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

[Calandale]

Calandale, that is an interesting take on it.

I read it quite differently.

I got the impression that she valued their friendship and trusted him, but didn't want to fuck him.

She didn't feel disgusted or violated by his actions, it just wasn't something that she wanted to do with him. She didn't want to outright reject him and make him feel bad, so she gave him gentler messages that she hoped he would pick up on. And which he should have picked up on, but didn't.

That's what it looks like on face value, and I wouldn't dispute that is likely how both walked away feeling, to some extent.
I just wonder, because I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in wanting to be convinced, and coming up with reasons to stop.

The stuff about toxic masculinity I do agree with. In some circles your value as a man really is judged according to your sexual conquests.

So I've heard. And maybe seen evidence at some level - but about as believable as other tall tales about fighting and the like.
Certainly not something I've felt really applied with most guys I've known. Then again, I suspect I shun folks who fit that mold.

[Calandale]

... and then also ignored her going limp and quiet while he kept doing stuff.   

Yeah. I think that should be a pretty good clue. I might go to that extent with someone I already
had a relationship with (and yeah, because I get off on it more than because I'm actually pissed),
but you've gotta send mixed signals if you want them to continue and they don't know you're just
a spoiled tease.

[Al Swearegen]

... and then also ignored her going limp and quiet while he kept doing stuff.   

Yeah. I think that should be a pretty good clue. I might go to that extent with someone I already
had a relationship with (and yeah, because I get off on it more than because I'm actually pissed),
but you've gotta send mixed signals if you want them to continue and they don't know you're just
a spoiled tease.

Or don't send mixed signals?

[Al Swearegen]

Back to the OT- saw this yesterday and it struck me as a good example of culture and education making a difference in someone's attitude towards their own sexual behaviors.

(Before anyone gets all het up saying I'm screaming rape where there is none- I don't think the article I'm linking describes assault, but I do think it describes shitty behavior.  I also don't think the babe.net Aziz Ansari story describes assault, and I'm actually a little more ambiguous on whether it even does describe shitty behavior on his part or not, but that's a qhole side-quagmire.)

I thought I was one of the good guys. Then I read the Aziz Ansari story.
She told me to stop. I ignored her. It took me years to realize how wrong I was.
By Anonymous  Jan 24, 2018, 9:30am EST
SHARE
MORE
 
Shutterstock
First Person
Vox's home for compelling, provocative narrative essays.

Last week, I read the Babe.net article describing an encounter between comedian Aziz Ansari and a woman identified only as “Grace.” I read about how Ansari allegedly pushed past several verbal and nonverbal cues suggesting that Grace was not comfortable with their sexual encounter. I had a sickening moment of truth: I’ve done that.

RELATED

The controversy around Babe.net’s Aziz Ansari story, explained
It was just over four years ago. I was 22, newly single, and in college. I had just broken up with my long-distance girlfriend of five years and had spent the past few years hearing all about my friends’ and roommates’ hookups. I was excited to be single and date around. I kept a mental list of several women around school whom I wanted to sleep with.

I had an acquaintance, “Julie,” who was on that list. I’m not using her real name here, and I’m writing this piece anonymously, to protect both of our privacy. We had been to parties together, laughed together, and on a couple of occasions, I had walked her home. We liked each other enough to flirt, which eventually turned into the occasional texting conversation or phone call. I got the sense she was attracted to me.

After a couple of weeks of texting, Julie invited me on a trip to her home a few hours away from campus. I felt a little weird about going, as we didn’t know each other very well. But I said yes — to me, the invite felt like a pretty big sign that she wanted to hook up, and I was eager to have sex.

We arranged our travel plans. She would drive her car, and I would sleep over at her place the night before we left because we had to wake up early.

That night, Julie and I hooked up — and I ignored several of her verbal and nonverbal cues telling me to stop. Years later, I have come to believe that I came alarmingly close to raping her. I’m still disturbed by how normal it felt at the time.

The verbal and nonverbal cues I ignored
I arrived at Julie’s house at around 11 pm. We walked upstairs to her bedroom, which was small and cozy, lit by a star-shaped lamp.

