Should a potential rape wictim be allowed to use deadly force?

[Acim]

Ignorant? It is about perception. Men are not perceived as victims in a rape where as women are. Men have no rights or say in an abortion because their input into the pregnancy is completely null and void where the wish of the woman are concerned.

I understand that perception.

It is ignorant.

Also, you are talking about how that ignorance translates into idea that men have no say on rape, which is perpetuating ignorance. Men can certainly be raped. If rape means (only) vaginal penetration, then a) men cannot be raped and b) not all women who meet with sexual predator are being raped and c) this means we might want to distinguish this as clearly as possible in consideration of this thread.

The final intent is what we are talking about here and it is the victims perception of that intent that leads to their reaction.

You are not talking about final intent. I think you think you are, but someone who is acting outwardly aggressive about sex is demonstrating an intent. That could lead to a few things (perhaps whole bunch), but I really think seeing this as only a rape issue, and seeing that as only a woman issue, is narrow approach that cannot be appropriately judged. To the degree we allow for 'shoot first, ask questions later,' would allow for rather violent and despondent society. It essentially tells would be rapists, plan on killing them or you will be killed. I'm not saying, rapist would not do it if we didn't have this 'fight back attitude' and I do realize you and others are doing all you can to get across that because rapist may kill, then killing them needs to be an option. I really do get that. But what I don't think you and some others are getting is that violence is not going to solve the matter, and in many ways could exacerbate the problem. A person (would be victim) could be taught to hurt / subdue instead. That might not stop all, and even that isn't best solution. But to jump to "kill or be killed" sends a message to all of society, and certain faction that essentially is saying, "if I can do rape, yeah, I think I can do killing too."

Sexual assault is sexual assault but the penetration is the ultimate violation of a woman's (or mans) person gets into rape. The act of destroying a person and degrading them by stripping away their choice where an act of sex is concerned. Molestation is on another level completely and best talked about in another thread.

I apologize to anyone reading, but I can't go along with "destroying a person." That doesn't mean I don't realize significance of violation that rape is, but I do believe healing is possible, and redemption (of sorts) is achievable.

I am also going to ask you a question and do realize I am probably not going to get a truthful answer and that is fine because I do not expect one.

Have you ever been raped? I mean forced to preform sexual acts or forced to accept someone into you? Have you been forcibly sodomized? Have you been forced to preform oral sex on another person?

By this definition - no.
By another definition (less emphasis on physical force) - yes.

I am fortunate enough to have never been a victim but I know one man and three women who have been sexually violated (molested) and three women who have been raped.

Two of the four molestation victims turned out fine and two are still dealing with it decades later. One has been very promiscuous and had some major emotional issues that are directly to the violation.

The two that have been raped are opposites. One is very passive and kind but has some socialization issues and the other is strong and her strength helped her daughters who were also raped.

I have seen up close the innocence stripped from a child as well as the confidence and self esteem stripped from a woman causing her to withdraw and attempt suicide. You seem to be twisting and making light of a very real problem.

I can understand why you say this. But I have familiarity with this topic as well. Perhaps not as much as you, then again, maybe more. Not sure if there is ******* contest in there that I'd care to get into. You seem to me to be twisting and making things darker than need be to find actual solution (in society) and real healing for individual(s).

Have you been there and/or do you know the real impact? Have you felt a childs tears and seen them grow up dealing with it always feeling they have something to be ashamed of? Have you?

Yes.

Your arguments are completely illogical as it directly pertains to this thread and the fact is if it were that easy we would see more of it. It is already legal to defend yourself and use deadly force if necessary.

Do not make a game of this.

I do not. And given how sensitive you appear, I simply do not feel I can speak as openly on this thread, perhaps on this site as I would like to. I've been down this road before on other forums, and people (like you) are fully convinced their way of understanding the hurt and pain is only way to understand this issue. That what I'm bringing to the table is 'airy fairy, wishful thinking mumbo jumbo.' Well, for now, I'm backing off on how utterly direct I would confront your ill fated logic and cut through such BS that I observe (not just think, but observe based on perpetual BS reasoning) is making things worse.

