Rape fantasies in men and women

[Error Nomad]

Originally Posted by ChiTownHoney

This is great stuff! Thanks!

I think you are correct in the sense that when any human being has power, he will abuse it to some extent. That is the truth of humanity. We will never be satisfied with what we have, but strive for more. That is why we have advanced tremendously throughout the ages. Man always wants more.

It is true that most soldiers do not rape. But rapes are most common in third world countries. This is because the army is most often not consisting of volunteers.

The rapes of thousands indigineous women in Guatemala went unpunished during the guerilla war. It was not even just the guerillas, but the actualy Army who raped women 5 men at once. Almost all women prisoners were raped and tortured. I think this is because the men who were soldiers were in the army against there will. They did these things because they were angry themselves. Also, there were no consequences. But how can that be justified?

Maybe power changes a man. I have never had any great amount of power, but even when I had a little bit, I loved it. I could easily take advantage of it.

It's not just that they're not volunteers, it's that they're -unwilling- volunteers. This means that any message of discipline and honor transmitted from above isn't likely to take, and that you're going to end up with a cross-section of society that will include a higher percentage of shitheads. In WWII the Western Allied troops were not generally known for rape, though I'm
sure it occasionally occurred. But during Vietnam some situations surfaced. This was still a tiny minority, probably equivalent what you would find in society normally, but these individuals had much more power and violence egging them on.

It's not justified. It's not something that you should sleep well about at night. But justification is just a way of saying "I'm right" with authority, and you can justify some pretty horrible things. It just is, as everything else is, and should be understood. One of the many reasons to avoid war.

EN

[ego]

A rape as an act of war is to complicated to be sure about.And very different than peace time.During war, the victim is called enemy.Soldiers are there with killing as main purpose.If killing is allowed, perhaps they guess that minor crimes are allowed also.Who is going to stop them (or put charges) ? Any army commander prefers his soldiers break on non-mombatants than among them.In some wars, soldiers are asked to rape (when war happens for land).Rape is another way to demoralize ememies.To make them be afraid for you.
Secondly, soldiers are probably thinking as a mass.When they do the crime as a team the responsibility is divided.
Generally if your life is "kill enemies-burn villages-destroy everything that moves", a rape wont destroy your day....

If it is justified? I cant say. A kill is justified during war?
What i know is that a war never comes alone.It brings death, destruction, pain, hunger, misery and perhaps some rape.
So, what is to be justified (if can be justified) is the war itself, not its aftereffects.
And i am afraid some wars were not only inevitable, but absolutely necessary.

About the opening question now: I dont have a clue.What i know is that most of girlfriends i had, were glad to add something different in bedroom.And that nine in ten girls i meet and like them, i imagine i rape them also.

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by ego

A rape as an act of war is to complicated to be sure about.And very different than peace time.During war, the victim is called enemy.Soldiers are there with killing as main purpose.If killing is allowed, perhaps they guess that minor crimes are allowed also.Who is going to stop them (or put charges) ? Any army commander prefers his soldiers break on non-mombatants than among them.In some wars, soldiers are asked to rape (when war happens for land).Rape is another way to demoralize ememies.To make them be afraid for you.
Secondly, soldiers are probably thinking as a mass.When they do the crime as a team the responsibility is divided.
Generally if your life is "kill enemies-burn villages-destroy everything that moves", a rape wont destroy your day....

If it is justified? I cant say. A kill is justified during war?
What i know is that a war never comes alone.It brings death, destruction, pain, hunger, misery and perhaps some rape.
So, what is to be justified (if can be justified) is the war itself, not its aftereffects.
And i am afraid some wars were not only inevitable, but absolutely necessary.

About the opening question now: I dont have a clue.What i know is that most of girlfriends i had, were glad to add something different in bedroom.And that nine in ten girls i meet and like them, i imagine i rape them also.

War is a sad thing. The fact that we as a civilization can never live together in a Utopian society is very sad. No matter what we have, there will always be a reason to fight each other.

As for the matter at hand....You can take that war mentality of soldiers and apply to peace time as well. You never know what may be going on in another human beings life, therefore, they may just as well be at a similiar state of mind as if they were at war. i.e they're crazy, deranged, and they may totally not be at fault or aware of their actions. To say that a war rape is justifiable is to say that rape is justifiable. To say a war kill is justifiable is to say that any kind of kill is justifiable. Murder is murder, rape is rape. And all human beings are capable of doing these things because it lies within each of us.

What I am saying is if somebody can do these things at desperate times, they are perfectly capable of doing it when they are not desperate. Its the the society/religion/whatever, that condemns it. I am not interested in society, I am interested in the instinctual nature of humans.

