Not to stray off topic, but I generally read debate threads more than I post in them; it's not specific just to this thread or anything.
In the case of this particular thread, though, it seems to me that the same arguments have been repeated throughout the thread and repeatedly addressed as well, which makes me wonder if I should really repeat my arguments and say the same things over and over (especially since I think some people here have thoroughly elaborated on the same counter-arguments to the OP's position that I'd make if I posted).
Anyway, back on the topic of the OP: Since it seems to me that the same arguments keep getting repeated here, I'll try to address the main ones in detail. This will most likely include some unavoidable reiteration of things I've already posted, albeit with some more detail this time around.
• I think the comparison of rape to satisfy supposed sexual desires to car theft, bank robberies, or organ-selling is inaccurate. Not only are the supposed objects of desire different but the underlying logic seems flawed as well.
Let's imagine two people, A and B, seeking monetary gain through different means: A works hard at a full-time job to earn money, while B decides to steal money instead of trying to earn it through his or her own work. The means of getting money are different, but the two people still seek the same thing: money. B obtains it through less ethical means than A, but that doesn't change the
object they both try to obtain.
In the car theft scenario, it's basically the same thing: A wants a car, and B wants a car. A legally buys one, while B steals one. Again: They both seek to have the same thing but through different means which aren't equally ethical.
On the other hand, a person who desires consensual sex and a person who rapes someone
do not have the same object of desire. Clearly, for someone to actually rape another person, they would have to have more issues than being "too horny." Basically, I think that saying people who don't have sex may get "too horny to control themselves" puts all people who don't have sex and/or are celibate in a negative light: if we take that assumption as true, then it seems to follow from it that people shouldn't feel safe around single or celibate people because they might be "too horny" and therefore liable to rape someone to satisfy their desires, especially since outside looks alone aren't usually a definite indication of whether or not someone is a sociopath or has the kind of mental issues that may cause them to rape someone.
• Definitions of some words taken straight out of a dictionary without any context whatsoever are generally not very useful, helpful, or clear. Words aren't usually used in a vacuum, so it doesn't seem to me that the definition of a word copy-and-pasted from a dictionary is necessarily the be-all and end-all of the usage of the word.
So, if a dictionary defines rape as a sort of "sexual crime," it doesn't necessarily mean that rapists commit rape due to their sexual desires completely taking control of them and making them too helpless to resist. Pulling definitions out of a dictionary doesn't really settle that one way or the other.
As an example, this is
the definition of sexual harassment taken straight from Dictionary.com:
sexual harassment
noun
unwelcome sexual advances made by an employer or superior, especially when compliance is made a condition of continued employment or advancement.
Origin:
1975–80
Now, does that necessarily speak to the motivation of sexual harassment? Because from what I've seen, men who verbally harass women by yelling obscenities at them, as one example of sexual harassment, don't do it because they are "too horny"; they do it to reinforce their sense of control, humiliate the person they're harassing, and make themselves feel assured in their perceived power over said person. It's especially apparent when a person who has committed sexual assault is arrested and claims that they "wouldn't have done it if her conduct weren't so indecent." (I've actually heard things along those lines, and though they were unconfirmed in that particular instance, some people do make such arguments against victims of sexual harassment or assault.) As if a rapist would care about "proper" or "decent" conduct.
Really, if someone is so horny, which is easier for them: to masturbate or to follow women around and harass them, usually in public? Why would they do such thing that potentially puts them at risk if they are exposed if it's just to satisfy a desire that they could more easily try to satisfy through other means anyway?
• Despite being able to see how someone may not intend to justify rape at all when they argue from the position that sexual desire may be the primary motivator for rape, I also can't overlook how such argument could lead to all sorts of justifications for a rapist's behavior. It's a potential excuse for a rapist who "couldn't control himself," for example, or a rapist who found the way a woman handled herself in public to be "too tempting" and therefore sexually harassed her or raped her (as in the example I mentioned above). Since sexual desire is a natural thing for most people, it could potentially be used as a scapegoat to justify this kind of behavior, even if said justification may be unintentional on the part of some people who argue from that standpoint (i.e., that sexual desire may be the main cause of someone's losing control and committing rape).
• Admittedly, I haven't read every single post in this thread in detail, so it's possible that there were arguments I didn't address in this post. If so, then I'll try to address them when/if I re-read through the thread, if they are reposted later, or if someone who holds an opposite viewpoint links back to them in response to later posts in this thread (or in response to this one).
For the record, I will never name you or share anything you tell me in private with anyone else on the forum. It's not my style.
