Facebook supports rape?

Sorry bemybebe,

You posted faster than little I and were spot-on too I think.

Dont, I am arguing against the phrase that rapists rape because they can and that they are no different to the ordinary man on the street.

Which bit of that do you not get?

Intelligent they may be, convincing family men, etc. Rape is such a hideous crime that morally, that person has something wrong. If you are saying that rapists are fully functional morally, socially and educationally then perhaps you would care to explain why rapists commit the act of rape, because the explanation "because they can" is the stupidiest one I've come across yet.

Your response is hazarding guesses as to why you might have upset me with your posts?

Sorry but that is a bit rubbish.

You keep saying "oh rapists are like this, they're like that" but you haven't given one shred of evidence that is the case. You say they have to be in control and powerful in all aspects of their life. Really? So they should be easy to spot, yes? You say they are social wankers. Really? (Not sure what it means but anyway) and that they take in all situations. Where do you get these ideas from?

I am guessing that you are making it up as you go along and don't realise how genuinely offensive you are being in your unsupported ponderings.

SardineQueen asked
jamma you seem up on your stuff. Does the profiling of acquaintance rapists come from studies on acquaintance rapists who have been convicted to rape?

I haven't quoted any peer-reviewed papers here, and I always think it is a bit corny quoting abstracts when folk have to pay to download the full paper. I have an Athens login but I wouldn't wish to abuse it. All of the references came from the public web sites linked, just using Google.

SardineQueen asked
What is your point with that post jamma? You say you are labouring the point but you don't say what your point is?

Well, basically, that even with aquaintence rapists, there is evidence that the offenders (generally) exhibit traits that not easily associated with (sigh) average men in the street.

With stranger rapists, the distinction is even clearer - there are distinct sociopathic and other traits that provide good markers in being able to clearly identify 'those who do' and 'those who might' from 'those who would never'. Of course there are exceptions to any rule. In essence though generalistic stereotyping is never helpful, but professional scientific profiling is.

SQ - I think the point that jamma is making is that 'stranger' rapists (potential and realized) are people who have certain character traits in common that allow them in certain circs carry out their attacks. They are not just random 'men from the street', 'ordinary blokes'. And that 'acquaintance' rapists who as a group are more difficult to profile still have a number of traits in common...

Again, my point was it is a shame that by making a statement that she did (deliberately or by accident) CE diverted her argument... real pity because in the end - FB and its scandalous encouraging of these pro-rape groups is forgotten.

SQ - men who think it is ok to rape have something wrong with them ok? The argument on here seems to be that any man is capable of rape and that most would if they thought they could get away with it. I find that shocking and offensive.

Now I am guessing you have been a victim and I am sorry that you've had to experience that. I am also guessing that he was a partner of yours. So I apologise in advance for saying that rapists have something wrong with them, but that is my opinion. Rape is not an ordinary crime, it is a violation of someone's basic rights, it objectifies women and leaves the victim scarred for life.

Of course a rapist can perform sexually without raping, just as a thief is capable of shopping without stealing. That goes without saying. But if a man thinks that rape is acceptable, then his moral compass hasn't just gone awry, it's fucked. Perhaps it was never there in the first place.

What they do is make it seem as though it is your fault. But you can do more spot a rapist than you can a thief, yet I am sure you will agree that you cannot go around saying that the ordinary man on the street is a thief. Yet stealing is the wrong comparison because rape is far from being a victimless crime, so let's use mugging. You cannot even contemplate mugging someone yet you must agree if someone can justify the act of mugging there has to be something socially wrong with that person? Social as in the act of communicating with others, having healthy relationships, finding common ground, knowing the difference between right and wrong.

Muggers don't just mug because they think they can, they mug to intimidate, to have a financial reward, to make themselves feel more powerful, more in control and above the law. Is that what rapists do? Quite possibly, because it evokes the same fear and feeling of being violated (I use mugging as it involves force). I am aware that not all rape involves force, some rape is perpetrated when the person is rendered helpless, and that is the most cowardly act of rape.

Whatever the reason, that person has deep social issues for even thinking they could justify such an act. And that person is nothing like the majority of men.

who are NOT like that obviously

If rapists were violent in their relationships, had to have power and control to perform in all areas of their life including sexually, and all the rest of it, they'd be pretty fucking easy to spot, wouldn't they.

I can't believe what I'm reading here TBH. Where does that leave women raped by men who are like that? Not raped? Or stupid? What? FFS.

I am feeling a bit sick here and would be grateful if someone could please clarify exactly what on earth is being said here?

jamma you seem up on your stuff. Does the profiling of acquaintance rapists come from studies on acquaintance rapists who have been convicted to rape?

What is your point with that post jamma? You say you are labouring the point but you don't say what your point is?

Rape in itself is invariably categorised through the relationship between victim and rapist.

Both in the US and UK in 80% of rapes, the victim knew their attacker.

The remainder are 'stranger rapes'.

In the US and UK, profiling of 'stranger' rapists is quite advanced. A summary of such profiles (US-centric) can be found at Forensics Talk.

Profiling aquaintence rape has proved more difficult, but even so some core attributes have been identified in the attackers;

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

Further discussion on aquaintence rape profiling (once again US-centric) can be found at The National Centre for Victims Of Crime

A key feature of aquaintence rape is the prevelance of alcohol. The above web site quotes with reference to college rapes in the US;

One study found that 75 percent (75%) of the males and 50 percent (50%) of the females involved in college campus acquaintance rapes had been drinking when the sexual assault occurred (Bohmer & Parrot, 1993).

(the quotes can be used if I include this text - Copyright © 2008 by the National Center for Victims of Crime.)

Okay I'm not going to labour the point. The science of profiling stranger rapists is well advanced. The same confidence cannot be applied to aquaintance rapists. Even so though some key elements to distinquish such offenders are coming to light.

"Rapists are social wankers who usually take advantage of other situations."

Like this as well what does this mean? How do you know this? If someone has been raped by someone who is not like this then what does that mean?

Rhubarb I am not deliberately doing anything, I don't understand what you are saying.

Read what you wrote again ""Rapists do not rape because they can. They rape because they are socially disfunctional (does that sit better?) and cannot perform unless they feel in control and powerful. "

Can you not see how I thought that meant what I thought it meant? Then you said "not just in the bedroom" meaning that you included sex?

I really don't understand and I am trying but I don't get it. I feel very upset inside and I would really like you to explain maybe more simply what you meant? Please?

How about our own partners SGM? Will they do?

How about the average woman on the street? What is she like?

Huh? Why are you deliberately mis-reading what I write? Who mentioned sexually? No-one but you. Rapists are social wankers who usually take advantage of other situations. A good man does not rape. A man who thinks that rape of any kind and in any form is very very different to the majority of decent men out there.

No he does not have horns or a big sign around his neck saying "rapist wanker", no you might not spot a rapist amongst your group of friends, but to justify rape the man will have a very skewed sense of morality, for whatever reason. Rape is the dominance and violation of a woman and puts the man in full control. From there it stands to reason that control is one of the key issues.

So you think that rapists can't perform sexually unless they are dominant and in control, and that they have to be dominant and in control in all aspects of life?

Is that right?

I didn't just mean in the bedroom SQ - I meant in life. Rapists dominate women and use them to satisfy their own needs. Therefore in life rapists are usually social wankers who like to feel powerful.

What did you mean then when you said they cannot perform unless they feel in control an powerful?

It's nothing to do with "well done me" I feel really upset and don't understand why you said that. What did you mean?

My point exactly bemybebe but pretty soon both you and I will be denounced as rape apologists.