I looked around. Her mattress was basically the only thing to sit or sleep on. It was clear — we would be sharing the bed. My face flushed, and my heart beat faster. I took this as a sign that a hookup would happen.

I lay in bed with Julie, her head resting comfortably on my chest, and we talked about this and that. We were dozing off a bit when we both turned on our sides to face each other. I could see her eyes were closed, but I sensed she was still awake. I touched my forehead to hers. She brought her mouth to mine, and we kissed.

As we were making out, we couldn’t find our rhythm. It felt like either her mouth was too small for mine or my mouth was too big. It seemed like she didn’t want to open hers all the way. I kept finding her teeth with my tongue, or going in for a mouth-half-open kiss, only to land on her pursed-shut lips. In the moment, I blamed first-hookup awkwardness.

I moved my hands under her shirt, pulled her close, grabbed her ass, and hoisted her above me so she could straddle my waist. It seemed sexy. She was still kissing me. I took off her shirt and bra.

At some point, I went down on her. I don’t remember any verbal cues to stop, but what I do remember is a significant nonverbal cue: She wasn’t making any sound. No moans, no breaths, no words. She seemed stiff. But I kept going because, well, I thought that oral sex was something people typically enjoyed. I worried I wasn’t doing it right, so I tried different spots and techniques, but nothing changed.

After some time, which I now realize was far too long, I stopped and asked if she was okay. She hesitated before speaking, and sat up.

“I don’t think we should have sex. We’re friends, and I think having sex will make things complicated.”

I responded almost immediately. “I don’t think it will make things complicated. I’m totally fine with figuring that out later.” I kind of laughed, I think, because I thought I was being charming. My feelings at the time were: We’re in the middle of having sex. It’s already complicated. Stopping now doesn’t make it less complicated. I was also horny, and Julie was hot, so I disregarded her feelings; I lurched toward her and starting kissing her neck.

“Are you sure you want to stop?” I whispered in her ear as I moved my hand toward her crotch.

“I just don’t think we should, because we’re friends.”

She never physically stopped me from touching her. At the time, I took that as a sign that she actually wanted me to continue. Her verbal objections, I convinced myself, were her poetic way of telling me she liked me enough to want to be in a relationship with me.

She was telling me to stop. And I didn’t. At least not at first. Instead, I continued to touch her clitoris, kiss her neck, and take off my underwear. She continued to say nothing and do nothing, and she was still stiff. I rubbed my penis across the outside of her vagina. She was wet. I convinced myself that this was further evidence that she wanted it.

I positioned myself for penetration but paused right before pushing inside her. At that point, things kind of snapped together for me. She didn’t want this — maybe she hadn’t pushed my hand away, but she had verbalized not feeling comfortable doing it. So I stopped.

It took me years to realize that even though I stopped, I’d still violated her.

I don’t remember what I said then. I don’t remember what she said either. But I remember that we talked in bed for a while. It felt normal. The next morning, we drove to her house. I met her mom and her old friends. We saw her old neighborhood. It was polite and pleasant but much less flirtatious. We didn’t have sex. I kissed her on the cheek when I said goodbye. After that, nothing really happened between Julie and me. I saw her around school, but that was it. I still follow her on Instagram.

I remember talking with my roommate after I got home. She wanted to know how my weekend went — I told her that Julie and I didn’t have sex because she wanted us to stay friends. I remember saying, “I hate when people aren’t clear about what they want. She seemed like she wanted to fuck me, so I kept going, but all she kept saying was that it would be weird. If she didn’t want to fuck me, she should have just said so.”

I realize now that this was my problem, not Julie’s.

Toxic masculinity affects all men
I considered myself a feminist back then. I still do — I fight for gender equality, and I actively try to be a better man every day. But it still took me years to realize that what I did to Julie was wrong. It was coercive. She told me she “didn’t think we should have sex,” and I kept trying anyway.

I thought I was getting signals from Julie that she wanted to have sex before the encounter started — the flirting, inviting me to her home. Maybe she did want to have sex. But at some point, she changed her mind or, at the very least, wasn’t sure how she was feeling. It wasn’t enthusiastic consent throughout, and at two different points, she objected. I ignored that.

