Rape?

[Alceste]

Which is exactly why it should be included in both ( in many instances ).
Which is exactly why rape is not called merely 'sex', but rather 'forced sex' or 'non-consensual sex'.

It's not called either of those things. It's called sexual assault. Sex is inherently consensual. Police brutality isn't a fight, even though most of the observable of physical actions involved are identical. A mugging isn't a donation, even though both involve the transfer of money from one person to another. A robbery isn't banking, even though both involve getting money from a bank. A war of aggression isn't diplomacy, even though both might achieve certain foreign policy objectives. Incest isn't parenting, even though it happens between a parent and a child. Bullying isn't playing, even though it's something kids do on a playground.

You get my point, I'm sure. Consent is fundamental to our entire social contract and criminal justice system. When we do something through force or aggression that is otherwise considered normal, healthy behavior, we use a different term for it and conceptualize it as a completely different issue. Violence. Aggression. Force. Domination. Cruelty. Injustice. These factors fundamentally alter our perception of the behavior.

What the handful of lads who insist rape is sex, or about sex, or caused by sexual desire, etc. are doing is requesting an exemption for male on female sexual assault, but without giving any reason why that behavior should be singled out for special treatment except to argue that men get really horny sometimes and would rather use an entire human female body for release than masturbate.

I'm not cooperating, as I'm sure you can see.

 

[Alceste]

I meant sex.

Then what you want is to meet a human female woman who desires you and finds you attractive. What does that have to do with how horny you are, or how long it's been since the last time you had sex, or the psychological causes of sexual assault?

If you're single and lonely at 20-something, you're completely normal. When you get horny, have a wank. When you meet somebody who wants to have sex with you, have sex. It's that simple.

If you truly can't bear your loneliness, get a hobby or a therapist.

Rape is violence. There's no reason for you to be mulling it over as a possible outlet for your sexual desires unless what you genuinely want has nothing at all to do with sex.

 

[Alceste]

How exactly does my definition disagree with this one?

You may not have noticed, but the FBI definition doesn't even address the question of the feelings or motives of the perpetrator. Like all legal definitions of rape and sexual assault, it is entirely concerned with the issue of consent. There's nothing in there that requires the perpetrator be a man, have an erection, be committing the crime for sexual gratification, etc. It only requires that the assault had a sexualized character (which could just as easily be a broom handle up the bum of a gay bashing victim as a penis in a vagina) and occurs without the other party's consent.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

So am I a bad person for have creating this thread?

I don't think so. I also don't think anybody is a bad person if there is disagreement. But I do have great concern for those who confuse rape with sex. I'm strongly committed to helping to educate others in the hopes that rape is better understood as an act of violence.

You asked a provocative question as the OP. But considering your follow up statements and questions, I also think you have been misled. But as evidenced by other responders in this thread, I don't think you're alone, either.

 

[Titanic]

To Alceste, Did I really say I was mulling it over? cause i am not. Sorry if i gave you the wrong idea about me.

 

[Titanic]

To Mystic, I thank you for your reply. One last finally question. Do you think lack of sex can be harmful in anyway?

 

[Koldo]

It's not called either of those things.

By whom?
I, and many other people, call it this way on many instances.

It's called sexual assault. Sex is inherently consensual. Police brutality isn't a fight, even though most of the observable of physical actions involved are identical. A mugging isn't a donation, even though both involve the transfer of money from one person to another. A robbery isn't banking, even though both involve getting money from a bank. A war of aggression isn't diplomacy, even though both might achieve certain foreign policy objectives. Incest isn't parenting, even though it happens between a parent and a child. Bullying isn't playing, even though it's something kids do on a playground.

You get my point, I'm sure. Consent is fundamental to our entire social contract and criminal justice system. When we do something through force or aggression that is otherwise considered normal, healthy behavior, we use a different term for it and conceptualize it as a completely different issue. Violence. Aggression. Force. Domination. Cruelty. Injustice. These factors fundamentally alter our perception of the behavior.

What the handful of lads who insist rape is sex, or about sex, or caused by sexual desire, etc. are doing is requesting an exemption for male on female sexual assault, but without giving any reason why that behavior should be singled out for special treatment except to argue that men get really horny sometimes and would rather use an arrow human female body for release than masturbate.

I'm not cooperating, as I'm sure you can see.

There isn't the need for anything else other than usage to justify the use of any particular word.

And i wouldn't say that 'sex' is inherently consensual but rather implicitly consensual.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

No. I asked who was insisting on suggesting that someone can be so desperate they can't help themselves, and they just had to violently attack somebody through rape.

The OP, PoisonShady, MeMyself, Kilgore Trout.

You are not being very clear here on what people agree with you because they separate rape from sex entirely. Could you be more specific?

I'm not the only one in this thread who is able to see that sex and rape are two distinctly separate paradigms. Everyone agrees in this thread on one principle: people get turned on. However, what separates rape from sex is not whether the perpetrator gets turned on, but the consideration for consent.

It really is that simple.

I was not talking about non-consensual ejaculation. But rather non-consensual penetration.

