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

[Calandale]

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.

I disagree. If you feel ownership, you may seek to express that, when otherwise facts disprove it.


Too, if you feel a strong threat/fear/hatred of a gender, it does not seem unreasonable to perpetrate assault
as a means of expressing your own dominance.

[Walkie]

Just a very quick point here:

... 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.

God , am I sick of hearing that argument all over the place.
Oh yeah?  And people still say "My God" "My Boss"  My mother"   "My master" "My country"
Use  of the so-called "possessive " needn't denote anything at all beyond some kind of relationship. In many such  cases, one does not  possess at all, but  is  rather possessed.

When I say "my neck of the woods" do you suppose that I own (or think that i own) all I survey?
When i talk about "my stupid mistake" do you think I'm not willing to let you comm it the selfsdame stupid mistake, if you like? That I've made sure to register the copyright to myself?
Must I hencefiorth write OFG tather than OMFG, to make it clear that I'lm totally happy to share my fucking god with you?
Must I carefully say "the person with whom I have a mutually committed relationship"  rather than "my partner"  , so as to avoid claiming ownership of the same?

Apparently so.
Your point  (errrr.... I mean,  the point that  issued from your own keyboard, or possibly your wife's 's or flatmates keyboard ...Ah! the keyboard that you are presently utilising, I should say  ) might be valid , but that is not the way to validate it *groooooan*

[Jack]

...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.

Yes it is, and you seem to be agreeing with that, by acknowledging people still use a possessive my, but aren't willing to be explicit about what that means. Anything explicit makes people cringe.

I'm having trouble distinguishing exactly what you're saying.

Am disagreeing with Walkie's assessment that sex isn't a deeply intimate act for males. Though at the same time wont commit to that being untrue, because stereotypes exist for a reason. Maybe it's a common conception because it's true, or maybe it's just the macho crap men feel the need to say. Think it may be a misconception that sex doesn't make males feel more emotionally intimate and connected to their partners, or that they really prefer sexual relationships without the sentimental baggage. Though not really sure because it could be that males may not deal well with females who don't associate sex and love, only because females are expected to. So, just really saying I don't know what to think. Saying some stuff so you will say what you think, because the honest perspective of a male on this topic is more interesting than my uncertainty.

[Jack]

Just a very quick point here:

... 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.

God , am I sick of hearing that argument all over the place.
Oh yeah?  And people still say "My God" "My Boss"  My mother"   "My master" "My country"
Use  of the so-called "possessive " needn't denote anything at all beyond some kind of relationship. In many such  cases, one does not  possess at all, but  is  rather possessed.

When I say "my neck of the woods" do you suppose that I own (or think that i own) all I survey?
When i talk about "my stupid mistake" do you think I'm not willing to let you comm it the selfsdame stupid mistake, if you like? That I've made sure to register the copyright to myself?
Must I hencefiorth write OFG tather than OMFG, to make it clear that I'lm totally happy to share my fucking god with you?
Must I carefully say "the person with whom I have a mutually committed relationship"  rather than "my partner"  , so as to avoid claiming ownership of the same?

Apparently so.
Your point  (errrr.... I mean,  the point that  issued from your own keyboard, or possibly your wife's 's or flatmates keyboard ...Ah! the keyboard that you are presently utilising, I should say  ) might be valid , but that is not the way to validate it *groooooan*

Absolutely agree with this. General use of possessive pronoun is very different than explicitly claiming ownership. Once discussed this here before in a thread about being territorial in relationships. Husband was once offended early in marriage because I claimed he's mine and he belongs to me. He told me I didn't own him. I told him yes I do in fact own him and I have the legal documentation to prove it; I own him so completely down to the decisions of his last dying breath. I told him he's my most prized possession and I would fight to protect defend and keep him, more so than any other thing. I said these are the choices we've made, I don't mind the idea of being owned by him, I didn't understand why it would bother him to think of himself as mine, and if it wasn't reciprocal then there's a problem with the relationship. Fortunately he found it endearing. Though do realize it's not socially acceptable to objectify him like that and talk about him in those terms. He gets it and that's good enough.

[Calandale]

Well now, I can't agree. When someone says "keep your hands off my wife (daughter ect)," they are
expressing something closer to possession than merely the existence of some sort of referential
relationship. Sometimes, the bonds of possession are different in nature from that referring to
an object - for example 'my country' which expresses a set of mutual obligations - but this is
the nature of language; the lines blur. As to the explicicity, that blurring allows people to directly
state what they mean, without any social consequence, because it is not always that.

[Calandale]

I'm having trouble distinguishing exactly what you're saying.

Am disagreeing with Walkie's assessment that sex isn't a deeply intimate act for males. Though at the same time wont commit to that being untrue, because stereotypes exist for a reason. Maybe it's a common conception because it's true, or maybe it's just the macho crap men feel the need to say. Think it may be a misconception that sex doesn't make males feel more emotionally intimate and connected to their partners, or that they really prefer sexual relationships without the sentimental baggage. Though not really sure because it could be that males may not deal well with females who don't associate sex and love, only because females are expected to. So, just really saying I don't know what to think. Saying some stuff so you will say what you think, because the honest perspective of a male on this topic is more interesting than my uncertainty.