Fortunately there is more than one way to resolve this issue in way that I am getting across, but in the intellectual one that we are having, I assure you that whatever venom you can bring to the table, I can make you look like little school kid who simply doesn't know any better. Again, I've been down this road and seen how sensitive types will get bent out of shape if anyone dare question their inferiority complex masking as superior understanding. Me, I feel sense of righteousness in how I relate to this issue, but realize I get to continue living in 'your world' where might is right, and kill or be killed is the 'good logic' we all get to agree on. When the 'bad guys' use this logic, we are quick to call them bad and evil, but when the good guys use this logic, we make up half *** excuses of how totally right we are in demonstrating use of force, as way to resolve issues.

With all this said, I'm bowing out. I'll monitor this thread perhaps for awhile, but I just don't see realistic solution that changes anything coming about here. Doesn't even change perceptions, doesn't really address reality. It is playing a game of another sort, and one where 'winners' are kept hidden while 'losers' get to see reflection of themselves in mirror they call 'enemy.'

 

[Archer]

I understand that perception.

It is ignorant.

Also, you are talking about how that ignorance translates into idea that men have no say on rape, which is perpetuating ignorance. Men can certainly be raped. If rape means (only) vaginal penetration, then a) men cannot be raped and b) not all women who meet with sexual predator are being raped and c) this means we might want to distinguish this as clearly as possible in consideration of this thread.



You are not talking about final intent. I think you think you are, but someone who is acting outwardly aggressive about sex is demonstrating an intent. That could lead to a few things (perhaps whole bunch), but I really think seeing this as only a rape issue, and seeing that as only a woman issue, is narrow approach that cannot be appropriately judged. To the degree we allow for 'shoot first, ask questions later,' would allow for rather violent and despondent society. It essentially tells would be rapists, plan on killing them or you will be killed. I'm not saying, rapist would not do it if we didn't have this 'fight back attitude' and I do realize you and others are doing all you can to get across that because rapist may kill, then killing them needs to be an option. I really do get that. But what I don't think you and some others are getting is that violence is not going to solve the matter, and in many ways could exacerbate the problem. A person (would be victim) could be taught to hurt / subdue instead. That might not stop all, and even that isn't best solution. But to jump to "kill or be killed" sends a message to all of society, and certain faction that essentially is saying, "if I can do rape, yeah, I think I can do killing too."



I apologize to anyone reading, but I can't go along with "destroying a person." That doesn't mean I don't realize significance of violation that rape is, but I do believe healing is possible, and redemption (of sorts) is achievable.



By this definition - no.
By another definition (less emphasis on physical force) - yes.



I can understand why you say this. But I have familiarity with this topic as well. Perhaps not as much as you, then again, maybe more. Not sure if there is ******* contest in there that I'd care to get into. You seem to me to be twisting and making things darker than need be to find actual solution (in society) and real healing for individual(s).



Yes.



I do not. And given how sensitive you appear, I simply do not feel I can speak as openly on this thread, perhaps on this site as I would like to. I've been down this road before on other forums, and people (like you) are fully convinced their way of understanding the hurt and pain is only way to understand this issue. That what I'm bringing to the table is 'airy fairy, wishful thinking mumbo jumbo.' Well, for now, I'm backing off on how utterly direct I would confront your ill fated logic and cut through such BS that I observe (not just think, but observe based on perpetual BS reasoning) is making things worse.

Fortunately there is more than one way to resolve this issue in way that I am getting across, but in the intellectual one that we are having, I assure you that whatever venom you can bring to the table, I can make you look like little school kid who simply doesn't know any better. Again, I've been down this road and seen how sensitive types will get bent out of shape if anyone dare question their inferiority complex masking as superior understanding. Me, I feel sense of righteousness in how I relate to this issue, but realize I get to continue living in 'your world' where might is right, and kill or be killed is the 'good logic' we all get to agree on. When the 'bad guys' use this logic, we are quick to call them bad and evil, but when the good guys use this logic, we make up half *** excuses of how totally right we are in demonstrating use of force, as way to resolve issues.

