Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Facebook supports rape?

908 replies

MotherPanda · 04/10/2011 13:53

Have we a thread on this yet?

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/04/facebook-hate-speech-women-rape?newsfeed=true

I am really shocked.

OP posts:
SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 17:30

You are handing a defence to rapists by saying that if they are not

SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 17:29

"However what I am saying that in this day and age I do not buy for one second that anyone can think having a shag with a drunk woman is not a crime. Your argument may give them a defence"

Of course loads of men don't see shagging a drunk woman as a crime.

And now you are saying that I am handing a defence to rapists?

SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 17:28

"I understand that you think rapists believe rape not to be a crime"

I don't think I've said that anywhere on this thread.

SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 17:27

I find your posts circular and contradictory rhubarb.

You say one thing, and when I ask you about it, you say something very different.

SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 17:26

If you look at countries which have extremely high incidences of rape, it's not the case that the men there are more prone to having psychological problems or being evil or whatever it is. They do it because it's something that you do, something that your friends do, it's not a big deal, you're not going to get punished, no-one will think badly of you, it's expected that you do it, maybe it's a rite of passage etc etc.

Men in these countries aren't different to men in other countries - they are simply living in a different culture, a culture where rape is seen as basically normal and an occupational risk of being female.

I think I'm saying the same as proles actually!

The point is that although people like to think we live in a culture where rape is absolutely anathema, we don't. The statistics and surveys about public attitudes show that.

TheRhubarb · 05/10/2011 17:19

I don't mind you disagreeing SQ. What I mind is when my posts are not read properly and people accuse me of being some kind of rape apologist or put words into my mouth that were never uttered or even thought. To be told that I myself said such things about rape and rape victims is abhorrent and hurtful and completely untrue bordering on slander (if this was in my real name).

I understand that you think rapists believe rape not to be a crime. However what I am saying that in this day and age I do not buy for one second that anyone can think having a shag with a drunk woman is not a crime. Your argument may give them a defence, I am saying they do not have one.

Most people do not break the law just because they can, they do so for a reason and that is their motive. The reasons you gave may seem petty reasons for breaking the law, but they are still reasons. If rapists rape because they enjoy it or it is convenient, that is still a motive and they do know they are breaking the law.

SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 17:11

Thing is rhubarb I just disagree with so much of what you post on here today.

eg this

"I have said that I disagree that rapists rape because they can, there is never a crime without a motive. We do not mug because we can, we do not murder because we can. It is a simple excuse that does not wash. But I am accused of making all this up as I go along."

People commit a criminal act when they speed in their car, when they talk on a mobile phone while driving, when they take some ecstacy at the weekend. People do these things because they can - they do not think they will get caught and they don't think they are "that bad". They do not see them as "serious" and do not think punishment is likely and so they just do them. I simply do not agree with your statement above. I just don't think it's true. The motive in these cases is convenience / pleasure / enjoyment / everyone else does it so I'm going to do it too. They aren't motives like the motive for murder, they are everyday "ordinary" motivations.

SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 17:06

Just got in.

Bemybebe yes I think your amendment is what the author meant. It is how I took it - I agree with Kritiq though that some people would argue with her article no matter how things were phrased as they simply don't like what she's saying.

Also wanted to say I am so sorry to read upthread what you went through with those men.

Prolesworth · 05/10/2011 17:06

THIS.

There's plenty of research out there to demonstrate that when people do evil things it is not entirely down to individual pathology, or certain character traits or whatever. It's in large part (imho) down to environmental factors. The most famous example is Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment, and there's also historical evidence (at risk of invoking Godwin's Law - Christopher Browning's "Ordinary Men" about how middle aged reserve policemen were used in WWII to carry out mass executions of jews).

So the argument goes that if we live in what has been called a 'rape culture' where, for example, rape is rarely punished (low conviction rates) and a large proportion of the general public believes that victims are to some extent responsible for being raped (if they have been flirting with the perpetrator, or drinking, or were dressed provocatively), then this creates conditions in which men can and do rape. Not all men, of course. Most men don't. But rape is much more prevalent than reported crime figures suggest. It's simply not realistic to think that all those rapes (most commonly by someone known to the victim, usually an intimate partner) are being perpetrated by a tiny minority of men with a screw loose.

If those conditions were changed - so if rape myths were challenged in a concerted way by the state (through the education system and the media, say), and if there were improvements in the justice system such that rape victims were taken seriously and reported rapes were properly investigated and so on, then this would create a less conducive context for rape to happen. Rape wouldn't disappear overnight of course, but it would no longer be supported by the wider culture (which it is, even if people say otherwise).

