proof (or even much evidence) that rape is about sex because rapists say so. I believe studying their responses is integral, but hardly proof of any reasoning they may believe they use.

 

[MacZ]

Just to play devil's advocate, or whatever, here, the feeling I get is that behind the discussion is an image of the dedicated, predatory rapist - the one who makes it a mission, premeditates and all that.

I think the rapists aren't getting full consideration. That is, they could fall into any number of categories":

The opportunist burglar - finds a woman in the house
Date rapist - just can't stop himself
Husbands...

 

[pumpkinsaren'torange]

i'm a woman, and, i disdain anything that has to do with the feminist movement. i think they are full of hate, and, the sad thing is, they dodn't even realize it.

 

[EvilPoet]

Originally posted by pumpkinsaren'torange
i'm a woman, and, i disdain anything that has to do with the
feminist movement. i think they are full of hate, and, the sad
thing is, they dodn't even realize it.

"He who fights monsters should look to it that he himself does
not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss
the abyss also gazes into you." -Friedrich Nietzsche

 

[Bebelina]

About power. It's one thing to have it, but it's a totally different thing to use it.

 

[Absurd]

Originally posted by James R

Look again at what I did contribute (see above). I said that militant feminists think rape is only about power. I note you conveniently miss the point yet again by ignoring the most important word: "only".

The reason why I "ignore" it is that I am still confused as to what your use of it is supposed to mean. As I said before, there are many banal reasons why rape cannot be "only" about power (and presumably "not at all" about sex). One such banal reason is that rape almost always involves sexual arousal on the rapist's part and intercourse. Surely there are no feminists (militant or otherwise) who would disagree with this observation. Is there any textual evidence of the existence of such people?

If what we want to express with the statement that rape is "about" this or that is a description of the act, then sex is "part of the answer". But this is not an answer that tells us something we do not already know. The desire for sex may be a proximal cause of rape, but it does not help us explain why it occurs (just as paranoid feelings are a proximal cause of behavior associated with paranoid schizophrenia, but do not help us explain it; rather, they themselves require explanation). Presumably, when we ask what rape is ultimately "about" we are looking for more distal causes that will tell us why not everyone who wants to get laid is a rapist. Obviously, the desire for sex is a nonstarter.

Obviously, if my point was "trivial and largely irrelevant" we wouldn't be having this discussion, would we?

No, not quite. The point that "all militant feminists believe that rape is only about power" is trivial and irrelevant, but that is not the point I read you as making, and that is why we are having this discussion.

I agree that anybody who believes rape is <b>only</b> about power has been influenced by militant feminism. It is a pity that you, Xev and Marquis didn't read carefully enough to note the word "only".

I still fail to understand what it means to believe that rape is "only" about power the way you think some feminists do. Would these feminists say that sexual arousal and intercourse play no part in rape, or would you say that sexual arousal and intercourse help explain rape in some way or another that they have missed? If your point is the latter, then it doesn't seem nearly as obvious as you make it out to be.