In Interviews With 122 Rapists, Student Pursues Not-So-Simple Question: Why?

[El]

So, I really was confused initially by Al's reaction in this thread, and I kinda pieced a better guess about what's going on in his head together a day or two ago and didn't bother commenting on it, but it's so bloody blatant now that I'm going to:

Al.  Dude.  Nobody in this discussion is accusing you of being a rapist, or a potential rapist.  And we (at least as far as I'm understanding this discussion) aren't saying all men are rapists/potential rapists.  And we aren't saying women are never perpetrators.

We aren't saying any of these things, explicitly or implicitly, but your reactions make me think that somehow they're what you think we're trying to get at.  Which you're allowed to think we're saying, and you're allowed to talk about, and you're allowed to argue against.  But fwiw, it does seem like you're primarily trying to argue against those central points (or argue against things you think are springing from those assumptions), which, because those aren't central points that are actually being made, kinda makes it look like you're just getting super-upset and yelling at people at random.

[Al Swearegen]

So, I really was confused initially by Al's reaction in this thread, and I kinda pieced a better guess about what's going on in his head together a day or two ago and didn't bother commenting on it, but it's so bloody blatant now that I'm going to:

Al.  Dude.  Nobody in this discussion is accusing you of being a rapist, or a potential rapist.  And we (at least as far as I'm understanding this discussion) aren't saying all men are rapists/potential rapists.  And we aren't saying women are never perpetrators.

We aren't saying any of these things, explicitly or implicitly, but your reactions make me think that somehow they're what you think we're trying to get at.  Which you're allowed to think we're saying, and you're allowed to talk about, and you're allowed to argue against.  But fwiw, it does seem like you're primarily trying to argue against those central points (or argue against things you think are springing from those assumptions), which, because those aren't central points that are actually being made, kinda makes it look like you're just getting super-upset and yelling at people at random.

I am not saying anyone is saying that of me and I do not care whether women are perpetrators or not or whether you think so. I would hardly think I would need to defend any such charge if it was made (as I didn't when Bint accused me of buggering my son). 

Come on, El, you are the psychologist and THIS is what you think is going on in my head? How come you are getting it so wrong? After two or three days this was your genuine attempt at psychoanalysis? Wow.

I am not yelling at random people I am responding to people on a forum I have been replying on for 10 years with others that have been here about the same time. How did you get this so wrong?

[Walkie]

So, I really was confused initially by Al's reaction in this thread, and I kinda pieced a better guess about what's going on in his head together a day or two ago and didn't bother commenting on it, but it's so bloody blatant now that I'm going to:

Al.  Dude.  Nobody in this discussion is accusing you of being a rapist, or a potential rapist.  And we (at least as far as I'm understanding this discussion) aren't saying all men are rapists/potential rapists.  And we aren't saying women are never perpetrators.

We aren't saying any of these things, explicitly or implicitly, but your reactions make me think that somehow they're what you think we're trying to get at.  Which you're allowed to think we're saying, and you're allowed to talk about, and you're allowed to argue against.  But fwiw, it does seem like you're primarily trying to argue against those central points (or argue against things you think are springing from those assumptions), which, because those aren't central points that are actually being made, kinda makes it look like you're just getting super-upset and yelling at people at random.

I am not saying anyone is saying that of me and I do not care whether women are perpetrators or not or whether you think so. I would hardly think I would need to defend any such charge if it was made (as I didn't when Bint accused me of buggering my son). 

Come on, El, you are the psychologist and THIS is what you think is going on in my head? How come you are getting it so wrong? After two or three days this was your genuine attempt at psychoanalysis? Wow.

I am not yelling at random people I am responding to people on a forum I have been replying on for 10 years with others that have been here about the same time. How did you get this so wrong?

Umm. Al , look closeley at El's wording please:

I really was confused initially by Al's reaction in this thread, and I kinda pieced a better guess about what's going on in his head

but your reactions make me think that somehow they're what you think we're trying to get at

... kinda makes it look like you're just getting super-upset and yelling at people at random.

