Why does society ignore the sexual coercion of men by other men and women?

[White_Unifier]

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/03/coerced-sex.aspx

'A total of 43 percent of high school boys and young college men reported they had an unwanted sexual experience and of those, 95 percent said a female acquaintance was the aggressor, according to a study published online in the APA journal Psychology of Men and Masculinity®.'

How is it that anti-rape education campaigns often ignore the possibility that men can be victims and women can be perpetrators? In fact, in the US until 2013, the legal definition of rape excluded the possibility that a man could be raped by a woman!

Sure the law changed since, but social beliefs about female sexual aggressors and male victims of sexual coercion still have a ways to go.

Outside of sexual violence, there is also the matter of domestic violence. Statistics show that the rate of men being battered by their wives is in fact almost as common as that of women bettered by their husbands, and the physical harm done can sometimes be just as horrific as women are also more likely to use weapons in the attack.

Is this just a societal blind spot based on gender-role stereotypes?

An interesting statistic I just came across too is that 60 to 80 percent of rapists, sex offenders, and sexually aggressive men were sexually abused by a woman in their childhood. While this certainly does not excuse the behaviour of an able-minded rapist, it certainly goes to show how combating the sexual abuse of men by women could probably help to combat the sexual abuse of women by men. With that, ignoring the sexual abuse of boys and men by women could contribute to the rape of women by men and so feed the cycle of violence.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9s5H-RNjxY

 

[petros]

I had a couple instances of girls stuff their hands down my pants or come up to me and start kissing.

I was full grown 6ft 180lbs and sporting a stache at age 15, smart, funny, good looking, a pool, a job and a RM 250 dirt bike.

If I were a 14 yo girl I'd have been all over me too.

 

[White_Unifier]

I had a couple instances of girls stuff their hands down my pants or come up to me and start kissing.

I was full grown 6ft 180lbs and sporting a stache at age 15, smart, funny, good looking, a pool, a job and a RM 250 dirt bike.

If I were a 14 yo girl I'd have been all over me too.

Please allow me to change your words:

'I had a couple instances of boys stuff their hands down my pants or come up to me and start kissing.

'I was big-breasted and curvy, smart, funny, good looking, a pool, a job and a RM 250 dirt bike.

'If I were a 14 yo boy I'd have been all over me too.'

So according to your logic, the more a woman forces herself on a man sexually, the more he should take it as a compliment? does this work if the roles are reversed?

It would seem that if we taught people not to rape instead of just boys not to rape, anti-rape education might be more effective. After all, rapists feed off one another. The stats show that many rapists have been abused themselves, often by the opposite sex, and that goes in both directions. Where do they learn it from?

 

[petros]

Nooooo.

Sexual assault is sexual assault and I didn't appreciate it and nor did my girlfriend.

Big haired heavy metal hosebags weren't my thing.

 

[White_Unifier]

Yet society always presents men as being incapable of being raped because they always want sex and women as being incapable of raping because only men have the rape gene. If someone questioned a woman's rape accusation on the mere basis that she was aroused or got an orgasm, he'd quickly be put in his place and rightfully so. Yet these same people would assume that a man has full control over erections, orgasms, and ejaculation and that therefore those prove that he wasn't raped as if he somehow has full control over his physiological functions.

 

[captain morgan]

only men have the rape gene.

The rape gene?

Lemme ask you then, for those transgendered individuals that are/were a man born in a womans body or woman born in a mans body, where does the rape gene come into play there?

Does a biological male believing they should be female lack the gene?... Does a biological female believing she should be male have the gene?

If someone questioned a woman's rape accusation on the mere basis that she was aroused or got an orgasm, he'd quickly be put in his place and rightfully so. Yet these same people would assume that a man has full control over erections, orgasms, and ejaculation and that therefore those prove that he wasn't raped as if he somehow has full control over his physiological functions.

Date rape... No, means no regardless how far into the hot 'n heavy you get, right?

 

[Serryah]

"Rape Gene"???

