Rape?

[Me Myself]

Nothing is ever mutually exclusive. With date rape, it probably isn't, for example.

With rape in general. It is a crime of sex. If there is no sexual element involved, it is not rape. If the aggressor wasnt deliberately targeting the victims sexual areas, its not rape.

 

[Titanic]

Who has ever said that? You claim that a notorious liar said so, but haven't told us where you got that information or why you think he was being honest on that single occasion.

I got it from his wiki. I do not know for sure if he was being truthful but I think he was. The reason why is cause, how could he have gotten sex any other way? He had only one real eye and was a broke vagrant for most of his life.

 

[Alceste]

I am a determinist, but that`s another discussion altogether.

The thing is that while sexual gratificaton alone doesnt force everyone to rape, anger alone doesnt force everyone to rape either. It takes a specific kind of mix of motivations and person for that.

You said you were fighting the nonsensical claim that lack of sex means someone has NO OPTION but to rape, did you think I was saying that?

You gave an example earlier where some hypothetical guy wants to have consensual sex with a specific woman and she turns him down, so he has no choice but to drug and rape her. Generally speaking, rapists don't bother with the effort to get any consensual sex lined up, they just go straight to planning the rape, since that's what they want.

 

[Me Myself]

I got it from his wiki. I do not know for sure if he was being truthful but I think he was. The reason why is cause, how could he have gotten sex any other way? He had only one real eye and was a broke vagrant for most of his life.

Sure, maybe he was. Psycopaths tend to have serious social issues, so I doubt he could have persuaded a girl to overlook his appeareance by attractive talking.

What is important to keep in mind is that for a person to actually rape another one because of sexual urge alone, such person must have practically 0 empathy which is of course a psychological imbalance (and a strong one).

Not that I can imagine anyone psychologically sound raping another one.

 

[Me Myself]

You gave an example earlier where some hypothetical guy wants to have consensual sex with a specific woman and she turns him down, so he has no choice but to drug and rape her. Generally speaking, rapists don't bother with the effort to get any consensual sex lined up, they just go straight to planning the rape, since that's what they want.

I notice an evolution in your way of tackling the issue.

Well, he had a choice, he could just have let it go wank it away and seeked for another woman. Its what a psychologically sound person would do. We were under the premise that Mr Smith was not psychologically sound.

 

[ChristineES]

With rape in general. It is a crime of sex. If there is no sexual element involved, it is not rape. If the aggressor wasnt deliberately targeting the victims sexual areas, its not rape.

We've discussed this before on a different thread- although it involves sex, I believe it isn't really a sexual act as much as an act of violence. People aren't raping others for sexual satisfaction, for the most part, but he or she wants to harm the person in an intimate way. It isn't always that- date rape, as I mentioned, might be a about sexual gratification- but even then it is murky- because date rape is terribly wrong, too.

 

[Debater Slayer]

There is no "rather". Both are causes of rape.

An asexual sociopath is unlikely to rape anyone.

The mix of sexual urge and lack of empathy might cause rape.

Other mixes are sexual urge and anger, sexual urge and hate or desire to dominate or subjugate, etc.

Now an asecual sociopath might still rape someone with a motivation of anger or some other motivation.

The thing is that sexyual urge is one of the many possible main/secondary causes of rape cases.

The point I'm making is that sexual desire alone can't lead to rape, and it's also often not the primary motivator for such. Most people have sexual urges, but most people don't rape anyone if they can't and/or don't have consensual sex.

On the other hand, no one rapes unless they have sociopathic tendencies, anger issues, or a desire to exert power over others against their will. You have one thing that's constant (sexual desire) and another that's variable (sociopathy/anger issues/etc.) between two people; if one of them rapes someone, I think it stands to reason that the variable will be the cause, not the constant.

 

[Alceste]

I got it from his wiki. I do not know for sure if he was being truthful but I think he was. The reason why is cause, how could he have gotten sex any other way? He had only one real eye and was a broke vagrant for most of his life.

I read that wiki. It seems very different to what you read. He killed his mother in an argument over whether he should come home and take care of her, then met a guy he had a homosexual relationship with and they went on a big gay crime spree together, after which he confessed to thousands of murders he didn't commit and perhaps one or two that he did. I didn't see anything in there about lack of sex.

 

[Alceste]

I notice an evolution in your way of tackling the issue.

Well, he had a choice, he could just have let it go wank it away and seeked for another woman. Its what a psychologically sound person would do. We were under the premise that Mr Smith was not psychologically sound.

If he's not psychologically sound, why would he bother trying to get her consent in the first place?

 

[Titanic]

Henry Lee Lucas did have zero empathy. His mass social rejection caused his hate with everyone. Lack of sex was what finally pushed him to his breaking point. He said in his own word's that if he could have gotten sex another way he would not have raped and killed people. This will be the last time I bring it up but it is in all his own word's.

 

[Alceste]

Henry Lee Lucas did have zero empathy. His mass social rejection caused his hate with everyone. Lack of sex was what finally pushed him to his breaking point. He said in his own word's that if he could have gotten sex another way he would not have raped and killed people. This will be the last time I bring it up but it is in all his own word's.

Once again, where are you getting that from? The wiki article I read indicates that he was in a homosexual relationship with his crime buddy and says nothing about lack of sex or raping women. Not in his words or anybody else's.

 

[Me Myself]

The point I'm making is that sexual desire alone can't lead to rape, and it's also often not the primary motivator for such. Most people have sexual urges, but most people don't rape anyone if they can't and/or don't have consensual sex.