El's made it perfectly clear that she's not a mind reader, and that she's finding it really hard to see where you're comimng from. She's casting around  for a rationale to explain your recent posts, because they  do come across as increasingly irrational . (That's my own observatioon)

If the boot were on the other hoof, you wouldn't be anywhere near as tentative as El is being  here. You'd be telling her exactly what she thinks., getting it totally wrong, then castigating her for it. I've seen you doing that loads of times ,just  lately, and I've been on the receiving end often enough

I don't think you intend  to construct a load of straw men, then bark at the straw men, but that's what you're doing in effect, all the freaking time. it's wearing me down. Looks like it's wearing El down too.

Psychotherapists  are not magicians, Al,  and you're not in her consulting room, you're in the place wgere she goes to hang out with her mates.  Stop demanding miracles. You're really hard to fathom these days,  but at least some of us are still trying to fathom you, despite that you bite our heads off for trying. I say: kudos to El for that.

 Well, anyway,  it's Christmas Eve over here . Maybe we can all raise a glass  to each other's health, and chill out for a while?

[Al Swearegen]

So, I really was confused initially by Al's reaction in this thread, and I kinda pieced a better guess about what's going on in his head together a day or two ago and didn't bother commenting on it, but it's so bloody blatant now that I'm going to:

Al.  Dude.  Nobody in this discussion is accusing you of being a rapist, or a potential rapist.  And we (at least as far as I'm understanding this discussion) aren't saying all men are rapists/potential rapists.  And we aren't saying women are never perpetrators.

We aren't saying any of these things, explicitly or implicitly, but your reactions make me think that somehow they're what you think we're trying to get at.  Which you're allowed to think we're saying, and you're allowed to talk about, and you're allowed to argue against.  But fwiw, it does seem like you're primarily trying to argue against those central points (or argue against things you think are springing from those assumptions), which, because those aren't central points that are actually being made, kinda makes it look like you're just getting super-upset and yelling at people at random.

I am not saying anyone is saying that of me and I do not care whether women are perpetrators or not or whether you think so. I would hardly think I would need to defend any such charge if it was made (as I didn't when Bint accused me of buggering my son). 

Come on, El, you are the psychologist and THIS is what you think is going on in my head? How come you are getting it so wrong? After two or three days this was your genuine attempt at psychoanalysis? Wow.

I am not yelling at random people I am responding to people on a forum I have been replying on for 10 years with others that have been here about the same time. How did you get this so wrong?

Umm. Al , look closeley at El's wording please:

I really was confused initially by Al's reaction in this thread, and I kinda pieced a better guess about what's going on in his head

but your reactions make me think that somehow they're what you think we're trying to get at

... kinda makes it look like you're just getting super-upset and yelling at people at random.

El's made it perfectly clear that she's not a mind reader, and that she's finding it really hard to see where you're comimng from. She's casting around  for a rationale to explain your recent posts, because they  do come across as increasingly irrational . (That's my own observatioon)

If the boot were on the other hoof, you wouldn't be anywhere near as tentative as El is being  here. You'd be telling her exactly what she thinks., getting it totally wrong, then castigating her for it. I've seen you doing that loads of times ,just  lately, and I've been on the receiving end often enough

I don't think you intend  to construct a load of straw men, then bark at the straw men, but that's what you're doing in effect, all the freaking time. it's wearing me down. Looks like it's wearing El down too.

Psychotherapists  are not magicians, Al,  and you're not in her consulting room, you're in the place wgere she goes to hang out with her mates.  Stop demanding miracles. You're really hard to fathom these days,  but at least some of us are still trying to fathom you, despite that you bite our heads off for trying. I say: kudos to El for that.

 Well, anyway,  it's Christmas Eve over here . Maybe we can all raise a glass  to each other's health, and chill out for a while?

Yes I agree psychoanalysts are not magicians and it looked to me when she said:

I really was confused initially by Al's reaction in this thread, and I kinda pieced a better guess about what's going on in his head

That she was INITIALLY confused BY she has pieced together what was in my head (read she has psychoanalysed me) and THAT was her psychoanalise of that "reading" after three days or whatever? Am I wrong?
Happy to take it all back if this is an unfair reading of her own words.