With all this said, I'm bowing out. I'll monitor this thread perhaps for awhile, but I just don't see realistic solution that changes anything coming about here. Doesn't even change perceptions, doesn't really address reality. It is playing a game of another sort, and one where 'winners' are kept hidden while 'losers' get to see reflection of themselves in mirror they call 'enemy.'

I am sorry but your entire post is full of ignorance. I know hat these people go through up close and personal. I have seen and do see the effects and for some people they are life long.

Imagine being held down, unable to fight and being stripped of all dignity and humanity. I hope you find out first hand. Yes I want to hear your story then. Find someone and ask them.

 

[beenie]

If you haven't been raped (God forbid) then I don't think you can pass judgment on healing and redemption.

 

[Archer]

Fortunately there is more than one way to resolve this issue in way that I am getting across, but in the intellectual one that we are having, I assure you that whatever venom you can bring to the table, I can make you look like little school kid who simply doesn't know any better. Again, I've been down this road and seen how sensitive types will get bent out of shape if anyone dare question their inferiority complex masking as superior understanding. Me, I feel sense of righteousness in how I relate to this issue, but realize I get to continue living in 'your world' where might is right, and kill or be killed is the 'good logic' we all get to agree on. When the 'bad guys' use this logic, we are quick to call them bad and evil, but when the good guys use this logic, we make up half *** excuses of how totally right we are in demonstrating use of force, as way to resolve issues.

You know this gets me. So catch my PM.

 

[MoonWater]

Hmm, I am sensing disagreement with many in this thread, so I'll continue to ask a few more questions.

1 - Does your position change at all if it is woman raping a man?

2 - Let's say it was woman raping a man (or allegedly raping a man) and man killed the woman, but there was say just a slight cut on his forearm. His story is, he clearly said no 5 times, she came at him with sense of force, they struggled, him grabbing her forearms, and he decided, forget this, I'm shooting her. Fully justified in your opinion?

3 - Let's say woman is allegedly threatened with rape, but has nothing physical to show she was attacked. Again, if we go with hypothetical situation of post #5, here is the scenario:



The underlined parts leave a bit to be understood clearly. In this thread, I think pre-conceived notion is if it is man on woman rape, the woman would know when it is time to pull trigger, and shoot (to kill). But if it were female on man (and let's just assume man is thinking he is physically stronger, but instead is going with what majority of this thread is suggesting), would it be okay if man shot woman who 'continues to approach him' in aggressive way for sex?

4 - Do you think there would ever be situation where person who kills alleged rapist, would be held accountable in way that amounts to involuntary manslaughter of something along those charges? Think of situation where woman (or man) has no physical marks on her (or his) body to show attack, but the story is one that says it was necessary to shoot this person. Would you say any charges ought to be brought against the person who did the killing, or in most, if not all cases, absolutely no charges?

5 - On reread, I guess I overlooked idea of homosexual rape as well. An aggressive woman going after another woman, or man against another man. So think of questions 1 thru 4 in that vein and let me know what, if anything, might change for you?

The way I see it the gender of either the victim or the perpetrator doesn't matter. If someone is trying to rape you and lethal force is the only way out or you end up accidentally killing them while trying to defend yourself you are still fully justified. Men are usually stronger than women and as such may not need to resort to lethal force against a female attacker as a woman would against a male attacker as it would usually be easier for him to overpower her provided she doesn't have a weapon of some kind. If no marks are left behind, or very few are, then likely the victim of the attack in this case would be charged though personally I don't think they should. A simple claim of self defense should not be enough to let someone go scott free and I understand these things are often very difficult to prove, particularly if someone has no injuries or only minor ones. Plus society tends to side with the woman over the man in cases like this.

Still, idealy, and in my own opinion, you have every right to take whatever means are necessary to defend yourself from a potential rapist. To me the gender of those involved doesn't even matter.

Though I can certainly understand the bias towards women in this case. it's just so ******* stupid and horribly terrifying to think that the simple fact that I was born female makes me about 75% more likely to be sexually assaulted in my life time. God, it sucks.

 

[Alceste]

It's disturbing how it seems to be in vogue to portray victims as the criminals and criminals as the victims. That and rape apologetics.

