Rape is not about sex, it's about power

[Jinn]

I've heard the idea that "rape is not about sex, it's about power" many times in my life. From sociology classes at University all the back to 5th grade health class, I've heard this phrase uttered by teachers, parents, and students alike.

Just today I was reading a story today about a spree of convenience store robberies in which a detective was quoted as saying "robbery isn't a economic crime, usually - it's about the power." It's the same logic as above, but being applied to robberies.

Which got me to thinking - it this a legitimate claim? Are rape and robbery really about power, or is it a concept invented by a sociologist or psychologist?

It's a very prevalent idea, and just searching google for "rape power sex" gets you "Rape is not about sex to the rapist; it has to do with control and power. Although exact figures are not available...", "pornography is about power and sex-as-weapon - in the same way we have come to understand that rape is about violence" and "acquaintance rape is about power. ,. control,. and anger—not romance."

After dutifully searching the Internet and the academic (scholarly) journals that my University gives me access to, I'm unable to find research on the actual motivations of convicted rapists.

Even if a researcher asked convicted rapists why they committed rape, would they really say "it was for the power"? If not, would any statement such as this be anything more than a psychologist's assumption about their behavior?

The easiest counter-example is a person. If I know a person who wants to have sex but is unable to coerce willing females who subsequently rapes a woman (for the sex), then I have one example of a person who raped for sex, not power. If I know someone who robs a bank for the money, rather than the power, then I have another example.

I feel that the reasons for rape and burglary are - at the very least - a combination of a subconscious desire for a power as well as the actual thing being stolen; sex and money. Therefore, I'm not sure that statements that rape is always about power, or even "mostly" about power are accurate.

So, I'm curious - do you feel that this phrase accurately represents the majority of rapists? If so, have you arrived at this conclusion through research, or accepted it as true because of it's prevalence?

[KnifeMissile]

I know what you mean.

I've only raped a couple of girls in my lifetime but I can tell you that it was always about the sex. I have never cared about power. If only those girls were willing to have sex with me then I would never have raped them. I don't know what they were thinking...

I think psychologists come up with those theories in order to villify rapists. We can all relate to a need for sex but few of us will relate to a need for power...

[CSflim]

Two observations:
1. Men spend a lot of effort seeking sex
2. Some men choose to use violence to get what they want.

So, assume that rape is not about sex. The question is, if the phenomenon of rape is not about sex, then why don't we see some other behavior where some men use violence to get sex? And if such a behavior did exist, how would we be able to tell it from rape?


That being said, I don't think the mantra of "rape is not about sex" is without merit. For most well adjusted people sex should be an act of love and affection and pleasure. And rape is most certainly not about this kind of sex.

[fhqwhgads]

I can only intelligently speak about the one rapist that I have interviewed, and for him, I could clearly tell that the crime was about power. His victim was an 82 year old woman, who he admits he picked because she would be less of a problem to control than the 24 year old that he attempted to rape a year before. It wasn't about the sex to him, it was about "feeling like a man" by exerting his power over a female.

Also... don't get burglary and robbery confused. A robbery is the taking of something from a person by force or threat of force. A burglary is simply the breaking and entering of a residence/storehouse with the intent to commit a crime. (in my state, a 4th degree burglary doesn't have that last qualification of the intent to commit a crime.) People always say "my house got robbed", which is inaccurate.

[The Phenomenon]

Robbery != Burglary

Robbery is more aggressive and violent and implies confrontation with your victims while burglary intends to avoid the victim completely.

If you are going to go steal for purely economic reasons, you are more likely to go the burglary or petty-theft (as in pickpocketing a guy's wallet) route.

When it comes to rape I also learned that its all about power and not about sex. Most "normal" men I wager have rape fantasies, and they are sexual in nature. They don't act out these fantasies directly though (clarify: they might act them out with a willing partner but they don't go do it for real). When most people imagine rape they would imagine a sexual situation, though im guessing that most of people who think that way would never actually go through with it. That would be why when you think of rape it screams sex at you.

I don't think the psychological reason behind rape = power is all crap "they" made up, more likely "they" are entirely correct. I don't think in an interview with a convicted rapist you get "I was horny" as a reason. If you did some research im sure you will find case studies that support this.