Christmas is the time of miracles. But I think it is rather less miraculous to make a fair assessment of what I did say to what I did not. I never once mentioned that I don't rape (I don't but that is rather beyond the point). Most men don't and when I say most, I really mean that.

Let’s look at figures. Hard non-abstract figures.

In 2015 there were approximately 140 000 000 males in America. (and the incidences of rapes are falling)

There were about 40 000 reported rapes (it was less but let’s run with that)

This accounts for all rapes and rapists tend to be serial rapists rather than rape as a one off. So let’s account for that and knock it down to 30 000

However this is only was is reported so let’s increase this by 700%

280 000 rapes / 140 000 000 males (if you watch the news and see the proliferation of females being accused of rapes — especially teachers you know it is NOT gendered BUT let’s pretend it is)

0.002% of the male population engaging in rape.

So who are these rapists? Well, many are abused themselves and/or have really fucked up psychological issues.

It is not to say that 280 000 rapists are something of no consequence nor a societal problem but it is not an ingrained spectre lurking in the hearts of most men and something inherent in the male psyche and pretending it is anything close or merely a male educational thing men need to own and take responsibility for is a bit perverse.

That is my reading.

[El]

There were about 40 000 reported rapes (it was less but let’s run with that)

...

O_o

problematic assumption is problematic.

[Jack]

The phrase "sex is meaningless" was direct out of the horse's mouth. Perhaps I should have inserted the word "emotionally" before the term "meaningless" because that was clearly what was meant. And that's surely not to say that it isn't a powerful urge.  Heck , even sneezing is a poweful urge, come to think.

To make it even more clear: one of those  men who told me that sex was meaningless to him had a powerful sex drive nonetheless ...and a deep resentmemnt towards  women , in general, for exploiting their sexual power over him.  That's something quite common, it seems.  It was also discussed in that book that you have no respect for.

This perspective may give some weight to Calandale's point about removing the sociological baggage from sex. Will agree it seems widely acccepted, males generally lack emotional sentiment associate to sex, and the opposite is true for females. However your description of the sexually driven male friend lacking sexual sentiment could just as easily describe me. Lack of sentiment has definitely been off putting to partners, so have before wondered if the general conceptions about men are really true. Maybe is just isn't as socially acceptable for males to express such feelings of sentiment, or maybe females equate sex and love because they're taught to and therefore expected to. The concept of men wanting a fuck buddy without the emotional baggage doesn't seem so true when that partner is someone they respect or care about, or at least want to. Maybe prostitutes are a good outlet for people who genuinely prefer the emotional detachment. It would be interesting to know a prostitute, to ask them how many men have fallen for them.

[Calandale]

...males generally lack emotional sentiment associate to sex

Bullshit. It's just a different sentiment than you're thinking. One of ownership.

, and the opposite is true for females.

Not sure about this at all. For example, past studies have shown females more willing to
forgive a sexual indiscretion more than an emotional tie.

Maybe is just isn't as socially acceptable for males to express such feelings of sentiment, or maybe females equate sex and love because they're taught to and therefore expected to.

This is what I believe. That societal constructs are largely what drive all of this.

It would be interesting to know a prostitute, to ask them how many men have fallen for them.

The limited number I have known well never expressed that this happened. I suspect it happens more often with waitresses.

[Jack]

...males generally lack emotional sentiment associate to sex

Bullshit. It's just a different sentiment than you're thinking. One of ownership.

A sense of ownership is common in relationships for both males and females, but it's socially unacceptable to discuss people in terms of personal property. Husband was offended by it once, but after explaining what it means he was okay with the objectification that comes along with it. Not sure if it's bullshit in general for males to not find sex emotionally meaningful; just saying that's the accepted generalization and stereotypes are commonly based in a truth. Still think it's possible males are much more sappy feely about sex than what's believed, and possibly more so than males are comfortable acknowledging.

[Al Swearegen]

The leaps between such things as feelings of belonging to each other or feeling lust or resentment towards a gender or having emotional attachment/detachment or what have you tend not to lead in ANY way to rape and the nullification of consent.

Trying to establish these things as rapists not "getting the memo" is just as bad.