That is what Cath Elliott is getting at when she says that rapists rape because they can. Of course that's a simplification, it's a polemic, she is writing to provoke thought and debate, but the problem of rape culture (and the part that tolerance of rape jokes plays in creating that culture) is what she's talking about.

KRITIQ · 05/10/2011 17:03

Jamma, I really think we need to go back to the evidence presented further up that showed that lots of "Mr Averages" when asked what they thought of rape and whether they would do it replied with a resounding no. But, when the same men were presented with a range of scenarios that reflected the legal definition of rape or serious sexual assault (aka penetration of an orifice by something other than a penis without consent,) quite a few were prepared to say that they would engage in that kind of activity.

In short, many men who rape do not see what they do as rape, so don't see themselves as rapists by any stretch of the imagination. If they see a guy convicted of rape on the news, they may feel genuine abhorrence, because they don't see what they have done or would consider doing as anything like what he has done. They might read through some statistics on rape, but they don't see where they apply to them in any shape or form.

In a similar vein, I can think off the top of my head of 4 women I have known who have had experiences that meet the legal definition of rape. None of them define what happened to them as rape, even where they have experienced physical damage, panic attacks, PTSD and other awful things often associated with rape survival. None of the men who carried out the acts has been punished and I doubt any of them would see themselves as rapists.

I would never suggest that men are "prone" to rape unless kept in check by the law, fear of getting caught or lack of opportunity. Men who respect other people's personal and sexual boundaries and respect women as human beings of equal value to men are unlikely to rape because they don't feel entitled to possess, control or subjugate people (usually women) who they see as of less value than they are.

However, there are men who have been socialised to believe women are inferior to men, that men are entitled to the domestic, sexual and other services of women and that exerting power and control over a woman or women is an indicator of masculinity. That doesn't mean they will automatically become rapists. It does mean perhaps that they may be inclined to view forcing/coercing/cajoling/tricking/blackmailing a woman as acceptable but not necessarily as rape. It does mean they are more likely to justify or excuse such behaviour in other men, even if they don't resort to it themselves.

Just because you've been fed misogynistic bullshit all your life doesn't mean you have to accept it unquestionably. There are many men who question, who challenge who refuse to collude with sexist attitudes and activities every day. They're also the kind of guys who won't mew and cry that their feelings have been hurt because someone suggested that "ordinary guys" can also be rapists. They'll see that the greater harm is in the thousands of women, children and men who have their lives pulled apart by rape and sexual assault, who rarely see the perpetrators held accountable for what they have done.

MotherPanda · 05/10/2011 16:32

Sorry to have started this thread and then to run - really glad to see this discussed though.

Some very interesting points.

OP posts:
TheRhubarb · 05/10/2011 16:21

My fault Amor. Apologies. I seem to be a convenient target today.

AmorYCohetes · 05/10/2011 16:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

jamma111 · 05/10/2011 15:58

Theala wrote;

If rapists rape because they can, and they are not any way different from than the average man in the street, the implication is that the average man in the street who hasn't raped anyone, has not done so because he can't, i.e. because he has never had the opportunity.

That is a bit scary, but a valid point. Once again though it could be making a mountain out of a molehill. I don't think anyone is suggesting that 'average man' can be say sitting at home watching the news and sees a report about low rates of conviction for rape and thinks 'hey, I could rape and have a very low probability of arrest/conviction.' In other words Mr Average is constrained from being a rapist only because he has not comprehended the piss-poor rape conviction statistics and calculated his chances accordingly.

TheRhubarb · 05/10/2011 15:56

SQ - you tell me that I am saying that it is victim's fault and when I say that it is not you ask "Why are you bringing victims blaming themselves into it"

So far I have been accused of blaming victims of rape for what happened to them - but without a shred of evidence to back up that offensive and ridiculous claim.

I have been told that I have denied SQ a voice and said her posts are not relevant and that she is incompetent - without any evidence whatsoever that this is what I have done.

I have been told that I am making it all up as I go along.
I have been told that I think women are not raped.

SQ I apologised to you before you asked me to. I would like an apology from the people who made the above assumptions. Because I am sure you can understand how hurtful and untrue those assumptions are.

I have answered every one of your points SQ and others that were made.
My crime was to disagree with you and cite what I have learnt at Uni.
Not in any way did I ever say that SQ's points were not valid, or that rape is made up, or that victims were to blame.

I have stated very clearly that my position is that ALL criminals have characteristics which is what forensic psychologists analyse. I have said that these characteristics might not be readily identifiable and that some criminals are very good at hiding their true intentions. Some posters have taken that to mean that victims are to blame for their own rapes.

I have said that I disagree that rapists rape because they can, there is never a crime without a motive. We do not mug because we can, we do not murder because we can. It is a simple excuse that does not wash. But I am accused of making all this up as I go along.

