Do we have a rape gene?

[Robert Maxwell]

Robert, the original point of this post, was that there was a study, by an evolutionary psychologist, and I believe that they are scientists, and this is a science board, that says that there may be a rape gene, or collection of genes.

I don't know whether or not evolutionary psychology is a "legitimate" science, although it seems to be a rather contentious field in the scientific community. That's usually a bad sign.

I'm interested in this cos I read SF and New Scientist and Sci am and I am qualified in the sciences.

Reading science fiction does not make you the least bit qualified in the sciences. Reading scientific periodicals also doesn't make you "qualified." Only your understanding of scientific principles does.

This has not been verified by geneticists yet and the article does give some opposing views, some of which, like you, say the whole area of research is a no-no.

I sure didn't say the area of research was a "no-no," just that you have no compelling evidence.

I also posted this scientific evidence:

http://www.anusha.com/rapeevol.htm

I did say that culture and genetics play a part equally in my theory.

Random links on the Internet do not constitute "evidence." How about a real scientific journal, or even a mainstream news article?

I do remember reading that the deep south was a little homogenous, genetically, but I do not remember where and I cannot find the quote.

Then it's not evidence or even a good talking point, since you have nothing to back it up.

My view is not a world view, and I was not born with it, not did it develop through my formative years. It is based on 43 years of experience. Darwin was not a geneticist, he could not analyse DNA and he came up with a theory based on observation.

Actually, the axe you're grinding here very much is a worldview. You are trying to take your personal experiences and apply them to a view of the world you find palatable to yourself. Darwin developed his theory using systematic observation and didn't draw conclusions about it until he had gathered enough data. Just taking your life experience, calling that "observation," and building a theory on it--that's not science. Sorry.

I do see, though.that culture probably has a lot to do with areas of low acheivement and those areas do sometimes have low status women and that may trigger something. I think I read somewhere that low acheiving men can be more inclined to rape and low acheivement is cultural in some places. I can see that a genetic study would make some a bit nervous, though. Maybe it should occur, but just be kept in the national archives until we have the maturity or standard of living to open it! Maybe we would be better off not knowing!

Equating rape with low achievement is a red herring, or at best it is an incomplete picture. Crime in general occurs more frequently in groups that you would consider "low achievement." People with little opportunity will indeed turn more to crime. I believe I said earlier in the thread that rape is often a response to a sense of powerlessness felt by the perpetrator--(most often) he wishes to reduce his own powerlessness by dominating another and inflicting that same helplessness on someone else. Why do you wish to assign a genetic component to something that can be explained entirely through different means? There is no evidence to suggest rape is caused by or even linked to genetics.

You seem to think we are against scientific research or something. I assure you nothing could be further from the truth. But it's very dangerous to start spouting something like this without anything to back it up. It's like the people who used to (and some still do) claim that blacks are genetically inferior and less intelligent. Yeah, they always had some kind of dodgy, half-assed "science" to back it up--and it was used to justify all sorts of terrible things.

I'm still waiting to see any kind of evidence, such as a peer-reviewed journal article, indicating anything even close to the existence of a "rape gene" or even a cluster of genes that correlate to sexual predation.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Cheapjack, we understand your point, but it seems you are pretty oblivious why they are met with skepticism. Dismissing it as a "touchy subject" kinda reinforces the feeling that you are not really aware of why people disagree with your treatment of the issue.

 

[Cheapjack]

Robert Iguana, I admit there is no genetic evidence, i've said that all along, but that Nicholas Kristoff has written a book about it, in the New York Times ,and has proposed a theory and incidentally has written a few books about empowering women too.

I've met some very funny ones in my time!

 

[Angel4576]

Sounds like rapist apologist propaganda.

"It's not my fault, it's the illness.....", or "It's just the way I am......"

 

[iguana_tonante]

Robert Iguana, I admit there is no genetic evidence, i've said that all along, but that Nicholas Kristoff has written a book about it, in the New York Times ,and has proposed a theory and incidentally has written a few books about empowering women too.

I've met some very funny ones in my time!

Beside the obvious joke about "Robert Iguana", the gestalt entity composed of myself and Robert Maxwell, I don't really know what to say anymore.

 

[Cheapjack]

These two were a biology professor and an anthropologist:

http://www.anusha.com/rapeevol.htm

Not geneticists, I admit, but scientists.

I'm not a rape apologist, nor a eugenics proponent. I don't want rape to happen. It would look like education is the answer.

 

[Cheapjack]

My apologies, and I admit, there is no scientific evidence for my observations, they're just anecdotes. But they might do some good?

 

[Cheapjack]

And, i would say, that rape is not always a case of dragging someone down a back alley and breaking laws which have been in place a long time. There's something a lot more subtle going on sometimes.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Robert Iguana, I admit there is no genetic evidence, i've said that all along, but that Nicholas Kristoff has written a book about it, in the New York Times ,and has proposed a theory and incidentally has written a few books about empowering women too.