It seeks to make rather bizarre connections that have no business of being connected.

When I was younger.....really younger....about a million of years ago....I would go to nightclubs and occasionally pick up. I have a head like a robber's dog so not as often as I may have liked. The culture of nightclubs as being meat markets is quite apt. Essentially everyone says they are going there for a few drinks or to dance or hang out BUT the drive to find someone of the opposite gender and take them home after a few or few too many drinks is rife.

Many DO end up picking up someone who they later, after the alcohol and a hormonal fuelled jaunt in the sheets, feel they want to have a relationship with but more often than not, they bail or lose the number and avoid if they see them out again.

None of that is rape. It is almost a rite of passage, or is where I grew up.

[Jack]

...males generally lack emotional sentiment associate to sex

Bullshit. It's just a different sentiment than you're thinking. One of ownership.

It's probably easier to forgive a sexual betrayal, if one actually believes their partner doesn't have an emotional tie to sex.

[Jack]

The leaps between such things as feelings of belonging to each other or feeling lust or resentment towards a gender or having emotional attachment/detachment or what have you tend not to lead in ANY way to rape and the nullification of consent.

Agreed. Have no clue what makes a rapist tick, and wouldn't begin to pretend to. Not really discussing that at all, but rather finding Calendale's perspective interesting on aspects of sexual baggage that may be completely sociological. Not seeing these things considered in terms of how they affect a rapist, but rather affecting how rape is perceived.

[Al Swearegen]

I think rape USED to be considered the forcible sexual penetration of a female and for this to occur, non-consent had to be expressed and the woman had to try to resist. Then things were made less arbitrary and then moreso again until today no one really knows BUT we all know accusations of any inference that there was rape is dangerous ground.

I DO think that the former basis for what constituted rape WAS too stringent. Fear and domination can mean that the ability to struggle and voice resistance is muted. THIS ought not absolve the rapist nor make it all the victim's fault.

As a young guy I fought a bit. A bit more than I should and for a bit longer than I should. I was low self-confidence and had a lot I thought I should prove and was very angry and a bit of an arsehole. Hard to believe, right?

One thing that I learned was that you did not have to really hurt a guy to win. If you absolutely dominate a guy in a fight, you will win. Outclassing them is one way. If you go toe to toe and evade, block and strike better, that will likely work and at some point the guy will essentially give up and cover up and stop trying. That is a hard way to go.

Me? I was only fully grown at about 21-25 and only 5'9". However, I was very strong for my height and compact and had a high pain threshold. For me the sparring was not as meaningful as getting under the reach of a guy who was likely to be a lot taller and bigger and take it to the ground and press and pound and ground. Be quick and mean and brutal.

People who were not used to being manhandled as easily and being winded and thrown around would very quickly give up and be almost paralysed in fear. Some did not even have the sense to cover up. If you at THAT point seeing this and them knowing you saw it, got up, they would generally not want to try it on again. You had won, whatever point needed to be made had been made.

The reason I bought this up is that I think in many cases rape could be the same perhaps. someone pressed into a position they do not want that they are unable to break free of and ecape from and paralysed in fear. Unfortunately the Progressives pick up this ball and run with it, but I think there has to be common sense. Bad sex, drunken sex, regretable sex and sex with someone you later realise is an arsehole does not equate to rape. Unconscious sex, forcible sex, sex where someone expresses no desire at all for sex probably is.

[Pyraxis]

People who were not used to being manhandled as easily and being winded and thrown around would very quickly give up and be almost paralysed in fear. Some did not even have the sense to cover up. If you at THAT point seeing this and them knowing you saw it, got up, they would generally not want to try it on again. You had won, whatever point needed to be made had been made.

The reason I bought this up is that I think in many cases rape could be the same perhaps.

It makes some sense to me that it could be similar. Haven't been raped but I know what that physical paralyzation feels like. However I would ask whether it would be different for a guy, getting physically manhandled and beaten, and then released (assuming in a private place rather than a public fight) and getting physically manhandled, anally raped and then released. Would it have a different psychological impact? It seems intuitively obvious that it would, though I'm open to being corrected. With that said, I think the paralyzation and feeling of being beaten is only one aspect of the impact.