I have said that rapists are completely unlike the ordinary man in the street. My opinion for which I have been accused of saying that women are not raped and it is all their fault.

I challenge those posters who accused me of such things, to look back at my posts and justify their accusations. Because those are HUGE accusations that are hurtful, offensive and shocking.

I readily apologise again if I upset SQ, I certainly do not think your points any less valid. I would like an apology from those posters who have been so free with their accusations of me.

KRITIQ · 05/10/2011 15:47

Thanks for your reply Jamma. If I get a chance later, I'll look into the research.

In your Wed 05-Oct-11 13:18:05 post, you cite three core attributes that have been identified amongst "acquaintance rapists" (although I don't think there was a citation.)

*A propensity toward violence in problem-solving;
*Aggressiveness in intimate relationships; and
*Being overly demanding of partners.

Imho, those characteristics would be seen by many, in some circumstances to be within the "acceptable" range of "normal" male characteristics, although they might describe them differently. For example, some might slightly re-frame the above characteristics as being assertive, ambitious, driven, standing up for yourself, having a hot temper and in some contexts, actually "positive" attributes" for men to have.

The other problem though is if you've just met a guy at a party, see him every morning on the train, work down the hall from his office, were introduced through a dating site or he's a mate of your bother (or similar), you aren't necessarily going to know whether he harbours any of the above characteristics.

I think rather than expecting women and men to have a "spotters guide to the common rapist," in their pocket at all times, as a society, we should be challenging the sense of entitlement to power, control and sex with regard to women (and men they see as of lower status sometimes,) and not in any way colluding with comments, jokes or situations that support that sense of entitlement.

jamma111 · 05/10/2011 15:22

Kritiq wrote
What would be interesting is to have a list of the traits that "acquaintance rapists" exhibit and see how these stack up against characteristics that are considered within the "normal" range for men. Is there any way you can provide these?

No I can't. It's not an area of study and research I am proficient in, just aware of. But I think the starting point would have to rather be defining what Cath Elliot indicated as the ordinary man in the street. When she used that wide-ranging term, what did she mean by 'ordinary'? Is 'ordinary' interchangeable with 'normal'?

DontCallMeFrothyDragon · 05/10/2011 15:21

Aha, I understand your point now. Thank you, Jamma. DW, I wasn't expecting you to do it from work

jamma111 · 05/10/2011 15:16

'Jamma, I don't think using your athens would be "abusing" the account at all... Where would you get that idea? If you can find the original study (not quoted) online, then go ahead. But if you have access to information, why refrain from using it? I'd just reference it.'

'Cos this is outside my 'proper' work - I'm an anthropologist.

I will have a look for suitable journal papers and try to provide a summary of abstracts, but I'll be doing it from home.

KRITIQ · 05/10/2011 15:06

Hi bemybebe, I can see that adding that wee phrase, "look or act" into the sentence would have made the meaning a bit clearer. But, I still think there would be a swathe of commentators who would still read the sentence for what they wanted it to say, not what it actually said.

Even after the author and other contributors explained that the argument wasn't that "all men are rapists," there were still plenty of contributors who insisted that this was the central point of the article, and therefore, worthy only of derision.

bemybebe · 05/10/2011 14:48

sorry it was you who said it... i was trying to find further upthread Blush

bemybebe · 05/10/2011 14:47

"You can't tell who they are. To all intents and purposes they are ordinary men on the street."

SQ - you have a very valid point. Maybe even this is the point CE was making. Only it read to me differently.

"rapists don't rape because they're somehow evil or perverted or in any way particularly different from than the average man in the street"

They ARE different only as somebody said earlier it can be too late for the victim. Still they are different...

"...rapists don't rape because they're somehow evil or perverted or look or act in any way particularly different from the average man in the street" would be much better.

SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 14:35

And that's the point isn't it. The point that the woman was trying to make in the article. You can't tell who they are. To all intents and purposes they are ordinary men on the street. The first time most women get any idea that they are not "ordinary men on the street" is when it's too late.

SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 14:26

Is it too scary to consider that men you know who are kind, and friendly, and cheerful, and nice, might have raped someone? They probably haven't, obviously. But they might have. You can't tell, after all. Or is that what you think. That you can?

SardineQueen · 05/10/2011 14:24

"I am not talking about a certain cohort - every criminal has certain characteristics, however if you are mugged does that make it your fault? Acquaintance rapists are very good at putting on the 'normal act'."

Do you really simply not understand how unpleasant and offensive you are being?

Why are you bringing victims blaming themselves into it?
Why are you still insisting that all rapists are as described in your posts upthread and if they are not then they must be acting?
Along with the obvious implication that if it's an act, it can be spotted?

Why are you absolutely not prepared to accept that some men might actually not be as you describe, and still rape someone?