In the years following the incident with Julie, I began to realize, often while reading articles online about enthusiastic consent, that what had happened between us wasn’t fully consensual. But it wasn’t until I read the Aziz Ansari story and the media conversation surrounding it that I realized the extent of what I had done.

I’m still not sure what to call what I did — assault? Coercion? A violation? What I do believe is this: If I hadn’t stopped when I stopped, I would have committed rape. But in that moment, it didn’t feel that way — it felt normal. I had convinced myself that she still wanted me despite her objections.

I don’t think I’m the only man who has done something like this. I think rape culture is so pervasive that men sometimes don’t realize when we’re actively committing assault. When Grace confronted Ansari via text message after their night together, he responded: “Clearly, I misread things in the moment.”

With Julie, I was aware of her verbal and nonverbal cues. But I had been socially conditioned to believe that women would want to have sex with me if I could convince them. I remember watching teen movies like Superbad and American Pie Presents: The Naked Mile, where men were portrayed as entitled to sex with women simply because these men were virgins and it was their “rite of passage.” My first orgasm was while watching internet porn, where consent to have sex is implicit. My middle school health class taught me about anatomy and drugs, but never consent.

As I aged, I ignored discussions of consent because I believed all sorts of myths about rape: that it’s only something that happens violently between strangers, when the woman is completely drunk, or between a powerful older man and a much younger woman. I never got the message that rape and assault was happening to women all around me and being perpetrated by men just like me.

Toxic masculinity praises sexually active men. Sex is conquest, competition, and a measure of self-worth. There is rarely a punishment for pressuring a woman to have sex with us — there is only, we are taught, the reward of sexual pleasure if we succeed.

But what we need to do is admit our faults. There are a million ways to say no, and we need to stop ignoring them. We need to make “enthusiastic consent” our mantra and keep it in mind whenever we might have sex.

I’m engaged now and have been with the same partner for four years. In the years following the incident with Julie, I’ve changed my behavior in bed. I try to let go of penetrative sex as a goal. I spent my younger years learning about foreplay and intimacy as a “means to an end.” Now intimacy, in all forms, is the end. The best way to get there is to listen to my partner’s words, actions, and body throughout sexual encounters — even if that means stopping sex in its tracks. That is its own form of intimacy.

I haven’t talked to Julie in years. I’ve thought about reaching out to apologize to her, but I’ve decided against it because it could upset her. Instead, I’m committed to continuing to change how I approach sex, and always making sure there is “fuck yes” affirmative consent.

I also want to talk to other men about this issue — it’s a conversation I’ve had with male friends, though not regularly. I remember one instance when two male friends and I were talking about sex, and we all admitted to engaging in some type of coercive behavior. None of us were proud of it. These are the kinds of discussions that need to keep happening.

Men, especially the most liberal, caring, and self-aware among us: look harder at yourselves. Rape culture ends when we stop raping.

I doubt this is what happened and I resent him deigning himself with some moral "voice of all men" position. H can go fuck himself.

[Calandale]

... and then also ignored her going limp and quiet while he kept doing stuff.   

Yeah. I think that should be a pretty good clue. I might go to that extent with someone I already
had a relationship with (and yeah, because I get off on it more than because I'm actually pissed),
but you've gotta send mixed signals if you want them to continue and they don't know you're just
a spoiled tease.

Or don't send mixed signals?

That's fine, if I never want to get laid. Which might well be the case now.

[El]

... and then also ignored her going limp and quiet while he kept doing stuff.   

Yeah. I think that should be a pretty good clue. I might go to that extent with someone I already
had a relationship with (and yeah, because I get off on it more than because I'm actually pissed),
but you've gotta send mixed signals if you want them to continue and they don't know you're just
a spoiled tease.

Or don't send mixed signals?

That's fine, if I never want to get laid. Which might well be the case now.

Clarity is a good thing to aim for in general, but I do think sending perfect, "unmixed" signals isn't realistic for everyone, which just is what it is- realistically, you can't go into a sexual encounter with a new partner and assume they're going to make all their wants and needs crystal-clear (nor can you assume they'll read very subtle cues correctly, to be fair- though again, I think in the article linked, the cues really weren't subtle).  But as far as how to respond to what your partner is putting out, when in doubt, err on the side of not crossing someone else's boundaries.