Oh FFS...

Anyone who believes in that is just... actually I'm not sure there's words for it.

Rape isn't genetic, rape is about power, period. Male on female, Female on male, it doesn't matter. It's about power.

 

[captain morgan]

It's amazing how far some people will bend over backwards to find any reason to excuse someone from personal responsibility

 

[White_Unifier]

The rape gene?

Lemme ask you then, for those transgendered individuals that are/were a man born in a womans body or woman born in a mans body, where does the rape gene come into play there?

Does a biological male believing they should be female lack the gene?... Does a biological female believing she should be male have the gene?




Date rape... No, means no regardless how far into the hot 'n heavy you get, right?

I was being sarcastic about the rape gene. Some feminists give me the impression that they believe in such a thing and that therefore women can't rape and all men are rapists at heart.

As for arousal, heck, a man can get an intense erection without arousal just by waking up in the morning. A man can also get an erection when angry or even terror-stricken. And a man can orgasm and ejaculate if forced into sex against his will without any problem. It's no different from a woman getting aroused or reaching orgasm during rape. It simply might not be in that person's control to prevent it from happening.

It's amazing how far some people will bend over backwards to find any reason to excuse someone from personal responsibility

What do you mean by that? If you mean for example that a woman should dress modestly and not get drunk, I agree. Same goes for a man. If he gets drunk and passes out, then he does raise the risk of getting raped. It goes without saying.

That still doesn't excuse the rapist either of course in either case.

"Rape Gene"???

Oh FFS...

Anyone who believes in that is just... actually I'm not sure there's words for it.

Rape isn't genetic, rape is about power, period. Male on female, Female on male, it doesn't matter. It's about power.

You've not come across much recent feminist tripe, have you?

 

[Serryah]

I was being sarcastic about the rape gene. Some feminists give me the impression that they believe in such a thing and that therefore women can't rape and all men are rapists at heart.

As for arousal, heck, a man can get an intense erection without arousal just by waking up in the morning. A man can also get an erection when angry or even terror-stricken. And a man can orgasm and ejaculate if forced into sex against his will without any problem. It's no different from a woman getting aroused or reaching orgasm during rape. It simply might not be in that person's control to prevent it from happening.



What do you mean by that? If you mean for example that a woman should dress modestly and not get drunk, I agree. Same goes for a man. If he gets drunk and passes out, then he does raise the risk of getting raped. It does without saying.

That still doesn't excuse the rapist either of course in either case.



You've not come across much recent feminist tripe, have you?

I've heard of it actually. I thought it was stupid then as now.

Then again, I think certain parts of feminism are full of apeshyte wackadoodles that need to take a few meds to STFU and just stop trying to represent my sex.

 

[White_Unifier]

the other thing that irritates me is the idea that a man is stronger than a woman so should be able to fight her off. Firstly, that's not always the case.

Secondly, even when it is the case, there are factors to consider. Imagine the following scenario:

A man expect protected sex. Suddenly, the woman mounts him without protection. In disbelief, he opens his eyes and looks. Realizing that it's actually happening, he dips his bum into the bed to extract his penis from her vagina. She quickly adjusts and it's back in within a fraction of a second. He then contemplates throwing her off the bed but has to assess the surrounding dangers. For example, if there is a piece of furniture next to the bed, he might worry about her hitting her head against it if he throws her off. He might also worry about her hitting her head against the floor. he might also worry about injuring her in some other way too. As a result, he might need a second or two to analyse his surroundings and possible options. If he's particularly aroused, the entire incident might take no more than 3 seconds before orgasm and ejaculation and it's over. That's a lot of information to process in three seconds and is just not enough to react to the situation no matter how physically strong he might be.

The same could apply to a female rape victim who accesses a knife. human nature is such that she might still hesitate to stab him in spite of his raping her. Some people just don't like to hurt others even when the other is hurting them. Part of the reason for this too is the element of shock. People don't get raped every day after all.

 

[captain morgan]

I was being sarcastic about the rape gene.