[Martel]

Originally Posted by KnifeMissile

I've only raped a couple of girls in my lifetime

[smooth]

Originally Posted by JinnKai

After dutifully searching the Internet and the academic (scholarly) journals that my University gives me access to, I'm unable to find research on the actual motivations of convicted rapists.

Start at Scully and Marolla's 1984 research Riding the Bull at Gilley's

I actually wrote a response to their position but I'd have to dig it out...

[Jinn]

From Riding the Bull at Gilley's:

Doesn't this support the idea that a statement like "rape is not about the sex" is far too generic and even perhaps incorrect in the majority of cases?

[World's King]

Rape is about sex and power.


The best way to show you have power over someone is to do something to them that they don't want you to. Sex is the best thing to do.

[raeanna74]

Perhaps it has been seen that some men, who are GETTING sex already, still rape. If that were the case, in my mind, I would assume that the rape wasn't about getting sex at all because they could have had it willingly, but instead chose a different method of acquiring it. I have heard things like this but I cannot substantiate this theory. Anyone else hear of anything like this?

As for the thievery/robbery... I am aware that there are people who shoplift for the thrill of it and not because they WANT the item all that much. I knew a girl in highschool who did this. She told me it gave her an adrenaline rush. Once in a while she wouldn't even open the item she'd gotten or she'd give it away. It was HOW she got it, not WHAT she got. Maybe it plays out this way for Robbery as well.

[cyrnel]

Originally Posted by World's King

Rape is about sex and power.

The best way to show you have power over someone is to do something to them that they don't want you to. Sex is the best thing to do.

The mistake is in calling all rape motivations equal in the eye of the offender. It might be about sex, or power, maybe both, maybe other reasons as well.

Perhaps someone here could share their knowledge about the spectrum of rape situations? For instance:

-Getting drunk together.
-Getting them drunk.
-Drunk with physical force.
-Physical force.
-Physical force and abuse/assault.
-Abuse/assault.

Where do these fit in the prosecution of sexual assault crimes? Would a horny teen's plying of his reluctant girlfriend with a drink really be thought of as motivated by power? That would be strange.

All generalizations are bad.

[KnifeMissile]

Originally Posted by cyrnel

All generalizations are bad.

I don't know, conservation of energy strikes me as a very useful and powerful generalization and I don't think anyone would call it "bad."

Am I the only one who sees the irony in cyrnel's statement?

[cyrnel]

I hope not.

The cliche was meant to touch on the obvious problem of universal solutions derived from limited experience. Even finding a common vocabulary can be difficult until we agree on what can be hot-button terminology. Then, before "publishing" or "enacting," the findings must be carefully considered and presented or those not involved could fall into the same trap of applying our language to their experiences and value systems.

My feeling is that many of these studies are generous on the input side but lean on the output side, leading to these "rape = power" misunderstandings.

I tend to be repetitive about not trusting generalizations, and only taking them as seriously as their consequences.

Deja vu.

[Seaver]

The reason I believe rape is about power and not sex? Because sex is always fairly available, you just have to lower standards.

If it was all about the sex they could easily hire a prostitute or something. Instead they take it forcibly from a girl who they could probably never get consent from anyways.

[smooth]

Originally Posted by JinnKai

From Riding the Bull at Gilley's:

Doesn't this support the idea that a statement like "rape is not about the sex" is far too generic and even perhaps incorrect in the majority of cases?

No, it doesn't support the idea you just wrote at all.
If that were the case, their first page would contradict the rapists' statements and some of the conclusions Scully and Marolla reach. Of course, one would need to get to the end of the article rather than the end of the first page (the portion you're quoting) to flesh that out.

In any case, your opening statement was that you hadn't seen any studies directly interviewing rapists. The Scully and Marolla peer-reviewed article does exactly that. I now realize I forgot to include the link, it's publicly available on JSTOR here.
As a bonus, as is typical with all research articles, the researchers have provided a literature review. The first three pages cite a string of researchers who argue more directly for the "rape is about power" concept. A quick jump to the bib will give you the complete citation. Hence, my "start here" comment...

[Jinn]

My question is not whether rape is about sex INSTEAD of power, but rather if people felt the generalization in the title was accurate.