Calandale, that is an interesting take on it.

I read it quite differently.

I got the impression that she valued their friendship and trusted him, but didn't want to fuck him.

She didn't feel disgusted or violated by his actions, it just wasn't something that she wanted to do with him. She didn't want to outright reject him and make him feel bad, so she gave him gentler messages that she hoped he would pick up on. And which he should have picked up on, but didn't.

That's what it looks like on face value, and I wouldn't dispute that is likely how both walked away feeling, to some extent.
I just wonder, because I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in wanting to be convinced, and coming up with reasons to stop.

That concept... kinda doesn't scale well.  There's all kinds of shit you might personally prefer or secretly want, but you can't assume that's how other people are operating without some kind of explicit indication of that.

Also, he really didn't try to convince her, anyway- he just forged ahead.

[Al Swearegen]

... and then also ignored her going limp and quiet while he kept doing stuff.   

Yeah. I think that should be a pretty good clue. I might go to that extent with someone I already
had a relationship with (and yeah, because I get off on it more than because I'm actually pissed),
but you've gotta send mixed signals if you want them to continue and they don't know you're just
a spoiled tease.

Or don't send mixed signals?

That's fine, if I never want to get laid. Which might well be the case now.

Clarity is a good thing to aim for in general, but I do think sending perfect, "unmixed" signals isn't realistic for everyone, which just is what it is- realistically, you can't go into a sexual encounter with a new partner and assume they're going to make all their wants and needs crystal-clear (nor can you assume they'll read very subtle cues correctly, to be fair- though again, I think in the article linked, the cues really weren't subtle).  But as far as how to respond to what your partner is putting out, when in doubt, err on the side of not crossing someone else's boundaries.

Calandale, that is an interesting take on it.

I read it quite differently.

I got the impression that she valued their friendship and trusted him, but didn't want to fuck him.

She didn't feel disgusted or violated by his actions, it just wasn't something that she wanted to do with him. She didn't want to outright reject him and make him feel bad, so she gave him gentler messages that she hoped he would pick up on. And which he should have picked up on, but didn't.

That's what it looks like on face value, and I wouldn't dispute that is likely how both walked away feeling, to some extent.
I just wonder, because I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in wanting to be convinced, and coming up with reasons to stop.

That concept... kinda doesn't scale well.  There's all kinds of shit you might personally prefer or secretly want, but you can't assume that's how other people are operating without some kind of explicit indication of that.

Also, he really didn't try to convince her, anyway- he just forged ahead.

I think he wanted to morally virtue signal the evil of men, the need to teach toxic masculinity and wanted to lay a little blame on him but only because he was a little stupid/uneducated/ignorant because it is really because he is a male and therefore toxic and society is too Patriarchial and we are all too uneducated. He is leading the charge.

I doubt it ever happened but it is a narrative riddled story and one that portrays him as a victim of a bad society whilst pushing the Progressive narrative. I call bullshit.

[Calandale]

But as far as how to respond to what your partner is putting out, when in doubt, err on the side of not crossing someone else's boundaries.

Yep. My reading of others is bad enough that I do that. I don't even pry so much as to initiate conversation nor ask questions
during one they initiate until I know them well.

pt... kinda doesn't scale well.  There's all kinds of shit you might personally prefer or secretly want, but you can't assume that's how other people are operating without some kind of explicit indication of that.

On the other hand, I feel that those who have been sexually aggressive enough to make advances on me have
been able to get a pretty good clue of when they cross my boundaries. Mixed signals or no. It's a lot easier
to say no to something you don't want than it is to say yes to something that you feel is wrong.


Am I suggesting that someone follow that as guidance? No - because if you get someone who can't say no,
it's a bigger problem. But, my own intrinsic behavior is similar enough to certain conventional feminine patterns
(perhaps these are disappearing - relating back to the over-importance of sex); if those patterns were (are?) common enough,
it makes a lot of sense why behavior of more aggressive pursuit developed and was sustained.

Also, he really didn't try to convince her, anyway- he just forged ahead.

What do you expect 'convincing' is? "Gosh, let's step back from this moment of passion and rationally discuss
your feelings?" I'm sure that's likely to be a successful seduction strategy.

[Lestat]

Quite, (on that last bit), turning things into a discussion, complete with theoretical propositions written on a chalkboard, thats never going to get anyone anywhere, unless the woman is of the predatory variety.

Conventions certainly do change and IMO they have. Albeit before my time, it would have been unthinkable for a girl to storm over, kick the stuffing out of a guy who got in her way just wanting to speak to her, grab somebody and make her first introduction by grabbing a guy and making out with them, after stunning them somewhat (I mean, stunning not as in 'wow, she's GREAT! but as in female uses fixed large object to apply force to male by throwing them at it and following up with a body-slam)...it would have been scandalous not too long ago for certain (hell even today it could be pretty scandalous if the girl wasn't ex-post-facto given a free pass by the guy, because the guy had just fallen for her. The one I have in mind, hell I could have pressed charges if I'd been of the inclination to do it, I just wasn't, because she really did kick arse on an industrial scale and I think looking back I was hooked from the moment she took the first step towards me, albeit not in the least expecting the way things were about to go down )

[El]

But as far as how to respond to what your partner is putting out, when in doubt, err on the side of not crossing someone else's boundaries.

Yep. My reading of others is bad enough that I do that. I don't even pry so much as to initiate conversation nor ask questions
during one they initiate until I know them well.

pt... kinda doesn't scale well.  There's all kinds of shit you might personally prefer or secretly want, but you can't assume that's how other people are operating without some kind of explicit indication of that.

On the other hand, I feel that those who have been sexually aggressive enough to make advances on me have
been able to get a pretty good clue of when they cross my boundaries. Mixed signals or no. It's a lot easier
to say no to something you don't want than it is to say yes to something that you feel is wrong.


Am I suggesting that someone follow that as guidance? No - because if you get someone who can't say no,
it's a bigger problem. But, my own intrinsic behavior is similar enough to certain conventional feminine patterns
(perhaps these are disappearing - relating back to the over-importance of sex); if those patterns were (are?) common enough,
it makes a lot of sense why behavior of more aggressive pursuit developed and was sustained.

Also, he really didn't try to convince her, anyway- he just forged ahead.

What do you expect 'convincing' is? "Gosh, let's step back from this moment of passion and rationally discuss
your feelings?" I'm sure that's likely to be a successful seduction strategy.

  It sounds like his logic was "I'mma keep doing this thing that hasn't been working, but I'm gonna do MORE of it."  The way he's describing it, it doesn't sound like it was a "moment of passion" for her.

[Calandale]

But as far as how to respond to what your partner is putting out, when in doubt, err on the side of not crossing someone else's boundaries.

Yep. My reading of others is bad enough that I do that. I don't even pry so much as to initiate conversation nor ask questions
during one they initiate until I know them well.

pt... kinda doesn't scale well.  There's all kinds of shit you might personally prefer or secretly want, but you can't assume that's how other people are operating without some kind of explicit indication of that.

On the other hand, I feel that those who have been sexually aggressive enough to make advances on me have
been able to get a pretty good clue of when they cross my boundaries. Mixed signals or no. It's a lot easier
to say no to something you don't want than it is to say yes to something that you feel is wrong.


Am I suggesting that someone follow that as guidance? No - because if you get someone who can't say no,
it's a bigger problem. But, my own intrinsic behavior is similar enough to certain conventional feminine patterns
(perhaps these are disappearing - relating back to the over-importance of sex); if those patterns were (are?) common enough,
it makes a lot of sense why behavior of more aggressive pursuit developed and was sustained.

Also, he really didn't try to convince her, anyway- he just forged ahead.

What do you expect 'convincing' is? "Gosh, let's step back from this moment of passion and rationally discuss
your feelings?" I'm sure that's likely to be a successful seduction strategy.

  It sounds like his logic was "I'mma keep doing this thing that hasn't been working, but I'm gonna do MORE of it."  The way he's describing it, it doesn't sound like it was a "moment of passion" for her.