When I get that all figured out, I'll let you know

Oh, and what you said about the responsibility being divided up concerning gangrapes....yes it may be true, but the trauma you cause the victim, the years of mental anguish and physical brutality you inflict on another human being by raping them...it does not differ from war to peace time. A man who is at war knows this....but he does it anyways....

That is why I believe its in mans nature....although he is less likely to do it because society condemns it and there are sheer consequences. Men at war rape because there ARE no consequences.

[Error Nomad]

"That is why I believe its in mans nature....although he is less likely to do it because society condemns it and there are sheer consequences. Men at war rape because there ARE no consequences."

The lack of consequences is probably part of it. I don't believe it's the most important factor. I think the situation itself triggers behaviors at a deep level that make things like rape more likely. If killing is possible, something like rape is possible.

As to whether or not rape itself is in mens nature, I think the real issue is that abuse of power is in human nature. Rape is one artifact of that. There are many, and gender has nothing to do with it.

EN

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by Error Nomad

As to whether or not rape itself is in mens nature, I think the real issue is that abuse of power is in human nature. Rape is one artifact of that. There are many, and gender has nothing to do with it.

EN

Exactly

So do people even bother with the whole penal system anyways....trying to be just in an unjust world....Why does someone shun the rapist or the murderer? saying that they dont deserve to live? If you say one of these guys dont deserve to live you are saying everyone should just perish right now.

That is why the world will end soon. Humans are evil.

You know what else is really sad. In the U.S, a college woman has sex with one of her peers when she is intoxicated. The next morning she claims that he raped her. The guy gets arrested, charged, and thrown out of school.

A 14 year old indian girl in Central America is kidnapped, tortured, raped, by 5 or 6 soldiers. She cant walk right for the years after because of the brutality. The men just get up and go about their business without so much as a look. No consequence, no nothing.

Whats the difference? The 1st example is a "rape" that happened years ago, and thats what people call "rape". Can you believe it? A stupid bitch has some regrets, so she has been "raped". And most people think its a "horrific crime". The guy could get jail time, and everybody hates him Thats our system in the U.S.

But the 2nd example happened too. Too thousands of young indiginous in Central America. But according to some people on this board...its ok, cause war is a different circumstance. However, the stupid whore in the 1st example is pitied and sympathized with.

[ego]

Originally Posted by ChiTownHoney

. But according to some people on this board...its ok, cause war is a different circumstance.

If by saying "some people" you mean me, please read again my post. I never said that "its ok".I said its an aftereffect, it comes with a war as many other brutallities and that if u want to judge it, u have to judge it as a part of a bigger total. U cant separate it.

[ego]

Originally Posted by ChiTownHoney

Murder is murder, rape is rape. And all human beings are capable of doing these things because it lies within each of us.

Absolutely true....

Originally Posted by ChiTownHoney

I am interested in the instinctual nature of humans.

That is why I believe its in mans nature...

And this also. The reptile lives in all of us....

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by ego

If by saying "some people" you mean me, please read again my post. I never said that "its ok".I said its an aftereffect, it comes with a war as many other brutallities and that if u want to judge it, u have to judge it as a part of a bigger total. U cant separate it.

I wasnt talking about you specifically, but based on everyones comments as a whole. Particularly the person who said that the rules change when there is war, and that she wouldnt compare war rape to peace time rape. Why should the rules change? Does human nature change? Does morality change? Does pain change? I guess maybe they do, but its is totally wrong do dismiss a brutal attack as an "afteraffect of war". Why wouldnt you compare a rape during war time to any old rape on the street? Does the pain change?

[Error Nomad]

"Why should the rules change? Does human nature change? Does morality change? Does pain change? I guess maybe they do, but its is totally wrong do dismiss a brutal attack as an "afteraffect of war". Why wouldnt you compare a rape during war time to any old rape on the street? Does the pain change?"

No, they don't, but you learn the limits of them. Any time someone is in constant contact with the breaking of the rules they've been raised with they will eventually learn that they count for little. They can be broken, and they are often broken with official sanction.

This can be in a war, in a really crappy neighborhood, in a poor place, or just in the wrong place. But as a species we mostly live by rules we only superficially understand and that were handed to us by others with a set of instructions. We don't think about them much, though we judge by them. When we learn that the rule is arbitrary, it breaks the mold, and the rule is no longer -automatically- in force. Doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't follow it, but that we won't do it automatically. We may or may not think about why. Add pressure, hatred and imminent death and stir.

I think many veterans of all wars come back with problems that, among other things, involve trying to piece the rules back together.

I'm not offering any excuses for anyone. I make observations only, and those could be wrong. But I suggest we be careful with the value judgments from our couches.