Sorry, smooth.. beat me to the punch. I'll take another look at the reference. I only made it through the first page because that's all JSTOR will show me. I'll have to look elsewhere for it..

[smooth]

Originally Posted by JinnKai

My question is not whether rape is about sex INSTEAD of power, but rather if people felt the generalization in the title was accurate.

No, it's not even an accurate portrayal of the literature on the subject.

cyrnel's responses demonstrate the symantic issues arising from not knowing or mischaracterizing the literature, for example. No one familiar with the literature would suggest that all rape is about power, nor that all of those things he listed would be classified or thought of as equal to one another.

I'm not going to play forum police, but if people want to have an informed discussion on the topic, they should at least read one of the seminal articles on the subject to get a footing on the claim behind the statement that rape is motivated by power.

EDIT: If the JSTOR isn't publicly available, that's my bad assumption that it was. If people can't make it past the first page then mods send me a PM of the how or whether I can post the full content (although it doesn't look likely, http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html).

You'll also be interested in Diana Scully and Joe Marolla's piece on Convicted Rapists Vocabulary of Motive: Excuses and Justifications (1984). At least in that paper, they argue more directly in the first page that rape is learned and social rather than interpersonal. This is pulled from a tradition in criminology and sociology about vocabulary of offenders. You'll probably want to read some of Mill's "Vocabulary of Motive" and Sykes and Matza's (my advisor's advisor ) "Techniques of Neutralization" to get a sense of what's going on...or if I get bored with my paper I'll write more on the subject.

In case you're interested, the paper I wrote wasn't in support of the position. But I had the "luxury" of being in a situation where I could assess convicted felons and their discourse from an insider's perspective. So I took some issue with Scully and Marolla's points but that was a very long time ago before I was trained...so my views my be different now if I reread the arguments. I haven't really thought about rape research for a long time, to be honest.

[amonkie]

I'm trying to see if I can find anything, but it would be interesting to see some statistics about the relationships between rapists and their victims.

I personally think that relationship - stranger versus someone trusted, might help to shed a light behind motivation.

Saying no means NO - if someone tries to go beyond this, they're going to have to physically be much stronger than me or make threats on my life. Taking away my ability to fight or remove myself from a situation I do not consent to is Power. The sex is just the consequence

And Mod Note - if such articles are available - it is helpful to link them in discussion if you have access

[mixedmedia]

I'm not particularly well-informed on this subject, but I think the rape=power theory is pretty self-explanatory. Even for couples who play-act rape it is about the assertion and surrender of power. Sure there are other reasons that men may have for committing rape, but throughout history and up to the present rape has routinely been used both by invaders, by predators, by husbands and systematically by societies as a way of asserting power over women. I don't see much sense in denying it.

[Menoman]

I believe it's probably about power mostly, but also about sex.

I mean if you want to exert power, feel powerful, that's the best way to do it? There is a connection between the two that makes me believe if the "power" wasn't achieved by this, there would be drastically less rape. and visa versa.


The one that I won't believe unless I somehow come across some pretty significantly mind altering results in a enormous study, is that the women who walk around dressing like whores, tits hanging out, skirts up to their twat, and generally having the physical attitude of "easy" get no blame at all when/if they are sexually violated.

[analog]

The title of the thread, "rape is not about sex, it's about power" is correct.

What the research done in the quoted article indicates, is that there is not a set pattern of thinking that delineates a rapist from a non-rapist. They are indicating that there is no "type"- rather it is a combination of many traits which seem to be so common, there is no method of isolating behavior patterns in a broad enough way that give us a psychological profile of "a rapist".

There are fairly reliable psychological profiles of different types of murderers. They can narrow down the "type" of person you're thinking already is, or might be at risk to become, a murderer. The study indicates that there is no discernible "pattern" to rapists, making it impossible to form a psychological profile- furthermore, they seem to indicate that it's possible for practically anyone to suddenly develop the impulses to rape, regardless of their psychological profile. In other words, they are saying that almost anyone can suddenly want to rape someone, and there's no pattern of thought we can use to trend and identify this impulse by their behavior.