It disturbs me just as much to see everybody gleefully venting their private, violent rape / retribution fantasies in public, regardless of the reality that the vast majority of sexual assaults amount to awkward, fumbling, uncomfortable miscommunications gone wrong.

 

[Archer]

It disturbs me just as much to see everybody gleefully venting their private, violent rape / retribution fantasies in public, regardless of the reality that the vast majority of sexual assaults amount to awkward, fumbling, uncomfortable miscommunications gone wrong.

The question in the thread is "should they be allowed" not "should they".

Yes there are strong personal feelings on this but I do not think anyone has suggested that blowing brains all over the floor is the first solution.

A tip on self defense: When you weigh 120lbs and go against someone that is much larger, stronger, full of hate and can take some punches you are as good as dead or attacked in the least. I had someone that knows Chuck tell me that "A street fighter will take out a better Karate man".

So physical contact self defense should be used as a final resort.

The steps to save yourself are:

Escape and evade and if you have a weapon get it at this phase.

Next is threaten and, if necessary, use your ranged weapon because it has not deterred your attacker.

As far as self defense for a smaller person. You need to make your first hit count because if you are close enough to strike they are close enough to subdue you. When they have you they have you and there is not much you can do about it other than a headbutt to the face and struggling.

So the safest thing is to get away, used ranged weapons and then and only then fight.







I personally do not believe and sexual predator deserves life and would gladly volunteer my time to slit their throats if there was a need for a person to do it for the state.

 

[pwfaith]

It disturbs me just as much to see everybody gleefully venting their private, violent rape / retribution fantasies in public, regardless of the reality that the vast majority of sexual assaults amount to awkward, fumbling, uncomfortable miscommunications gone wrong.

Could you expound on the bolded?

 

[pwfaith]

The question in the thread is "should they be allowed" not "should they".

Yes there are strong personal feelings on this but I do not think anyone has suggested that blowing brains all over the floor is the first solution.

A tip on self defense: When you weigh 120lbs and go against someone that is much larger, stronger, full of hate and can take some punches you are as good as dead or attacked in the least. I had someone that knows Chuck tell me that "A street fighter will take out a better Karate man".

I sat in on a self-defense class that my son & daughters karate class offered during one of their weekend seminars. I wasn't sure I wanted to take it so I just sat in for a bit. I WILL be taking it next time though, great stuff. But I was initially shocked to see one of the female black belt instructors among all the women in there. I thought "holy crap, you wouldn't think she needed this class" until the instructor teaching the class, introduced herself as another black belt and proceeded to show everyone why none of that mattered in the heat of an attack. It was very interesting. She showed how with karate most of the moves are from a slight distance whereas generally with an attack you are skin to skin, you don't have the distance to get in some of your good karate moves to disable the attacker. I can't wait to take the class next time it is offered. I learned a lot about myths women are often told about using pepper spray and their keys too.

 

[Archer]

I sat in on a self-defense class that my son & daughters karate class offered during one of their weekend seminars. I wasn't sure I wanted to take it so I just sat in for a bit. I WILL be taking it next time though, great stuff. But I was initially shocked to see one of the female black belt instructors among all the women in there. I thought "holy crap, you wouldn't think she needed this class" until the instructor teaching the class, introduced herself as another black belt and proceeded to show everyone why none of that mattered in the heat of an attack. It was very interesting. She showed how with karate most of the moves are from a slight distance whereas generally with an attack you are skin to skin, you don't have the distance to get in some of your good karate moves to disable the attacker. I can't wait to take the class next time it is offered. I learned a lot about myths women are often told about using pepper spray and their keys too.

There is nothing wrong with that but honestly I feel Judo would or some type of MMA would be better.

Just remember when an attacker is coming at you and they are larger their goal is not to fight it is to subdue. One well placed strike can end it and in some cases kill.

It is better to kill or disable with a gun center of mass than a one strike kill or a head shot with a gun. A good prosecuting attorney can tear it up and say you were good enough to kill so you have shown you could have disabled.

Back to my point. No self defense class in the world is going to stop a larger determined attacker; unless you get lucky. Only years of practice and even then if you are close enough to strike you can be stricken. Best to avoid any physical contact.