I'm not terribly typical, I think. So, my personal view is likely of little value. And the women I've been both
sexually and emotionally involved with are not either.


Given that though, my limited experience (both direct and perceived) lend to both males and females being able to
engage in sex without much meaning - sometimes even just as a means to get out of anotherwise uncomfortable
situation. Both are able to form emotional bonds quickly, with or without sex. The major differences that I've seen
appear to be gender role-based expressions: which I tend to mark down almost entirely to societal expectations.


The most distant perceived experiences are probably the most generally applicable - though, of course, I am
likely applying filters and have less information as to what is really being felt. The gamit seems to align well
with what I've experienced more closely (through self, or close contacts).

[El]

*tentatively raises hand from the back of the room*

...so umm... maybe we'll have more luck if we just compare the relative likelihood of the genders to each other to have certain experiences and attitudes rather than trying to make an argument requiring half the planet to have homogeneous sets of emotions and sexual appetites?

[Jack]

*tentatively raises hand from the back of the room*

...so umm... maybe we'll have more luck if we just compare the relative likelihood of the genders to each other to have certain experiences and attitudes rather than trying to make an argument requiring half the planet to have homogeneous sets of emotions and sexual appetites?

Though what is the relative likelihood of what people feel? Really don't see anything wrong with generalizations in this conversation, because such generalizations already exist. Females are generally more emotionally expressive than males. This is accepted as true, but understand it's accepted as true because people also understand it's true that it's more socially acceptable for females to be emotionally expressive, and they're taught to be. It has nothing to do with how much males actually do or don't feel. The point that this also translates to sex seems valid.

[Jack]

I'm not terribly typical, I think. So, my personal view is likely of little value.

Fair enough. Would have to say the same about myself. Used to think my perspective about sex was more like a male, until realizing that might not actually be what guys think either.

[Al Swearegen]

*tentatively raises hand from the back of the room*

...so umm... maybe we'll have more luck if we just compare the relative likelihood of the genders to each other to have certain experiences and attitudes rather than trying to make an argument requiring half the planet to have homogeneous sets of emotions and sexual appetites?

Or perhaps we can agree that bad people do bad things for bad reasons and the relationship to their gender or their education plays less part than their psychology? Could we agree to that? (I am feeling charitable)

[Jack]

*tentatively raises hand from the back of the room*

...so umm... maybe we'll have more luck if we just compare the relative likelihood of the genders to each other to have certain experiences and attitudes rather than trying to make an argument requiring half the planet to have homogeneous sets of emotions and sexual appetites?

Or perhaps we can agree that bad people do bad things for bad reasons and the relationship to their gender or their education plays less part than their psychology? Could we agree to that? (I am feeling charitable)

It seems unreasonable to expect anyone to deny gender relationships to any form of violent crime. While social status variants of education and income are more debatable, the remarkable difference in victimization rates is also difficult to deny or argue against. Though to be fair, will agree with your earlier assertion, there are some things people don't need to be taught are wrong, and it's not productive in certain topics to take any stance which suggests some people harm others because they don't know any better.

[Calandale]

*tentatively raises hand from the back of the room*

...so umm... maybe we'll have more luck if we just compare the relative likelihood of the genders to each other to have certain experiences and attitudes rather than trying to make an argument requiring half the planet to have homogeneous sets of emotions and sexual appetites?

It's worse than that, because each society seems to treat these things differently.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

In terms of whether sexual intercourse is a deeply intimate act for men or just a physical release of some sort, I would imagine the range of emotions involved for men is a bell curve with "deeply intimate" to the right and "not intimate" to the left. If you drew the same bell curve for women then you'd probably see a similar shaped bell curve to the right.

I've attached a rough hand-drawn example of what it might look like. Remember that "deeply intimate" is to the right and "not intimate" is to the left. There is probably a lot more overlap than I've allowed for. But it kind of covers Walkie's example of men saying that they find sex about as intimate as blowing their nose, and the experiences of some of us men who find sex a deeply intimate experience.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

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.

It depends where you go. I know several guys who married women who they met as prostitutes. You wouldn't encounter very many men falling in love with prostitutes very often in countries where the girls tend to be "on the clock" and charge by the hour or half hour, and none of the guys I know who married prostitutes met them in my home country where I've lived the majority of my life.

This raises a good point. These relationships tend to be unstable, usually because of the behaviour of the males involved. They marry the girl because she looks good and makes them feel like a million dollars and the sex is great. But some of the sort of guys who marry prostitutes tend not to "get" things like intimacy and commitment. That's just my experience anyway.

[Al Swearegen]

In terms of whether sexual intercourse is a deeply intimate act for men or just a physical release of some sort, I would imagine the range of emotions involved for men is a bell curve with "deeply intimate" to the right and "not intimate" to the left. If you drew the same bell curve for women then you'd probably see a similar shaped bell curve to the right.

I've attached a rough hand-drawn example of what it might look like. Remember that "deeply intimate" is to the right and "not intimate" is to the left. There is probably a lot more overlap than I've allowed for. But it kind of covers Walkie's example of men saying that they find sex about as intimate as blowing their nose, and the experiences of some of us men who find sex a deeply intimate experience.

I just saw boobs and cleavage