Saying that "rape is not about sex" is a fairly generic phrase to toss out there- but the point of it is to immediately rebut the more commonly-found belief that rape is about sex. This is like saying the "morning after" pill is not an abortion pill... this is certainly a very generic statement, but it is one of the most common dissenting opinions. To state simply what it is not, is definitely more succinct- and directly answers the majority opposing viewpoint- rather than going to great length about what it is, and not directly addressing the prevailing issue... which can ultimately leave the whole issue more muddied than when you came in.

[ubertuber]

I thought lots of consensual sex was about power too.

I know that sounds kind of flip, but I'm serious. How much more about power is rape?

[mixedmedia]

I think it also relevant to assert that rape is present in nature. In dolphins and primates, that I know of (probably in other species, as well), and that to some extent the urge may be a natural biological function. At some level. Not to say that it is acceptable, just that urge may be as much biological as it is psychological in SOME cases. Hope I've expressed myself clearly enough that everyone knows I am not trying to excuse rapists. This thought just occurred to me while mulling over the subject.

[Ourcrazymodern?]

Robbery is not a natural biological function, so I'm thinking stealing sex through rape isn't even in the neighborhood of stealing THINGS. The power idea regarding rape might be valid.

[Glory's Sun]

Originally Posted by ubertuber

I thought lots of consensual sex was about power too.

I know that sounds kind of flip, but I'm serious. How much more about power is rape?

Consensual sex may be about power but it's only power in the sexual realm. I would guess that the power involved in rape is not only power over who the person has sex with but also their mind. They have the power to instill fear into a person which usually incapacitates the person which in the scheme of things does nothing but intensify the feeling of power in the rapists mind. I would guess that it's almost like they feel they are controlling the entire destiny of the person being raped.

I'm not really schooled in the matter, so I could be completely off-base, but that would be my take on it.

[analog]

Originally Posted by ubertuber

I thought lots of consensual sex was about power too.

I know that sounds kind of flip, but I'm serious. How much more about power is rape?

It can be, and likely often is at least on some level- but asserting power through sex, and asserting power through rape, are not at all the same thing.

When having sex, asserting some power is part of the natural order of things- dominance, etc (this does not always happen with humans, especially these days, though i'm sure it's still very much in practice with lots of cultures and societal groups). But rape is not about the sex- it's about asserting power. There are many ways to assert power over another, and rape is just one way to do it.

The main issue is, you're comparing sex and rape, and they're not at all the same thing; we would never use the phrases "had sex with" and "was raped by" interchangeably. This is not without reason, as the motivations and actions inherent to each are so different.

[World's King]

Rape is a crime of passion. Fueled by some sort of misdirected rage.


Now Date Rape is another story all together. That more often then not is about sex.

[Ourcrazymodern?]

...sex might be (and often is) viewed as an act of love. If one party is unwilling, and the other carries on, anyway, the first retains their rights, and the second forfeits theirs. So...regarding the OP, whoever asserted robbery is like rape was wrong...or imagining the parallel was.

[Gilda]

There's a theory in social psychology that says all relationships are about power, about establishing dominance of one individual or group over another, and that all conflict between groups or individuals comes from attempts to establish, contest, or reinforce dominance.

While I don't think this explains all relationships, it does help to explain a great many of them, and it's helpful when looking at the phenomenon of rape.

Rape is just short of murder as a way of exerting control, another word for power, over another person. Sex is, of course, an element of rape, but the question becomes why the rapist chooses rape as the means of gaining sexual satisfaction. A partner isn't even necessary to get the physical stimulation and release that comes with sex. Partners are readily available in most instances, either willing partners or prostitutes. So what leads someone to choose rape instead of a more socially acceptable form of release? What is the attraction, the thing that makes it different from paying someone or picking someone up in a bar for a one night stand?

Ordinarily we have sex with a partner because there is something more to that than just the physical sensations. There's a connection of some kind. It may be a power connection, going either way--the ability to convince someone you find attractive to have sex with you is a form of power, more subtle than brute force, but a form of power nonetheless.

With a rape, this connection becomes explicitly about the exertion of dominance. The sex is an element, sure, and the rapist wants the sex, but the method chosen is all about the power, the control, that comes with it.

There are sadists who get sexual pleasure strictly from the infliction of pain, and there are dominants who get pleasure directly from controlling others. Rape is one more expression of this.

Rape involves sex, but it isn't about the sex.