Here is an example: If an attacker in reasonably good shape with a height of 6'2" and 260 pounds came after you how could you defend? Black belt? Well your distance weapon is your legs and legs are slow compared to hands though they can do more damage. Now you kick at this guy, he takes the blow, catches the leg and puts you down. It is brawling time and you will lose unless you get lucky.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Yes. Absolutely yes.

In fact, there might be a moral imperative for a woman to kill her attacker if possible. Get rid of some scum.

 

[Alceste]

Could you expound on the bolded?

The majority are committed by people who do not understand or cannot accept a sexual rejection. For example the husband who coerces his wife when she is not in the mood, or the boyfriend who settles a disagreement on how long to wait before having sex by force. In these situations the rapist has severely miscalculated the wishes of his victim, opted to ignore them out of selfishness, or incorrectly assumed that the victim will change her mind once things get underway.

 

[Alceste]

Yes. Absolutely yes.

In fact, there might be a moral imperative for a woman to kill her attacker if possible. Get rid of some scum.

We can't really support such a dramatic gender disparity in population.

 

[.lava]

my answer is of course

.

 

[Meow Mix]

I say that the potential rapist is going to rue the day when they find themselves nailed to a tree stump by a certain body part and handed a rusty, dull butterknife when said stump is set on fire. They then have a choice.

More seriously, since I'm at a huge disadvantage with rapists (I'm a mute; and so can't call for help... and I'm not very strong or tough, regardless of how much trash I talk ), you'd better believe I'd unload on them if I had a pistol in my hands and never regret it.

 

[Father Heathen]

I say that the potential rapist is going to rue the day when they find themselves nailed to a tree stump by a certain body part and handed a rusty, dull butterknife when said stump is set on fire. They then have a choice.

More seriously, since I'm at a huge disadvantage with rapists (I'm a mute; and so can't call for help... and I'm not very strong or tough, regardless of how much trash I talk ), you'd better believe I'd unload on them if I had a pistol in my hands and never regret it.

You mean you would murder someone over an innocent misunderstanding?!


(I'm being sarcastic, btw. )

 

[Father Heathen]

It disturbs me just as much to see everybody gleefully venting their private, violent rape / retribution fantasies in public, regardless of the reality that the vast majority of sexual assaults amount to awkward, fumbling, uncomfortable miscommunications gone wrong.

Not even worth taking seriously...

Alceste, you obviously don't know anyone who has been a victim of rape, so let's not speak about things we know nothing about, 'k? 'k.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It disturbs me just as much to see everybody gleefully venting their private, violent rape / retribution fantasies in public, regardless of the reality that the vast majority of sexual assaults amount to awkward, fumbling, uncomfortable miscommunications gone wrong.

Heck, that applies to the vast majority of consensual sexual acts as well.

Seriously, I think it's a rather moot question, as, in my experience, the type of person that would use deadly force to defend themselves against rape, probably wouldn't be in the position of being raped anyway.

 

[Archer]

Heck, that applies to the vast majority of consensual sexual acts as well.

Seriously, I think it's a rather moot question, as, in my experience, the type of person that would use deadly force to defend themselves against rape, probably wouldn't be in the position of being raped anyway.

True in many cases but I know someone who works in a bad area. I would say assault or robbery before raps but the potential is there.

 

[Alceste]

Heck, that applies to the vast majority of consensual sexual acts as well.

Seriously, I think it's a rather moot question, as, in my experience, the type of person that would use deadly force to defend themselves against rape, probably wouldn't be in the position of being raped anyway.

Well, this may be true. My friends who have experienced rape at the hands of their boyfriends, friends, family or acquaintances did not mention attempting to seriously injure their attackers to avoid the rape. Maybe could have ended the assault if they were willing to go for the eyes or something. Then again, maybe it would have come out even worse for them if they put up more of a fight because the rapist would have fought back. Who knows? All we can do is look at the statistical norm, which is that the VAST majority of rapes are perpetrated by people the victim knows well, cares about and probably does not want to harm, like a husband. That's not what most people think of when it comes to rape, though. They prefer to contemplate the extremely rare but far more titillating idea of rape by a masked stranger leaping out of a dark alleyway.