[Al Swearegen]

People who were not used to being manhandled as easily and being winded and thrown around would very quickly give up and be almost paralysed in fear. Some did not even have the sense to cover up. If you at THAT point seeing this and them knowing you saw it, got up, they would generally not want to try it on again. You had won, whatever point needed to be made had been made.

The reason I bought this up is that I think in many cases rape could be the same perhaps.

It makes some sense to me that it could be similar. Haven't been raped but I know what that physical paralyzation feels like. However I would ask whether it would be different for a guy, getting physically manhandled and beaten, and then released (assuming in a private place rather than a public fight) and getting physically manhandled, anally raped and then released. Would it have a different psychological impact? It seems intuitively obvious that it would, though I'm open to being corrected. With that said, I think the paralyzation and feeling of being beaten is only one aspect of the impact.

Yes. I imagine (thank God I am only making this abstract assessment) would only be a part of things. But it struck me when Jack mentioned about the definition of rape I automatically thought of the Progressive "anything could possibly be" kind of definition and the hard and fast old definition that was a decent guide at best. The definition to me is likely somewhere in between and has to take into account such things as fear and domination and that willingness to fight back may naturally be suppressed by fear and inability and so on.

It somehow came around to reminding me of fact, that in fights I have had. I did not rape anyone, and the fights were a man on man, but it occurred to me that men CAN be completely overwhelmed in a similar paralysed way. Again, in a similar way to women, I would imagine (or men if they were raped too I guess) could be beyond the mental state to make rational and aggressive attempts to free themselves from their predicament.

The other thing is that actual damage to the person need not mean that there was a fight or an assault, nor that the person was not in fear. One of the last people I fought 10 or 15 years ago. I scared Hell out of. Did very little actual damage to them. They were very big and could absorb a bit of damage and no doubt was sore for a while but no breaks, muscle or ligament tears, noticeable facial swelling or the like BUT they knew they had been in a fight and that I had easily got the best of them and that they were unable to answer or counter anything I tried. They were terrified and froze up. They left town soon after and no doubt did not try their crap with others afterwards.

[Calandale]

...males generally lack emotional sentiment associate to sex

Bullshit. It's just a different sentiment than you're thinking. One of ownership.

A sense of ownership is common in relationships for both males and females

There's a longer history of males' regularly exerting that ownership however. And that's important even if what we're looking
at is purely societal in nature. Innovations of the past few decades are more easily swept away than long standing traditions -
especially when those traditions are reinforced by immigration from societies which do still hold them, often in even stronger forms.

... but it's socially unacceptable to discuss people in terms of personal property.

Is it? People still use the possessive - even if they aren't willing to be explicit about what it is they
possess. They talk about 'my partner' (significant other, or whatever), but don't seem to understand
that it is actually the tie of the possessive which makes any sense in the language.

Not sure if it's bullshit in general for males to not find sex emotionally meaningful; just saying that's the accepted generalization and stereotypes are commonly based in a truth.

Once again, I think this is a matter of imprecision. That there is a strong emotional attachment, but there are
differences in the expression. And there are likely physical reasons for this, having to do with the fast reduction
in sexual hormones after a male orgasm.

Still think it's possible males are much more sappy feely about sex than what's believed, and possibly more so than males are comfortable acknowledging.

Sappy is the iffy part. I think the bro bragging about his conquests has an emotionally meaningful relationship with the sex.
Does the word 'sappy' apply there though?




I'm having trouble distinguishing exactly what you're saying. A man gets tied to a sexual partner in many of the same
emotional ways a woman does, I think. The feelings of enjoyment linked with that person all become tied together, and
both (ideally) try to do things to make the other feel happy. When those bonds are broken, even when a friendship remains,
either gender can be devastated by the loss. I've both been through and kept both genders company through breakups enough to
be pretty sure that there's little fundamental difference - at least among the types of people whom I am likely to be friends
with (admittedly, probably not a great sample of the average). I've also seen similar reactions at a distance though (anger,
betrayal, hurt) which seem very similar. Am I completely missing the point here?