Rape is far less common than the media would have you believe, but the question is, why is it even as common as it is?
It is my view that generally and mentally the female is more “near sighted”, sensitive to the immediate, whereas the male is more “far sighted” and sensitive to the long range objective. Thus the male is more rugged, not being concerned over a few bumps and scraps as long as the objective is obtained. This combination along with the male being stronger is what gave the the team such an advantage over the jungle and propagation of the species. The male’s lack of sensitivity to the immediate allowed him to enforce the long term objective of success that competing animals could not see.
But this situation causes the male to be less sensitive to the immediate concerns of the female and the female to be more blind to the long range objectives so clear to the male. Thus the male doesn’t see his aggressiveness toward the act of rape in the same threatening light as the female. He instinctively senses that the immediate discomfort is comparatively irrelevant.
As males are medically and psychologically de-masculinized or feminized, they become more sthensthitive to the immediate and less to the long range implications. This typically enhances their memory and information handling skills (such as communication) but blinds them to the consequences of their actions.
Thus such males will gayfully vote for legislation that seems immediately rewarding regardless of long term consequences (ie. liberal). Whereas the more hardcore logical males will tend to have less memory skills (due to attending less to the immediate) and insist on protecting the planned future from chaotic disturbance. The will tend to brutally persist (ie. conservative).
Since courage requires discipline against the immediate danger, such feminized males also tend to lack courage in the face of danger and find it difficult to build highly interdependent structures such as tall buildings or stable economies. They might often mimic courage as their mind gets stifled into non-response, but that isn’t what courage is about.
But the good news is that they are far less often insensitive to the drama of immediate discomfort and thus far less tempted to rape. In a social sense, such males get raped themselves as the more masculine males at a distance use typical animal entrapping tactics to persuade them into future political bondage and submission.
So what really causes rape?
The same as the difference between liberal and conservative, the difference between near sightedness and far sightedness.
The guy wants the have sex, the woman doesn’t , the guy doesn’t care so he does it anyway regardless of the womans disinclination to the act.
There you go Rape.
I think your Opening statement is backwards; if the goal were reproduction and there was a dire need for it then this may support your argument, and perhaps at one time it did (perhaps, probably not though).
The Goal of Rape often isn’t procreation but pleasure either sexually and/or a pyschological desire to have power over someone else.
In this the Woman is more a long term thinker, “I don’t want sex with this person because I don’t want to get pregnent/get a disease/I don’t want a relationship with him/ this man doesn’t care about what I want and will hurt me to get what he wants.”
The Rapist is only thinking about the moment the plesure he gets from it, the one being raped is Disliking it for both the pain it causes them in the immediate and the problems it can cause for them in the longterm.
Of course the act of Rape isn’t always from one man to another woman but most rapes are, and your the one bringing up the aspects of Gender in it.
If you perhaps read a little more carefully, you can see how that is what I said, merely with more detailed explanation.
And you seriously think that the primative mind of homosapian was thinking, "let me see, if I want my species to survive the next ice age, it would probably be a good idea to create more of myself. Now hmm… how can I best do that?"
Perhaps I should mention that when a male has been de-masculinized yet not feminized, he loses his far sightedness without gaining nearsightedness and is thus un-sighted; blindly stumbling through efforts such as communication with limited vocabulary and not seeing the obvious intention or consequential reasoning, clumsily responding without forethought or insight.
The thread was about the rape issue, which is associated with the comparative nearsighted blindness of the male. I just thought I would add that additional common concern since it seem to be leading in that direction.
Hold on… not sure what kind of newspaper you read, but its pretty obvious that rape, sex without both person’s consent, is much more common than what is known. Yes, the media nurture our fear and want us to believe that “every” women on the planet has a high risk of getting raped in the bushes, but that kind of rape, assault rape from someone unknown, is the least common rape. However getting raped in your own bedroom by someone you know, husband, boyfriend, friends etc is much more common and is rarely spoken of. Shame and the difficulties surrounding proof makes it so.
Im sorry… what? Is pretty obvious that from a nature point of view, far more women would have sex, than men. So what do men do about that? They have to rape. These days, its more complex. They still rape because they have to, but as somone else said, they do because they can. OR they have a serious Oedipus complex…
I suspect, since attention reinforces memory and thus it’s lack weakens memory, the focus of the subject would more support one than the other. But then again, the focus of the male tends to be more long term ahead, not long term behind. But since a single course of action is maintained, what was a long term priority would seem to have reason to be sustained a little more merely by returning to it as the priority in thoughts; “Where was I headed with this?”.
Although, I’m certain the medical environment has far more to do with that issue.