Non-consensual penetration does not equate to sexual gratification. You offered sexual gratification as a motive. If you believe sexual gratification can include non-consensual penetration, this opens the door for legitimizing rape. I suggest re-considering this perspective.

Thanks for reminding me that i shouldn't attempt to use the word 'man' as gender-neutral.

No problem. Women can rape. Men can be victims of rape.

There could be multiple reasons to that.
It is harder to hide a scarring or mark in the face, it is a weak point overall, it is more offensive as your head better represents you than anything else, and so on.

Interestingly, this is a relevant subject on homicide investigations. There is usually a rationale behind the method of choice.

Whatever rationale is considered, people don't tend to ask if the lack of whatever is considered leads to the homicide. People don't tend to ask something like, "Hey, everyone! Can a lack of having toys lead to arson?"...and then people debating furiously over whether or not it's normal, typical, or even relevant for people committing arson because they didn't have enough toys.

I have to disagree.
There are instances where the sexual part is particularly prominent.

No. It isn't. I find the insistence on defining rape as a form of sex dangerous and unethical. It is a perspective that I continue to offer to our kids and to others. And personally, at this point I have come to the conclusion that the criticisms of my views being seen as "naive" is actually quite complimentary considering the possibilities of how else they might be perceived

Look at it this way, it is far preferable to be thought of as "naive" than to be thought of as "dangerous" or "suspicious."

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Many rapes occur without a violent element, so it seems strange to label them as violent. Although, I suppose if we're turning this into a pedantic issue of semantics, then anything is possible. Maybe we could merge this with the "Semantics" thread, as some people had good posts about how people misuse semantics in arguments.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

No. I asked who was insisting on suggesting that someone can be so desperate they can't help themselves, and they just had to violently attack somebody through rape.

The OP, PoisonShady, MeMyself, Kilgore Trout.

I never said any such thing. As I figured, I don't think you thoroughly read my posts and understood my points. Please refrain from attributing things to me which I never said.

 

[Koldo]

You may not have noticed, but the FBI definition doesn't even address the question of the feelings or motives of the perpetrator. Like all legal definitions of rape and sexual assault, it is entirely concerned with the issue of consent. There's nothing in there that requires the perpetrator be a man, have an erection, be committing the crime for sexual gratification, etc. It only requires that the assault had a sexualized character (which could just as easily be a broom handle up the bum of a gay bashing victim as a penis in a vagina) and occurs without the other party's consent.

I have noticed that.
My question still remains though: How exactly does my definition disagree with this one?

 

[Alceste]

To Alceste, Did I really say I was mulling it over? cause i am not. Sorry if i gave you the wrong idea about me.

I've got a tendency to read between the lines. I don't suppose you're planning a rape. However, you've made comments that indicate you may be suffer from the entitlement mentality that is a genuine causal factor for male-on-female rape. Having those attitudes doesn't make you a rapist or an aspiring rapist, but it does mean that you share certain attitudes and opinions in common with all men who commit sexual assault on women. Here are two examples:

I guess hiring a prostitute is probably better than rape.
You know what's even better than hiring a prostitute or raping somebody? 1) Fully understanding that you are not entitled to use a woman's body for your personal sexual gratification just because you really, really want one. 2) Accepting that we don't always get exactly what we want in life and learning to cope with that harsh reality, just like everybody else.

You can only go without sex for so long.
Then what? What do you think is going to happen to you if you have to go longer than a few months without meeting a woman who finds you sexually attractive and is willing to sleep with you? You're going to lose your mind? Get sick? Die? Your **** will fall off? You'll go shoot up a school? If you're between sexual partners and you're horny, have a wank, just like pretty much everybody else on this planet does. It'll put an immediate end to your sexual suffering. There is absolutely nothing sticking your penis into a random human female vagina is going to do for you that you can't do perfectly adequately for yourself.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

To Mystic, I thank you for your reply. One last finally question. Do you think lack of sex can be harmful in anyway?

I think shaming a human being into not enjoying any sexual pleasure is devastating psychologically.

Lack of sex by itself is not harmful. One is free to masturbate freely. In accordance to local privacy laws, of course.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

There is absolutely nothing sticking your penis into a random human female vagina is going to do for you that you can't do perfectly adequately for yourself.

If you think this, then I think it explains the piece of the puzzle that you're missing. Many people find a substantial difference between intercourse and masturbation.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I have noticed that.
My question still remains though: How exactly does my definition disagree with this one?

The distinction is consent, not if somebody is turned on. There's your difference.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

If you think this, then I think it explains the piece of the puzzle that you're missing. Many people find a substantial difference between intercourse and masturbation.

It's not missing. It simply is not relevant.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It's not missing. It simply is not relevant.

She's the one who said it.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

She's the one who said it.

FWIW, I agree with her. Therefore I offered my clarification as well.

 

[Titanic]

I was raised wrong. I was rasied to believe that sex and women were evil. So I may have some problems in that area.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I was raised wrong. I was rasied to believe that sex and women were evil. So I may have some problems in that area.

I've read about your upbringing before, and my heart goes out to you given you were led to believe in such things. :flower: