Women's Reactions to Rape

From the short statement above I can already develop a pretty strong critique, specifically regarding the inference you are taking from it, but I will wait for a citation. Personally I'm surprised it is that low. I want you to think about this very carefully... If asked would you be willing to kill someone if you could get away with it, do you have an idea how many people would say yes?Self-reporting issues aside, questions on vague hypothetical situations which have no bearing on real life have not proven indicative of anything.If you want chilling social research, there is enough of it that indicts men and women equally. Especially when freedom from punishment is involved. That wasn't what I was saying. I was saying that the idea that men constantly counseling other men not to rape would be meaningless as those that are prone to rape will not listen. It is about the ineffectiveness of that method regardless of numbers of rapists.To answer your model of what men are like, I would say there are only a minority of men who rape. That is borne out not only by stats on rape, but even the rape fantasy study stats you reported. 35%... even if that reflected actual proneness to rape... is a clear minority.I don't know why you bring "consider it" into this discussion. I'm not even sure what you mean by that... fantasize? Realize the opportunity when it presents itself? Or are you talking about seriously contemplating whether to go out and rape someone (as opposed to going to a movie or something)?Fantasy and realization of opportunity are vastly different than serious contemplation. I think the latter, which is the only serious matter, is also in the minority. I want to point out that your revulsion and apparent revulsion that his male friends would pat him on the back stands in stark contrast to your original post on this matter. That is a form of counseling. Specifically it is a form of bonding and social reinforcement for having done the right thing.We are animals after all and that is EXACTLY what should have been expected and rewarded. If you did not give him a pat on the back you didn't reinforce his correct choice.If you are going to demonize him for noticing an opportunity, a very real temptation, then I am to assume you do not have these in your life? Whether it is regarding theft of material goods or physical pleasure or wiping out an enemy makes no difference. Temptation is temptation. People will notice opportunities. He should have been rewarded for making the right choice. Wasn't this person for all practical purposes stating that he realized it would be a form of coercion/violation? Otherwise why was he stating it was a good that he didn't do it?In any case, there are many women who treat sexual encounters as rape or violations when they are not. And there are even women that want rape-like or coercive sex and get upset when men don't. If you can tell me why that is I'll let you know why some men view something differently than women.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

sorry Rei - you know how it is - I was in the house (gun to hand) and a queer was trying to get in the window - I just hit the reply button in a panic.

Well to be accurate I am suggesting that violence against EVERY GENDER is prevalent in society. I would not say epidemic, but something that everyone should be concerned with as a possibility.If I remember right violence against men outweighs that against women. And if we want to talk about specifics of rape, many women start falling out statistically based on class and location. Amd what's worse most counseling of the victims tends to be only further victimization... oh poor you you must be traumatized, how horrible it must have been. Uh yeah, so lets get to counseling which is simply on how to move on without dwelling on failures (of defense) and how to empower onesself in the future. Guns are great for distance and not at incredibly short ranges where surprise is a major factor one is having to deal with. To be honest a knife or sword would be preferable.I don't mean to totally dismiss the utility of guns, But I am giving a pretty routine analysis of their value in what many rape situations would be.I would prefer pretty much anything other than a gun, except if I knew I was being pursued and had some distance. Oh I agree, that's why I am not punking outright on your question. But I think the best answer lies in the statement above. Avail yourself of EVERY defense option. There is usually always something one can use, but ones we normally carry may get cut off. We cannot EXPECT to be able to rely on it. That's why guns can become crutches which end up defeating the whole mental state you really need. I started with Karate and quickly dropped it... just didn't suit me personally.Then I spent 2-3 years in a sort of intensive kungfu program. I had to stop because of school but practiced its shadow boxing forms for years (still do off and on) as well as some of its other combat training methods.It was a specialized system based on chinese temple boxing systems... some tibetan as well. Its basis was wing chun (the same base system Bruce Lee used to develop his art) and chin na with a bunch of animal forms distilled to just their most effective attacks and defenses. I suppose it also threw in some Mouy Thai techniques to capitalize on knees and elbows.The point however was not flash or display or sporting but real streetfighting capability. I like studying martial arts and I still think it is one of the most effective systems I have ever seen... when you are talking about training to become adept at selfdefense quickly and for the most likely type of combat you will see: close quarters.It did involve some weapon training, including exotics if you trained long enough, but the emphasis was on escrima (sticks) and meteors (those little balls people use to toughen their grip) because they most resemble anything you can pick up around you in a flash.Heheheh... one of the "weapons" I used against the group of muggers was the wallet and money they wanted to steal. Oh I wish I had that one on tape.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

In addition to the UCLA study, lets look at a situation where we had an undisciplined force who "was the law":News: Breaking stories & updates - The TelegraphExcerpt:
----------
THE Red Army's orgy of rape in the dying days of Nazi Germany was conducted on a much greater scale than previously suspected, according to a new book by the military historian Anthony Beevor.Beevor, the author of the best-selling Stalingrad, says advancing Soviet troops raped large numbers of Russian and Polish women held in concentration camps, as well as millions of Germans.The extent of the Red Army's indiscipline and depravity emerged as the author studied Soviet archives for his forthcoming book Berlin, to be published in April by Viking.Beevor - who was educated at Sandhurst and served in the 11th Hussars (Prince Albert's Own), an elite cavalry regiment - says details of the Soviet soldiers' behaviour have forced him to revise his view of human nature."Having always in the past slightly pooh-poohed the idea that most men are potential rapists, I had to come to the conclusion that if there is a lack of army discipline, most men with a weapon, dehumanised by living through two or three years of war, do become potential rapists," he told The Bookseller.
----------This message has been edited by Rei, 10-01-2004 01:34 PM

---

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

I will point out that we have yet to see the study. What we saw was a sentence saying that 35% of guys (and given it is UCLA likely a select group of guys) selfreporting on whether they'd rape if they had a chance to get away with it.Again, I will wait for the study before speculating, but it's already looking worthless as an indicator of what men are like. Your excerpt, while not one of the studies I was talking about, was a clear demonstration of EXACTLY what I was referring to. Without question. Those conditions bring out the very basest instincts and actions based on instincts.I have yet to see any connection to what that means about men under normal living conditions.I mean EVERYONE UNDER BAD CONDITIONS LONG ENOUGH DO MEAN THINGS. People eat people when push comes to shove.And forget the red army, have we already forgotten the face of that girl in Abu Ghraib? Uhhhh... I think it's pretty much beyond question she became a rapist. Frankly that whole scenario almost mirrored the studies I was talking about.Anecdote: I was close to stepping off a train, when police raced in with guns to get someone that had just stepped off. This prim and proper old lady at the door... looked like the someone's sweet lil grandma... turned and SCREAMED, "THEY GOT GUNS THEY GOT GUNS WE"RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!" Then proceeded to CLAW her way back up the steps pushing anyone and everyone (including kids) between her and those guns.Anytime I get too confident about how nice people are, that acts as a nice counterpoint.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Ok, that's certainly the case. But several things are true:1) Men are better equipped on average, physically, to be both aggressor and defender.2) I've never met a man that wasn't at least a little interested in fighting - liked kung fu movies, could recognize a couple different models of handgun, knew a basic punch, kick, and block, etc. - and didn't think himself capable of inflicting at least a little damage.Neither of these things tend to be true of women. The first they can't change, really. But the second? Why are so many women totally ignorant of basic fighting tactics? And of course, "nothing you did makes it your fault." Can you imagine a man even thinking he would need to say that to another man? I sure can't. With several years of experience in at least three different styles of swordplay, I'm probably the best swordsman I know. That may not be saying much. At any rate, though, I'd be hard-pressed to suggest, in all honesty, that I could draw and strike with a katana faster than a gunman could draw his weapon and fire.Yes, I'd prefer a sword as well. (I'm working on a way to conceal one in a cardboard document tube. ) I could cut someone in half shoulder-to-hip if it was sharp enough. But that's not a feat that your average woman has the strength and skill to accomplish. Hrm. I guess before I'm able to address this, I'd like to see some kind of tactical analysis of the situation of rape. When/where does it occur? How is the woman disabled/restrained? Etc. Surely somebody's done a pretty good workup on this? Some police force, somewhere? I totally agree, obviously. The only reason I suggest firearms is because they provide the maximum defensive benefit with the least investment of time. It takes years to learn a martial art. It takes minutes to load and fire a gun. They may not work in all situations, or even most (I'd need to see some numbers), but they're incredibly effective in certain situations.

quote:

---

And forget the red army, have we already forgotten the face of that girl in Abu Ghraib? Uhhhh... I think it's pretty much beyond question she became a rapist.

---

I don't know. Did the prisoners explicitly say "no" and struggle? Otherwise, via our discussion on the other thread, she'd just be a "violator" or an "assaulter".Personally, I'd call her a rapist either way.One of the key points about the Red Army, however, was how widespread the rape was. We don't know yet - and may never know, although I hope not - how widespread the rapes conducted by US soldiers and contractors in Iraq are.

---

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Ack, what happened to my reply to this post?Never mind... I spent half an hour responding, and I don't feel up to typing it again, unless you really want Basic summarry:
I linked some studies from the New England Journal of Medicine (I"ll dig them back up if you need them ). One showed that you're 43 times more likely to have a family member shot by a gun in your house than an intruder; in their study, also (as an aside), there were 7 cases of guns being used against intruders. In 5 of the 7 cases, the homeowners ended up shot.The other study showed that homes with guns are 3 times more likely to have homicides in them.I then discussed rape rates in states with concealed handgun laws (they tend to be *higher* than normal rates).I put a heavy focus on the fact that you keep addressing unrealistic rape scenarios. Rapists don't just turn and run at you from across the room. If you've got a knife at your throat, and you try to reach into your purse, you're as good as dead. And a knife at your throat is a situation where you've got *more* options than most rapes (be they drugs, punched, pinned, or whatnot).I also pointed out that your case of a gun in the purse for deterrence is silly; a gun in the purse is not "brandishing" it. What you'd need to propose is either wear it on a holster, or announce its presence every 15 minutes. And you're still not going to avoid most types of rapes.In short, it's self destructive, which is the key point you need to address: minimal to nonexistant prevention power, much higher risk of hurting yourself and those you love.I then responded to your strawman (which I was rather ashamed to see you make:

quote:

---

Which do you think is more likely? Your average woman getting raped, or an experienced gun owner injured by their own weapon?

---

(the real situation is "Which do you think is more likely? Your average woman getting raped when the attacker comes from a far enough distance that you have time to get out your gun and fire or stop the person, as opposed to having no chance to even get to the gun, or having it where they struggle with you over the gun, vs. an average woman being injured by her own gun (especially when trying to draw it in a rape situation). In short, what is better? Drastically increasing your chances of being murdered after you're raped and getting yourself and a loved one shot, all for a near nonexistant benefit, or getting raped?Then I went into your bad analogy:

quote:

---

It's like you're telling me "well, my cousin was killed in a car accident, and my brother was killed in a car accident, and I have this coworker who's paralyzed from the neck down because of a car accident; but I'm not going to wear my seatbelt because it makes it too hard to eat in the car."

---

No, it's not like that at all. It'd be like that if guns stopped rapes and had no side effects. They don't, and they do. A more realistic analogy is:"It's like you're telling me "well, my cousin was killed in a car accident, and my brother was killed in a car accident, and I have this coworker who's paralyzed from the neck down because of a car accident; but I'm not going to strap a bomb to the hood of my car in hopes that if I get in an accident, it will blow me back into my seat."Lastly:

quote:

---

You know what's not going to stop an attacker? Leaving yourself no option but to lay there and pretend its not happening.

---

Unfortunately - and I know this often comes as an affront to male pride - there's not always a solution to a problem of violence. A bad solution is often worse than the problem itself - look at Iraq. Bringing a gun into a violent crime means that someone is going to get hurt - and more often than not, it will be you. Even without the crime, you're more likely to lose a loved one or your own life to your gun. It's completely counterproductive.I wish I hadn't lost my post... It was much better worded than this.

---

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

But that's just speculation. I haven't seen anything, from anybody here, that gives me any kind of indication of what scenarios are realistic, or common, or anything. If you think my argument is guns or nothing, then it is you making the strawmen.So you don't want a gun. That's fine. What are you going to do instead? So no guns, then. I can respect that.What I can't respect is, "guns are useless, so by extension, so is any attempt to protect myself." If you won't use a gun, what are you going to do? Hope you don't get raped?How well did that work for other people that you know?

I've flagged this message as a reply to Crashfrog, but I am really targetting quite a few people.Where to start? Well, Crash's comment seems as good a place as any. The fact that you can't imagine this situation demonstrates that you don't realise just how common it is, or why. Look back at Lam's comments about women being more careful about who they hang out with. Doesn't that look suspiciously like suggesting the woman was partly to blame by being friends with someone who then rapes her? Now, maybe that wasn't exactly what Lam was trying to say, but it sure comes across as that.Or how about your ideas of women doing more self defence? Does that mean that its the woman's fault for not learning self defence? Is it a case of "Well, if she'd bothered to learn karate it wouldn't have happened"?How do you think the police would react to a woman who has killed someone by shooting them and says "It was self defence - he tried to rape me". Consider this, even when a rape has taken place, its damned difficult to prove and get a conviction. How easy will it be to prove attempted rape? OK, the guy is lying dead at her feet, but you're missing any forensic evidence of rape because it didn't happen. It was prevented. So, instead of being raped, the woman could find herself on a murder charge and be facing life in prison. Gee, that's a step forward.Some of you have commented on how women react to rape and that they don't fight back hard enough. Would it surprise you to know that the harder you fight back, the more serious your injuries are likely to be and you still end up raped? I can't give you a reference for this, but I'll have a web hunt later. Women do struggle and try to fight off their attacker, but there comes a point where they realise that its futile and if they want to get out of the situation alive they do as they're told. You're forgetting thatwhen a woman is attacked like this, the overriding thought isn't "I don't want to be raped". Rape hardly comes into their thoughts. Its more like "Oh God, I don't want to die". That's where women are at when they're raped. They think they're going to be KILLED, MURDERED. With that in mind, are you surprised that they stop fighting? They're trying to survive. They will do whatever it takes to come out of this alive. Only later do the consequences of the rape hit home, then some smart arse says "You should choose your friends more carefully"!!! Strewth.Many of you here are pontificating about how a woman should react when threatened with rape without even realising that, in a situation like that, women think they are being threatened with murder. You think its different from serious violence. Not only that, but you have never had to face the threat of death, imminent death, with no-one there to help you. How dare you make sweeping statements about how a woman should behave in that situation when you have no idea what the situation is like when you're in it and you're on your own?Women are all too aware that, with few exceptions, men are much physically stronger than women. They are also aware that if they unsuccessfully try to use some half-remembered and rusty self defence they'll only make matters worse. If doing as they're told instead of fighting gives them a slight chance of survival, then they'll do what they're told.Before anyone has a go at me and says I'm pontificating as well, let me assure you I'm not. I'm telling you how it was for ME!!! So you can take your suggestions of choosing friends more carefully, or using self defence to make a bad situation worse and you can shove them where you seem to be keeping your brains! You see, I may not have stopped the rape, but I came out of it ALIVE and I came out of it without being disfigured or mutilated, something I would have had to look at EVERY day of the remainder of my life.I'm really quite angry about some of the comments on this thread, but I don't tend to bear a grudge and I do understand that some of you don't realise just what is involved in a situation like this. I'm not out to blast anyone out of the water - I just want to make some of you think a bit before you make sweeping generalisations again.'Nuff said

Some stats that I found that might help us judge which scenarios are more likely or more common (in no particular order):

quote:

---

About 1 of every 16 rape/sexual assault victims reported that a firearm was present during the commission of the offense. Most victims (84%), however, reported that no weapon was used by the offender.

​

About 9 out of 10 rape/sexual assault victimizations involved a single offender, according to victims' reports (figure 4).

​

Three out of four rape/sexual assault victimizations involved offenders (both single- and multiple-offender incidents) with whom the victim had a prior relationship as a family member, intimate, or acquaintance. Strangers accounted for nearly 20% of the victimizations involving a single offender but 76% of the victimizations involving multiple offenders. About 7% of all rape/sexual assault victimizations involved multiple offenders who were strangers to the victim.

​

About 7 out of 10 victims of rape/ sexual assault reported that they took some form of self-protective action during the crime (figure 6). The most common form of self-defense was to resist by struggling or to chase and try to hold the offender.

​

Among victims who took a self-protective action, just over half felt that their actions helped the situation. About 1 in 5 victims felt that their actions either made the situation worse or simultaneously helped and worsened the situation.

​

Compared to 1990, the rate of rape among women in 1995 was 10% lower (80 per 100,000 women versus 72 per 100,000 women). In 1990 law enforcement agencies recorded about 1 rape for every 1,250 women, and in 1995, about 1 forcible rape for every 1,400 women.

---

That's a bit of a relief; I had been under the impression that it was considerably more common than that.

quote:

---

For nearly 90% of the youngest victims of rape, those younger than 12, the offender was someone known to them. Law enforcement agencies reported that family members victimized 43% of these young victims--about 4 times the proportion found among victims age 30 or older (11%). Older victims (age 30 or above) were about 12 times as likely as the youngest victims to have been raped by a stranger (36% versus 3%).

​

About two-thirds of the victims age 18-29, the largest age group of rape victims, had a prior relationship with the rapist, but they were 7 times as likely to have been acquaintances (57%) as family members (8%).

​

About 12% of rapes involved the use of a gun (5%) or knife (7%), and 80% involved the use of physical force only.

​

About 40% of rape victims suffered a collateral injury--5% suffered a major injury such as severe lacerations, fractures, internal injuries, or unconsciousness.

​

More than half of spousal rapes, rapes by ex-spouses, and stranger rapes resulted in victim injury, while about a quarter of parent-child rapes resulted in major injury. Injuries were most common among victims age 30 or older and victims of rapists armed with a knife. Nearly 6 in 10 rapes involving a knife resulted in victim injury.

​

Since the latter half of the 1980's, the percentage of all murders with known circumstances in which rape or other sex offenses have been identified by investigators as the principal circumstance underlying the murder has been declining from about 2% of murders to less than 1%.

​

Sexual assault murders were about twice as likely as all murders (39.2% versus 20.9%) to involve victims and offenders who were strangers (figure 31). Sexual assault murders and all murders were equally likely to have involved acquaintances, but family murders were far less likely to have involved sexual assault.

​

The most commonly used weapon in sexual assault murders was a knife (figure 32). About 2.2% of murders in which a knife was used involved sexual assault. Less than 0.4% of firearm murders involved sexual assault.

---

from No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.vaw.umn.edu/documents/sexoff/sexoff.html#id2635172I don't offer these to prove any particular point; only as a guide to help us construct reasonable tactical rape scenarios.

Rape is a horrible crime that no woman deserves; no man, for that matter. I do rather resent your attempt to style my remarks as somehow blaming women for crimes visited on their persons. Well, they might very well find his prior conviction for rape; or discover that there is absolutely no connection between the man and the woman; or discover that the death happened in a place known to be the scene of many rapes.But if a woman is being attacked and thinking "hrm, I'd better not kill this guy, because I'm not sure I can make self-defense stick", then she needs to radically re-evaluate her priorities.The legal system provides remedies for the redress of injust conviction. What remedy is provided by the rapist? Would it surprise you to know that's simply not true? That women fight back in almost 4 out of 5 cases? And that in one out of two cases where they did fight back, they felt it improved their situation? Why should their reaction be any different to a murderer? Why wouldn't you fight back if someone wanted to kill you? Every woman should assume that their rapist is going to murder them. I have nothing but sympathy for your experiences. I truly cannot imagine what you have gone through.But I know how to read. And everything I read tells me that self-defense doesn't make a bad situation worse - quite the opposite. The vast majority of people who defended themselves made their situation better.

quote:

---

But that's just speculation. I haven't seen anything, from anybody here, that gives me any kind of indication of what scenarios are realistic, or common, or anything.

---

I've given you a list of possibilities. Armed rapes (which are relatively rare; the weapon is usually a knife, since - as I mentioned - rapists don't suddenly announce their intention to rape you from across the room). Brute force (the person pins you down). Drugs. Assault (the victim is physically incapacitated first). Etc.Hmm.. perhaps this will help:Error: SIU CarbondaleIt's a publication from a university's department of public safety on what to do in a rape situation, how to prevent a rape, etc (and a whole lot of other things related to rape). Notice that nowhere does it suggest that you be armed. There's a reason for that. Furthermore, if more potential rapists feel that they have to be armed, that is a very bad thing; those rapes are much more likely to end in homicide; you'll note that they advise very different things for if the assailant is armed.It also cites more detail about the UCLA study, although they don't give a link to it. I should try and track that study down. The numbers cited are:35% anonymously admitted that, under certain circumstances, they would commit rape if they believed they could get away with it
One in 12 admitted to committing acts that met the legal definitions of rape
84% of men who committed rape did not label it as rape
43% of college-aged men admitted to using coercive behavior to have sex, including ignoring a woman's protest, using physical aggression, and forcing intercourse
15% acknowledged they had committed acquaintance rape; 11% acknowledged using physical restraints to force a woman to have sexHmm... here's the full text of one UCLA study, but it's a different (albeit equally disturbing) one:Server Migration NoticeThey read men a story of a man asking a female student if she wants a ride to her dorm, she says no, he thinks she's being "an arrogant bitch", and he drags her into his car and rapes her. 36% of men reported sexual arousal, 37% identified with the rapist, 26% said the rapist was justified, 38% said the victim enjoyed being raped, and 36% of men thought all women should enjoy victimization, 49% said other men would rape if they could get away with it.

quote:

---

If you think my argument is guns or nothing, then it is you making the strawmen.

---

No. You compared a well-trained person to the average unarmed woman, and didn't at all include the fact that bringing a gun into a violent situation drastically increases the odds of you being a victim of further violence, that most types of rape couldn't be prevented by firearms (if someone pins you down, how do you go for your gun? If someone has a knife to your throat, how do you go for your gun (without getting killed)? If someone drugs you, how do you go for your gun? Etc; rape doesn't occur with the perpetrator announcing their intention to rape you).

quote:

---

So you don't want a gun. That's fine. What are you going to do instead?

---

Not make a bad situation worse, perhaps?If you want a list of available options, check out the first ref I gave in this post. One of those ("Intimidation may also work: Lie if you have to; tell him your male roommate is on the way home; tell him you have herpes or VD. Say you have to use the bathroom, and then leave. Say whatever it takes to get out of the situation.") actually worked for a friend of mine. She convinced the guy that the person in the room above hers was home, and that they'd easily hear if she screamed, because they were always complaining about her making too much noise as it was.The *best* thing a woman can do is be familiar with the fact that rape is real, that it is common, and that there are situations that you can be in that are particularly risky, and how to avoid them. Also, should someone attempt to rape you, as listed in the sheet of advice, there are things you can do to try and stop the rape, without putting yourself in a far worse position.

---

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

quote:

---

Compared to 1990, the rate of rape among women in 1995 was 10% lower (80 per 100,000 women versus 72 per 100,000 women). In 1990 law enforcement agencies recorded about 1 rape for every 1,250 women, and in 1995, about 1 forcible rape for every 1,400 women.

---

​

That's a bit of a relief; I had been under the impression that it was considerably more common than that.

---

You do realize that it's a per-year figure, right? Over the course of a lifetime, that means about 1 in 16 chance of a *reported* rape (estimates vary, but most people put the number at around 2 in 3 rapes are not reported). The numbers are also higher for women who go to college, and women who serve in the military.

---

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Why do you think self-defense does that? Statistically, the reverse is true.And this is what I can't understand - why any reasonable person would conclude that resistance against someone who is going to rape and murder you would have consequnces that were worse. What's he going to do? Kill you twice?And while sexual assaults usually don't end in murder, why would you take that chance? Why wouldn't you assume that any rape is going to end in your death? Yes. Self-defense. What did you think I was talking about?But why do almost 25% of women fail to do even that?