EN

[ego]

Originally Posted by ChiTownHoney

I wasnt talking about you specifically, but based on everyones comments as a whole. Particularly the person who said that the rules change when there is war, and that she wouldnt compare war rape to peace time rape. Why should the rules change? Does human nature change? Does morality change? Does pain change? I guess maybe they do, but its is totally wrong do dismiss a brutal attack as an "afteraffect of war". Why wouldnt you compare a rape during war time to any old rape on the street? Does the pain change?

Well, i also believe that rules change. Human nature changes not, but is released. Morality makes a U-turn.An action that could make u a despicable criminal, during war time somehow makes u a hero! Pain changes not.

Now, about why rules change: During war, your opponents are not considered as humans, they are just enemies.Your job there, is to put evil on them (the trainers do a really good job on make u believe this).The atmosphere of the battle (that joins u even when battle is over) gives u an overboost and margins every piece of morality left.There is no action -no matter how cruel it is- that u wouldnt do.Because an instinct rules.The most powerfull, the mother of all instincts: SURVIVAL (Have u ever try to put yourself in a WW2 battle? Explosions everywhere, u crawl among dismembered bodies, bullets whiz, the man u slept next to now scatters all around and the smell- that fucking smell of blood.If you smell it once, you never forgett it). What kind of morality u expect from someone who have such an experience? What a rape will cost in his soul?
Probably, rape is in his duties, among burning villages, killing, pillaging.
War is a brutallity itself and comprise from smaller brutal actions.You cant have the one without the other.

Creta was the last part of Greece felt during WW2 (1 and half year after capital!). 10.000 of the elit German paratroopers died in three days.Cretans had very few weapons.How they died? Rocks,spades,teeth.Can you guess the mental situation someone has to be to kill someone else by bitting his neck?
When reading greece's modern history, this people are called 'heroes' and their actions are 'monuments of bravery and valor'.

I am not trying to say that the fact u try to survive justifies the fact u gangrape a helpless kid.But as long as history is written by winners,brutal actions will be covered and varnished by the importance of the operation.

Sorry for the garrulity....

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by ego

Well, i also believe that rules change. Human nature changes not, but is released. Morality makes a U-turn.An action that could make u a despicable criminal, during war time somehow makes u a hero! Pain changes not.

Now, about why rules change: During war, your opponents are not considered as humans, they are just enemies.Your job there, is to put evil on them (the trainers do a really good job on make u believe this).The atmosphere of the battle (that joins u even when battle is over) gives u an overboost and margins every piece of morality left.There is no action -no matter how cruel it is- that u wouldnt do.Because an instinct rules.The most powerfull, the mother of all instincts: SURVIVAL (Have u ever try to put yourself in a WW2 battle? Explosions everywhere, u crawl among dismembered bodies, bullets whiz, the man u slept next to now scatters all around and the smell- that fucking smell of blood.If you smell it once, you never forgett it). What kind of morality u expect from someone who have such an experience? What a rape will cost in his soul?
Probably, rape is in his duties, among burning villages, killing, pillaging.
War is a brutallity itself and comprise from smaller brutal actions.You cant have the one without the other.

Creta was the last part of Greece felt during WW2 (1 and half year after capital!). 10.000 of the elit German paratroopers died in three days.Cretans had very few weapons.How they died? Rocks,spades,teeth.Can you guess the mental situation someone has to be to kill someone else by bitting his neck?
When reading greece's modern history, this people are called 'heroes' and their actions are 'monuments of bravery and valor'.

I am not trying to say that the fact u try to survive justifies the fact u gangrape a helpless kid.But as long as history is written by winners,brutal actions will be covered and varnished by the importance of the operation.

Sorry for the garrulity....

Well, all this said, it just says one thing to me. These actions that are justified in the war, are actions that occur all around us, so maybe they are justified too.

You know what reall pisses me off is that people dont seem to understand that some people deal with that same mental anguish in their day to day lives. Does that give them justification to go and commit a crime? If not, why not?

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by Error Nomad

This can be in a war, in a really crappy neighborhood, in a poor place, or just in the wrong place. But as a species we mostly live by rules we only superficially understand and that were handed to us by others with a set of instructions. We don't think about them much, though we judge by them. When we learn that the rule is arbitrary, it breaks the mold, and the rule is no longer -automatically- in force. Doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't follow it, but that we won't do it automatically. We may or may not think about why. Add pressure, hatred and imminent death and stir.

So, then, why are people punished for their crimes? Why do rapists get convicted and given a harsh sentence? Why should we follow rules? If the rules do not apply to soldiers who rape and kill just because they can, then why should they apply to me?

War is an invention of mankind...so why would mankind invent a system to punish criminality that they allow when they want to take and conquer?