[Frosstbyte]

I think conflating dominants with rapists walks a dangerous line. The times I've forayed into the D/S scene and the people I know who are heavily into it are probably more conscience of issues of consent than most others, and often in a much more explicit way.

I suppose you're much more qualified to talk about D/S relationships than I am, Gilda, but I don't think that being a dominant and being a rapist and taking out those desires really reflect the same type of person. Certainly power factors into both, but I don't view rape as an extreme of being dominant. Both branches along the same line, but with very different mindsets.

[james t kirk]

Originally Posted by Gilda

Rape is just short of murder as a way of exerting control, another word for power, over another person. Sex is, of course, an element of rape, but the question becomes why the rapist chooses rape as the means of gaining sexual satisfaction.

As ugly as rape might be, it's a million miles from murder.

Originally Posted by Gilda

A partner isn't even necessary to get the physical stimulation and release that comes with sex.

It's not the same unfortunately. You can masturbate all you want, it doesn't take the edge off.

Originally Posted by Gilda

Partners are readily available in most instances, either willing partners or prostitutes. So what leads someone to choose rape instead of a more socially acceptable form of release? What is the attraction, the thing that makes it different from paying someone or picking someone up in a bar for a one night stand?

As a male, I can inform you, as can most men on here, that female sexual partners are not always readily available. Hence, a truly hard up man can be a dangerous thing.

Prostitutes cost money, and there are lots of hard up guys out there who are either cheap, or can not afford a call girl as frequently as desired.

In wars for example, rape is common place. At the end of WW2, Russian soldiers raped the women of Germany at will. In Berlin for example there were an estimated 2 million rapes in the spring of 1945. That was a case where normal human behaviour was right out the window. It wasn't about power, if it was about power, the Russian soldiers could simply have killed the women in an instant and no questions asked. We humans walk a very fine line between so called civilized behaviour and into the heart of darkness.

Originally Posted by Gilda

Ordinarily we have sex with a partner because there is something more to that than just the physical sensations. There's a connection of some kind. It may be a power connection, going either way--the ability to convince someone you find attractive to have sex with you is a form of power, more subtle than brute force, but a form of power nonetheless.

No, for men, sex can very very easily be JUST about the physical sensations. There doesn't have to be anything other than the fact that it feels very good.

[Gilda]

To be clear, I did not intend to equate all dominants or sadists with rapists, only to say that there is a power element present in all of those mindsets.

Originally Posted by Frosstbyte

I think conflating dominants with rapists walks a dangerous line. The times I've forayed into the D/S scene and the people I know who are heavily into it are probably more conscience of issues of consent than most others, and often in a much more explicit way.

Of course, consent is the element that makes the difference. Sex with consent is good fun. Without, it's rape. Sadism with a willing masochist is good fun. Without consent, it's abuse, torture, assault. Domination with a willing submissive is good fun. Without, it's psychological abuse.

It's when there is a lack of consent that any relationship becomes abusive.

I suppose you're much more qualified to talk about D/S relationships than I am, Gilda, but I don't think that being a dominant and being a rapist and taking out those desires really reflect the same type of person.

Neither do I. I was attempting to draw a parallel between the appeal of the power aspects involved there, not between rapists and consensual dominants or sadists. The exercise of power is very exciting, in some in a sexual way, both in consensual and non-consensual interactions.

Certainly power factors into both, but I don't view rape as an extreme of being dominant. Both branches along the same line, but with very different mindsets.

While I do think that degree matters as much as the type of behavior, and that behavior that is acceptable at one degree is unacceptable at another more extreme level, I don't see rape as a direct, extreme form of domination, so we're pretty much in agreement here.

Originally Posted by james t kirk

As ugly as rape might be, it's a million miles from murder.

I wasn't comparing them qualitatively, but as a means of exerting control.

It's not the same unfortunately. You can masturbate all you want, it doesn't take the edge off.

I didn't say it was the same.

As a male, I can inform you, as can most men on here, that female sexual partners are not always readily available.

I didn't say "always".

Hence, a truly hard up man can be a dangerous thing.

Yet, most hard up men don't rape women. What do you think might be the difference there between the two groups? Other than rapists being scum, which is obvious.