On the other hand, no one rapes unless they have sociopathic tendencies, anger issues, or a desire to exert power over others against their will. You have one thing that's constant (sexual desire) and another that's variable (sociopathy/anger issues/etc.) between two people; if one of them rapes someone, I think it stands to reason that the variable will be the cause, not the constant.

sociopathic tendncies alone cant lead to sex either. They also aren`t a motivation.

So if you need your cause to be the only cause, you cant blame socipath for that. I understand any of them have moral codes, mostly so they dont feel too inhuman.

Rape happens when a number of factors coincide.

"About no one rapes unless", that would be similar to saying that the primary cause of all divorces is marriage. No one ever divorces without having been married. The reality is that while that may be shared with all divorces, there are a lot of marriages that dont end on divorce and being married alone would not be the cause of divorce (though you could list it as a cause).

Again, everytime you want to point at one single cause you will fail. Stuff has multiple causes. It`s the way stuff works.

 

[Poisonshady313]

The point I'm making is that sexual desire alone can't lead to rape, and it's also often not the primary motivator for such. Most people have sexual urges, but most people don't rape anyone if they can't and/or don't have consensual sex.

On the other hand, no one rapes unless they have sociopathic tendencies, anger issues, or a desire to exert power over others against their will. You have one thing that's constant (sexual desire) and another that's variable (sociopathy/anger issues/etc.) between two people; if one of them rapes someone, I think it stands to reason that the variable will be the cause, not the constant.

Most people won't rob a bank at gunpoint if they don't have money. But it's fair to suggest that lack of money is a motivating factor in robbing a bank at gunpoint.

Most people would try to get a loan... ask friends and family... get a job... etc...

But the bank robber isn't "most people". He can't get what he wants, so he finds a way to take it. It's criminal, there's no justification for it.

I'll repeat this, there is no justification.

Why when offering a possible motivation does it get turned into an accusation of justification?

Similar to the bank robber being motivated by a(n extreme and/or desperate) lack of funds, the OP suggested that at least some rapists are motivated by a lack of sex. When he can't get what he wants legally, he'll find a way of getting it illegally.

At no point does this position try to excuse the rapist or place blame on the victim.

 

[Alceste]

sociopathic tendncies alone cant lead to sex either. They also aren`t a motivation.

So if you need your cause to be the only cause, you cant blame socipath for that. I understand any of them have moral codes, mostly so they dont feel too inhuman.

Rape happens when a number of factors coincide.

"About no one rapes unless", that would be similar to saying that the primary cause of all divorces is marriage. No one ever divorces without having been married. The reality is that while that may be shared with all divorces, there are a lot of marriages that dont end on divorce and being married alone would not be the cause of divorce (though you could list it as a cause).

Again, everytime you want to point at one single cause you will fail. Stuff has multiple causes. It`s the way stuff works.

Nobody here is arguing for a single cause. We all accept that there are multiple causes. We're debating whether simply being horny for consensual sex and unable to get it can be reasonably considered a primary cause. To me, considering the fact that relief is always only a wank away, that's silly. Exactly as silly as saying hunger should be considered the primary cause of cannibalism in cases where there's lots of food in the fridge.

 

[Me Myself]

If he's not psychologically sound, why would he bother trying to get her consent in the first place?

Its less risky.

His psychological problem is lack of caring for others feelings, not disregard for his own well being (that tends to be the most important and only important thing for a person such as this). If its consensual he has no problem. The husband may find out but he doesnt care, let him shout a little, he gets too violent and Mr Smith calls the authority. Since the moment he did something against the law, he did something very risky that he would have prefered not doing. (out of selfish self prevention alone and entirely)

 

[Me Myself]

Nobody here is arguing for a single cause. We all accept that there are multiple causes. We're debating whether simply being horny for consensual sex and unable to get it can be reasonably considered a primary cause. To me, considering the fact that relief is always only a wank away, that's silly. Exactly as silly as saying hunger should be considered the primary cause of cannibalism in cases where there's lots of food in the fridge.

Why do people buy sex dolls?

 

[Alceste]

Most people won't rob a bank at gunpoint if they don't have money. But it's fair to suggest that lack of money is a motivating factor in robbing a bank at gunpoint.

Most people would try to get a loan... ask friends and family... get a job... etc...

But the bank robber isn't "most people". He can't get what he wants, so he finds a way to take it. It's criminal, there's no justification for it.

I'll repeat this, there is no justification.

Why when offering a possible motivation does it get turned into an accusation of justification?

Similar to the bank robber being motivated by a(n extreme and/or desperate) lack of funds, the OP suggested that at least some rapists are motivated by a lack of sex. When he can't get what he wants legally, he'll find a way of getting it illegally.

At no point does this position try to excuse the rapist or place blame on the victim.

I think the most successful and persistent bank robbers are the bankers themselves, and they've got plenty of money.

 

[Me Myself]

Most people won't rob a bank at gunpoint if they don't have money. But it's fair to suggest that lack of money is a motivating factor in robbing a bank at gunpoint.

Most people would try to get a loan... ask friends and family... get a job... etc...

But the bank robber isn't "most people". He can't get what he wants, so he finds a way to take it. It's criminal, there's no justification for it.

I'll repeat this, there is no justification.

Why when offering a possible motivation does it get turned into an accusation of justification?

Similar to the bank robber being motivated by a(n extreme and/or desperate) lack of funds, the OP suggested that at least some rapists are motivated by a lack of sex. When he can't get what he wants legally, he'll find a way of getting it illegally.

At no point does this position try to excuse the rapist or place blame on the victim.

This.

Also sometimes the bank robber just wants to be rich. He doesnt even need the money. He just really wants it and is an a*****

 

[Titanic]

I do not have a reply back I know i read it somewhere.

 

[Me Myself]

I think the most successful and persistent bank robbers are the bankers themselves, and they've got plenty of money.

But not "enough"