There were no mixed signals in the story case. She expressed a weak negative, and wasn't responding,
so I agree. I was disagreeing with your statements when there actually ARE mixed signals. Erring on the
side of caution and trying to 'convince' by means other than pursuing the physical seduction seem unlikely
to succeed, from my own passive experience.


I guess the key is, whatever may have occurred significantly prior to the moment simply shouldn't count
as a part of the 'mixed signals' in the moment. It's the immediate that matters, not some impression taken
out of the context of the moment of passion itself.

[El]

There were no mixed signals in the story case. She expressed a weak negative, and wasn't responding,
so I agree. I was disagreeing with your statements when there actually ARE mixed signals. Erring on the
side of caution and trying to 'convince' by means other than pursuing the physical seduction seem unlikely
to succeed, from my own passive experience.


I guess the key is, whatever may have occurred significantly prior to the moment simply shouldn't count
as a part of the 'mixed signals' in the moment. It's the immediate that matters, not some impression taken
out of the context of the moment of passion itself.

Oh, in the hypothetical abstract where it actually is hot and heavy and you're not just groping on someone who just said no and isn't responding happily, 'convince' has a broader range of meaning.  In this scenario, it's just digging the fuck-uppedness deeper.  Based on the article's description, it frankly seemed more likely to be salvageable by stopping really quickly into realizing the girl wasn't participating and at that point checking in, than by doing what the author did.

If the woman had been interested in having at least some kind of stuff happen in this encounter but was having some kind of upset or fear or freeze response for whatever reason (and those are big ifs, but the other options are basically that she was just not going to be into it no matter what), stopping and checking in about what she was experiencing, what she needed or wanted to have happen at this point might have also stopped that response.

[El]

Found yet another article to throw into this thread:

Can We Shame Perpetrators of Sexual Misconduct Into Becoming Better People?
Probably. But we need to figure out how to correctly deploy this powerful emotional tool.
By LINDA DOYLE

FEB 02, 20185:45 AM
TWEET
SHARE
COMMENT
 Man cowering in shame, man gazing upwards beginning to understand how to not be a terrible violent person.
Photo illustration by Slate. Photos by Thinkstock.
Shame is a powerful emotion. We often need it to motivate fundamental change. Researchers have found that compared with guilt and regret, shame was the only emotion that led people to be motivated to change something about themselves in the long run.

To be effective, however, shame must be deployed correctly. As new accusations of sexual misconduct continue to surface and public outrage indicates that this behavior will no longer be tolerated, it’s worth considering whether and how we could best make use of this psychological tool. Shaming moral transgression and norm violations is one important aspect of how we shape our society. But we need to shame perpetrators effectively—if we manage to, we have a greater chance of getting them to stop reoffending.

Shame is felt when some aspect of one’s character, or indeed one’s whole self, is fundamentally flawed, regarding moral transgressions, lacking competence, or inappropriate social behavior. The focus is on being a bad person, which differs from guilt, where the focus is on bad behavior. Guilt motivates you to make up for the specific guilt-inducing behavior, and once you’ve done that, it disappears. But shame could be the most useful emotion when long-lasting change is needed because the focus is on oneself, rather than the event, which forces the individual to acknowledge that unless he or she commits to changing, the behavior could be repeated.

The sentiments expressed by some of those facing sexual misconduct allegations have spanned the spectrum of admitting culpability. For example, Mark Halperin avoided shame when he said “my behavior was inappropriate and caused others pain.” Focusing on his behavior could imply that it was merely something he did, rather than his character that led to the behavior.

Shame could be the most useful emotion when long-lasting change is needed, because the focus is on oneself
Others, such as Matt Lauer have expressed regret (although, in Lauer’s case, this later changed to “ashamed and embarrassed”). Regret suggests you wish you chose a different path, but doesn’t commit you to preventing transgressions in the future.

In contrast, consider the language James Franco used on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert when questioned about the allegations against him: “In my life, I pride myself on taking responsibility for things that I’ve done … I do it whenever I know there is something wrong or needs to be changed, I make it a point to do it.” This hits home the key issue, which is that it is the perpetrator who needs to fundamentally change.