Prostitutes cost money, and there are lots of hard up guys out there who are either cheap, or can not afford a call girl as frequently as desired.

So being cheap is a mitigating factor in rape now?

In wars for example, rape is common place. At the end of WW2, Russian soldiers raped the women of Germany at will. In Berlin for example there were an estimated 2 million rapes in the spring of 1945. That was a case where normal human behaviour was right out the window. It wasn't about power, if it was about power, the Russian soldiers could simply have killed the women in an instant and no questions asked. We humans walk a very fine line between so called civilized behaviour and into the heart of darkness.

Killing would have been a different way of exerting dominance (power), sure. It's not the only way available. Yes, killing is about power. That doesn't mean that rape isn't.

No, for men, sex can very very easily be JUST about the physical sensations. There doesn't have to be anything other than the fact that it feels very good.

Rape involves the choice to disregard the lack of consent. The fact that it feels good explains masturbation, not rape.

[cyrnel]

Originally Posted by james t kirk

In wars for example, rape is common place. At the end of WW2, Russian soldiers raped the women of Germany at will. In Berlin for example there were an estimated 2 million rapes in the spring of 1945. That was a case where normal human behaviour was right out the window. It wasn't about power, if it was about power, the Russian soldiers could simply have killed the women in an instant and no questions asked.

These cases are common throughout history, but to me the stereotype itself falls into the "power" category. Soldiers in rape & pillage mode, so close to the edge of survival. They're one moment from taking a life, with peer-pressure, opportunity, little chance of retribution. Where do they rate rape as an evil after seeking out and killing enemy combatants? How much of the rabid behavior is encouraged or condoned by the command structure in their dehumanizing of the enemy and with their retribution propaganda?

Not to excuse it one bit, but I can believe there are extreme tensions and passions involved.

Also, I doubt many victims resist to their full abilities with armed enemy soldiers standing around. Survival takes priority. In the studies already mentioned, don't many rapists state they took a lack of physical resistance as a form of consent? As reinforcement that "she was asking for it"?

[Ourcrazymodern?]

Hi-ho, y'all need to relax.

[Nimetic]

I've always regarded this statement this as ridiculous.

If it's about power - sure then a the majority of rapists would rape just as many males as females yes? And then also, many of the attacks would not involve... um... intercourse.

[analog]

Originally Posted by Nimetic

I've always regarded this statement this as ridiculous.

If it's about power - sure then a the majority of rapists would rape just as many males as females yes?

Nope.

And then also, many of the attacks would not involve... um... intercourse.

Right, those are called battery, or murder. People get beat up or killed all the time. Those are different ways in which a desire for power manifests itself.

Rape is just one example of the myriad ways people assert power over another. For some, it's as simple as demeaning someone, talking down to them. A higher level would be rape, and an even higher level is violence directed solely at hurting or killing another.

I think you're also considering it as a purely conscious effort, which it's not. Where a conscious decision isn't made specifically along the lines of having power over the other, the subconscious impulse is simply one of entitlement- they believe they are already empowered over the other, and are entitled to what they want from them... a perfect example of this is date rapes. They believe they're in a position of power (consciously or not) and therefore entitled to sex.

[jorgelito]

Actually, a good example of rape as an instrument of power can be found in male on male rape such as prison rape and other male pack behavior types including hazing, locker room behavior, and police brutality. These examples are illustrative of power rather than homosexual realizations.

In each cohort, the sodomy or other sexualized act etc is carried out by the party in power to reinforce that power and to coerce submission by the "victims". Oftentimes the act is not carried out to ejaculation but rather the act itself is the vehicle for power dominance and subjugation. These acts can be considered the ultimate act of humiliation.

In the case of war time rape, it is most certainly all about power. Japanese soldiers did not rape millions of Japanese women and children the way they did the women and children of the countries they invaded. Dehumanizing the "enemy" civilian population is an effetc of the chaos and atrocity of war. Rape is a surefire tool to submit your enemy and exert control.

[analog]

Originally Posted by jorgelito

Actually, a good example of rape as an instrument of power can be found in male on male rape such as prison rape and other male pack behavior types including hazing, locker room behavior, and police brutality. These examples are illustrative of power rather than homosexual realizations.

Great example- I thought for a while and couldn't come up with this example of men raping men over power issues, but this is exactly it.