You might wanna make a small item like that really clear if you decide to go down that road... No one else had any idea you were being sarcastic

What do you mean by that? If you mean for example that a woman should dress modestly and not get drunk, I agree. Same goes for a man. If he gets drunk and passes out, then he does raise the risk of getting raped. It goes without saying.

What do you think that I meant by it.... You were going on about rape genes and whatnot

 

[Curious Cdn]

You are all talking about violent, criminal assault.

 

[petros]

Why does it need to be violent?

Unwanted touching is rape.

 

[Curious Cdn]

Why does it need to be violent?

Unwanted touching is rape.

Unwanted touching is inherently forceful.

 

[petros]

Not really. All it takes is a gentle rub on the leg. That's it.

 

[White_Unifier]

You are all talking about violent, criminal assault.

I agree. That's the worst kind. However, emotional manipulation can be just as traumatic. for example, threatening to end the relationship if she doesn't get sex, or begging and pouting, or asking him if he thinks she's ugly so as to make him feel guilty for refusing, etc. etc. etc. A man who succumbs to that might feel guilty himself and deny that he had been coerced even though it will still affect him far more than some might realize.

But then again, just as some believe men have a 'rape gene' and always want sex, some also believe that men have no emotions and so can't be manipulated into sex against their will. for example, a woman who verbally harasses her boyfriend for sex puts him in a difficult position. Does he tell her to F off? That's not very feminist of him is it? Does he physically kick her out of his house or, if at her home, tell her he's leaving and leave and slam the door behind him? Not a every feminist act either. does he just put up with her whining? Or does he give in? But again, that's not possible because men don't have emotions, right?

Not really. All it takes is a gentle rub on the leg. That's it.

In some cases, maybe. Then again, that goes both ways and can apply to some women too. Where the man really resists though, physical force against the man is uncommon but not unheard of. More likely it will be a combination of physical touching and emotional manipulation and emotional blackmail if necessary.

 

[Curious Cdn]

Not really. All it takes is a gentle rub on the leg. That's it.

That is a crime.

 

[White_Unifier]

That is a crime.

But not easy to prove, granted. Heck, even fornication in the absence of coercion can be difficult to prove unless they were having sex in a public park in plain sight of witnesses or CCTV cameras, were caught by police raiding a bawdy house,or one of them accuses the other of it. Sexual coercion of any kind is even more difficult to prove, and if it does not actually involve sexual intercourse, then that would be among the most difficult sex crimes to prove. It's just the nature of the beast.

While laws can help, education needs to play a role too. Instead of teaching boys not to rape girls, we need to teach people to not coerce other people into unwanted sexual experiences.

That is a crime.

Interestingly enough though, if a man started rubbing a woman on the leg without her consent, we'd all be up in arms. But when a woman rubs a man on the leg, it's just like rubbing a genie in a bottle.

It makes for good humour.

 

[Curious Cdn]

But not easy to prove, granted. Heck, even fornication in the absence of coercion can be difficult to prove unless they were having sex in a public park in plain sight of witnesses or CCTV cameras, were caught by police raiding a bawdy house,or one of them accuses the other of it. Sexual coercion of any kind is even more difficult to prove, and if it does not actually involve sexual intercourse, then that would be among the most difficult sex crimes to prove. It's just the nature of the beast.

While laws can help, education needs to play a role too. Instead of teaching boys not to rape girls, we need to teach people to not coerce other people into unwanted sexual experiences.



Interestingly enough though, if a man started rubbing a woman on the leg without her consent, we'd all be up in arms. But when a woman rubs a man on the leg, it's just like rubbing a genie in a bottle.

Hockey and sports coaching, Cub and Scout leadership, the Priesthood, even school teaching attracts predatory paedophiles to their ranks so that their prey is closer, more vulnerable and able be attacked with subtlety.

Expect the worst and keep our children safe. Any kind of touching is potentially criminal. Don't cool around. One simple incident can ruin a young person for life.