Shaming others works because people care about what others think of them, about their reputation and belonging to groups that are important to them. Shame is an emotion that lets us know we are in danger of being excluded from the group. We shame others when they have violated societal norms, which reflect the values and acceptable behavior in groups and societies.

This is what we have seen in Hollywood. First, Harvey Weinstein was fired from the company he co-founded, and Matt Lauer from NBC. Kevin Spacey, Louis C.K., and Brett Ratner all had projects cancelled. John Conyers and Al Franken both resigned from their political positions, and Roy Moore was not elected to the Senate. Companies and other affiliates want to be seen as punishing perpetrators, as stripping them of their positions of power to signal that this behavior will not be tolerated, and to distance themselves from them.

A key aspect of shame motivating change, however, is that it only works if we think we can change the flawed aspect of our character, according to a recent meta-analysis. If the shameful act is repairable, then shame makes you commit to change—it lets you know you need to change and the negative feeling gives you the motivation to do so.

But if the ashamed person thinks they cannot repair the flawed part of themselves, they will hide and wait for it to blow over without any real attempt to reform. One study on competency failures found that when improving themselves was perceived to be very difficult, shame led to a greater desire to protect their reputation, rather than motivation to improve. If you try to reform and fail, it is even more painful than covering it up, because you risk losing face in front of others or damaging your self-esteem even more. This suggests that when reform appears too difficult or even impossible, shame leads to withdrawing and saving face rather than the motivation to reform (it’s important to note that this research is on competency failures, not moral transgressions).

Showing remorse and shame is just the first step; it provides the motivation to change, but it does not signal change itself.
Still, the emphasis on reform is reflected in a point made by Bryan Cranston when asked whether there is a way back for sexual perpetrators. He argues that if they show us that they are truly sorry, do not make excuses, and admit they have “a deeply rooted psychological and emotional problem,” then there is the possibility for forgiveness. He adds that “we shouldn’t close it off and say: ‘To hell with him, rot and go away from us for the rest of your life’… Let’s leave it open for the few that can make it through that gauntlet of trouble … maybe it’s possible.” It is possible for sex offenders to repent; some have.

That shame can be appropriately deployed is borne out in lower recidivism rates for sex offenders treated with respect, and higher rates for those who experienced stigma and low self-esteem. This suggests that if the emphasis is on acknowledgement and rehabilitation rather than stigmatizing and shunning, reoffending may be lower. On the other hand, life-destroying shaming may act as an effective deterrent from attempts to change.

Rehabilitation programs, by definition, instill participants with the belief that they can reform. They can be an important part of how society deals with deviance, though they are not a panacea, and this is not to say we must forgive everyone as soon as they finish the program. It may not work for everyone, but it will for some. Neither am I suggesting that we replace prison sentences with rehabilitation—simply that rehabilitation should be a key aspect of dealing with anyone who has transgressed. It’s also worth remembering that showing remorse and shame is just the first step; it provides the motivation to change, but it does not signal change itself.

The take home message is this: Perpetrators who feel like they are permanently defective people may run and hide, possibly without trying to adjust their behavior. But if they feel like a part of themselves is defective but changeable, they may be more likely to own up to their failures and be motivated to reform. This suggests that as a society, in the media and in daily life, treating perpetrators like social pariahs may not be the best path toward a healthier society. Research suggests the most effective way to shame perpetrators is to express that this is not acceptable, that their time’s up. But that admonishment shouldn’t come with irrevocable condemnation—perpetrators should be encouraged to seek professional help and to stick with it for as long as necessary. Using shame in this way could lead to fewer cases of sexual misconduct in the future—a goal worth striving for.

[Calandale]

I don't buy it. When shame has been used (pedophillia for example) in sex-drive related matters,
it all too often becomes an enhancement to the need.


This might work fine for someone who truly just doesn't get that their behavior is inappropriate,
but for rapists? Even someone like Louis CK, I suspect there was full knowledge that his behavior was
wrong - and yet he still went ahead with it. Just as people who fuck in semi-public, with a vague thrill
of being caught know their behavior is not acceptable.

[Arya Quinn]

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.