[Nimetic]

I don't know if that's your training kicking in or what - but it's not convincing to me. This looks like a dump from a book.

Occams razor applies here. The rapist has a sex drive. The rapist has "sexual intercourse" with the victim, something that we normally simply label "sex".

So we should accept the obvious answer - until such time as we have clear evidence and studies to the contrary.

And lets look further at the sex drive. Lets suppose that a rapist takes a drug that blocks their sex drive... does this or does this not reduce the likelihood of them raping more victims. It'd be an illuminating study to do I think.

This is an interesting point...

But it leaves me with a vision of soldiers committing wartime atrocities or prisoners raping prisoners, while fantasizing about their high-school sweetheart or teacher... (in order to maintain an erection). Which is just too paradoxical for me to comprehend.

No - I think that these people must have some serious violent urge, plus a sexual one. If they get an erection - then surely this is (would you say?) an 'ipso facto' proof of a sexual component to the act?

I'd be interested in a link - if you find a functional one.

One study is purely noise of course in the academic background of course. (Particularly in this type of field which is surely relatively subjective.) But you never know... I occasionally change my mind.

[SecretMethod70]

Originally Posted by cyrnel

These cases are common throughout history, but to me the stereotype itself falls into the "power" category. Soldiers in rape & pillage mode, so close to the edge of survival. They're one moment from taking a life, with peer-pressure, opportunity, little chance of retribution. Where do they rate rape as an evil after seeking out and killing enemy combatants? How much of the rabid behavior is encouraged or condoned by the command structure in their dehumanizing of the enemy and with their retribution propaganda?

Not to excuse it one bit, but I can believe there are extreme tensions and passions involved.

Also, I doubt many victims resist to their full abilities with armed enemy soldiers standing around. Survival takes priority. In the studies already mentioned, don't many rapists state they took a lack of physical resistance as a form of consent? As reinforcement that "she was asking for it"?

Honestly, I don't have the time to digg up the things I've read about this to make a particularly in depth post on the subject, but I wanted to touch on this soldier issue a bit.

The issue of rape is far more complicated than stating "it's about power," or "it's not about power, it's about sex." A lot can be (and has been) learned about rape by observing primates in the wild. Primates who, by the way, act very much like their human counterparts, right down to waging "war" and committing rape. Nonetheless, primates who act out of instinct.

Rape has always been a part of human life, just like it is a part of the lives of many other animals. The fatal mistake, then, when dealing with rape is not recognizing that it ultimately has roots in who we are as animals. Breaking it down to "rape is about power," is nice and all, but it conveniently ignores that rape is something that comes from deep within our animal nature, not from a deviation in our "civilized" nature. Generally speaking, people do not want to admit that rape is natural - that it is part of the human animal. Doesn't mean it's a good thing - murder is also natural - but it does change how we look at it as a society and how to prevent it.

So, why rape? There is most certainly a power aspect to rape: the "conquering" of another person. But sex is also a very fundamental part of it as well. In short, the human animal is driven to rape not only in order to conquer someone in an emotional sense (stealing their sexuality), but to conquer someone in a physical sense (violently impregnating her). Which brings us to rape as it pertains to soldiers. Primates in the wild have been observed to rape the females of other tribes with whom they are at "war," in effect diluting the blood of the other tribe with the blood of their own tribe. Wars waged by humans obviously have aspects beyond the basic animal causes, but it is still ultimately a more complicated version of the same thing our animal cousins do. As such, it is not uncommon for conquering soldiers to rape the females of conquered lands. There are human aspects which make the issue more complex of course, but the drive ultimately seems likely to come from the need to spread our own seed - not just in the familial sense, but in the tribal sense as well.

This evolutionary view, then, does not deny that there is a significant power aspect to rape, but when broken down to its core it is rooted in the drive to reproduce. As such, the solder rape stereotype doesn't affirm or deny the "rape is about power" statement, but it does reveal that there is far more at play than what we as a society are comfortable discussing. Namely, it reveals that rape is not just a deviant behavior, but a deviant behavior which is, in some way, a fundamental part of the human animal, much like theft and murder (also things which are observed in the wild - primates do not always kill for food, and sometimes it is very brutal).