[Sternenlied]

Why should we follow rules? If the rules do not apply to soldiers who rape and kill just because they can, then why should they apply to me?

Well, there are rules for warfare ... soldiers aren't allowed to kill randomly (only enemy soldiers, no civilians) and certainly not to rape.
The hard (and impossible) part is making soldiers follow these rules. Mankind has too much of an animal in it not to go wild when there's almost no chance of prosecution.
How can you pursue a crime committed by (for example) ten soldiers when there were several thousand of them involved in the fighting?
I don't think it's right at all but beside from not going to war I don't know how to change it ...

[MarcEdeSade]

Originally Posted by Sternenlied

Well, there are rules for warfare ... soldiers aren't allowed to kill randomly (only enemy soldiers, no civilians) and certainly not to rape.
The hard (and impossible) part is making soldiers follow these rules. Mankind has too much of an animal in it not to go wild when there's almost no chance of prosecution.
How can you pursue a crime committed by (for example) ten soldiers when there were several thousand of them involved in the fighting?
I don't think it's right at all but beside from not going to war I don't know how to change it ...

War is an unnatural act for humans, and to become soldiers a LOT of work is required in overcoming the normal human urges to flee death, and to kill total strangers.

After all the dehumanization (both the individual soldier and geared towards the enemy) and under extreme stress, some behave a little....what we'd call less than human. big surprise.

It's not the lack of prosecution. Far from it. When you train an attack dog, and throw him in the pit, you don't expect him to cuddle the cute little bunny after tearing out the throats of his rivals.

[Lola86]

Originally Posted by gaggirl

unless of course half the people I met were lying!!

I think they were. Forced sex has been recognised as one of the top female fantasies. Women are happy to admit to it in a survey, just not to their friends.

[MarcEdeSade]

Originally Posted by ChiTownHoney

I wasnt talking about you specifically, but based on everyones comments as a whole. Particularly the person who said that the rules change when there is war, and that she wouldnt compare war rape to peace time rape. Why should the rules change? Does human nature change? Does morality change? Does pain change? I guess maybe they do, but its is totally wrong do dismiss a brutal attack as an "afteraffect of war". Why wouldnt you compare a rape during war time to any old rape on the street? Does the pain change?

Why not compare a wartime killing to any old killing on the street and execute all our soldiers when they come home?





Warfare involves a suspension of morality....especially when you're lighting thousands of people on fire with the push of a button.

Do we expect someone who just lit a few dozen men on fire and watched their agonizing flaming death, their flesh dripping off their bones, and had to think about their starving widows and orphans at home, bawling when the message comes....to even blink at the thought of raping just ONE person?

That's like asking a slaughterhouse "knocker" who spends all day shooting iron slugs into living cows to cry over the cat he ran over driving home.

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by MarcEdeSade

Why not compare a wartime killing to any old killing on the street and execute all our soldiers when they come home?

Maybe they should!! I dont and never have respected soldiers. ESPECIALLY American soldiers. They pull those stupid lines and think they the shit because they go overseas to fight for a cause they know absolutely nothing about. If it wasnt voluntary, I would just feel sorry for them.

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by MarcEdeSade

to even blink at the thought of raping just ONE person?

You're right! Its just ONE person. Just like I should not feel sorry for just ONE rape victim when there are thousands of them all around me.

[dionysius_drowns]

Interesting thread that's rolling here.

Just a thought I'd like to add. In our daily life, we have predetermined roles, as set on us by society. We have a policeman, a fireman, a streetwalker, a talk-show host and so on. Accompanying these roles, we have rules and regulations, which are supposed to preserve this order. Now, what if one day you wake up, and realise that all of this has been broken down. In an anarchy, would there be rape? Can a peaceful anarchic society exist? If you were set lose in a field, with no rules, and a hundred people, what would be your first instinct -- Conquest or co-existence?

[Muffler]

Originally Posted by dionysius_drowns

Interesting thread that's rolling here.

Just a thought I'd like to add. In our daily life, we have predetermined roles, as set on us by society. We have a policeman, a fireman, a streetwalker, a talk-show host and so on. Accompanying these roles, we have rules and regulations, which are supposed to preserve this order. Now, what if one day you wake up, and realise that all of this has been broken down. In an anarchy, would there be rape? Can a peaceful anarchic society exist? If you were set lose in a field, with no rules, and a hundred people, what would be your first instinct -- Conquest or co-existence?

This Field, would it have barnyard animals in it? If so, first thing I'd do, is fuck a cow, you know, just to show all the other cows, and possibly humans, that there'll be no co-existing in any pre-determined ways in my paddock, Dr Freud. I'm the top cow! Mooo...MOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!