I've met some very funny ones in my time!

Beside the obvious joke about "Robert Iguana", the gestalt entity composed of myself and Robert Maxwell, I don't really know what to say anymore.

The inimitable Robert Iguana is quite a fearsome creature of the night.

These two were a biology professor and an anthropologist:

http://www.anusha.com/rapeevol.htm

Not geneticists, I admit, but scientists.

I'm not a rape apologist, nor a eugenics proponent. I don't want rape to happen. It would look like education is the answer.

What?

My apologies, and I admit, there is no scientific evidence for my observations, they're just anecdotes. But they might do some good?

If you have no scientific evidence for anything you're proposing then I question why you're posting it in the Science and Technology forum.

And, i would say, that rape is not always a case of dragging someone down a back alley and breaking laws which have been in place a long time. There's something a lot more subtle going on sometimes.

And this is three posts in a row. That is known as spamming here and it's an offense that will earn you an infraction. Don't do it again. Learn to use the multiquote feature.

 

[Cheapjack]

Robert, my apologies for spamming. My computer is very slow. I will try to control myself!!

There is no scientific evidence for a rape gene, as we have not examined the gene sequence thoroughly.

But, there is a scientific theory, proposed by scientists, evolutionary psychologists, and that is a science. And I would guess, scientific theories belong on the science board. Scientific theory's lead to scientific discoveries, from what I know. The discovery may be that there is no rape gene. But the theory is based on evidence of behaviour, and some reasoning.l would guess that we all here would like to see more scientific discoveries, whether or not they bear out our own opinions.

Actually, I think that some people here are right and that more social and cultural change should bring about less rape, as you can't have eugenics. It may be done with some gene evidence, if it is there,it may not. But, as I said, you can find out if you're more genetically disposed to get breast cancer, and how to avoid it, so you might be able to have that bit of assistance, that bit of gene evidence, too. But rape is illegal, and hurts others, so I'm not too sure about this. Maybe you would just get more counselling at teenage.

Though this may seem like a diversion, but in the ST universe, which is the future a lot of people would like to see, I would say they have more social and cultural change and no eugenics to avoid rape. This is because Kirk attempted to rape Yeoman Rand, though admittedly only half of him did! But, half of him had the gene, or the instinct at least, so it is there, it is just more under social control.

My guess is that it is under control too, in this time, in most men, (and, controversially, in my guess, in some places, women), due to social conditioning. And, in some cases, in some areas, less so. Whether this is due to genetics and/or culture we don't know yet.

One thing I have always done, since childhood is share my ideas, maybe without thinking them through enough, first, I admit. Controversy sometimes is good. My apologies if I have offended anyone, but it was a scientific article I linked to.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Robert, my apologies for spamming. My computer is very slow.

What does that have to do with making multiple posts in a row?

There is no scientific evidence for a rape gene, as we have not examined the gene.

That's a circular argument if I ever saw one. "We won't know the rape gene exists until we find it! So, let's keep looking until we do!"

But, there is a scientific theory, proposed by scientists. I have named them. And I would guess, scientific theories belong on the science board. Scientific theory's lead to scientific discoveries, from what I know. The discovery may be that there is no rape gene. But the theory is based on evidence of behaviour, and some reasoning.l would guess that we all here would like to see more scientific discoveries, whether or not they bear out our own opinions.

It's not a "theory," it's a hypothesis. Scientific theories are peer-reviewed and confirmed by other scientists. Something put forth by a group of fringe scientists that is not accepted by the wider scientific community cannot be a "theory." Misuse of terms with specific meanings makes your claim that you are "qualified in the sciences" very suspect.

Actually, I think that some people here are right and that more social and cultural change should bring about less rape, as you can't have eugenics. It may be done with some gene evidence, if it is there,it may not. But, as I said, you can find out if you're more genetically disposed to get breast cancer, and how to avoid it, so you might be able to have that bit of assistance, that bit of gene evidence, too. But rape is illegal, and hurts others, so I'm not too sure about this. Maybe you would just get more counselling at teenage.

If--and it's a very big "if"--any gene correlated with rape could be found, I see no reason why it couldn't be addressed through genetic screening/therapy. And let's just assume there's a group of genes that correlates to the commission of rape. That does not mean the perp gets off. Rather, they would be considered to have an illness and be remanded for treatment until such time as their illness has been cured or is completely under control. If there is no treatment available, they will be incarcerated indefinitely.

I just don't see where you're going with this. No one is going to get away with rape because they have some gene or another. We would never allow it. The public outcry would be unbearable.

People have tried to use this sort of thing to get violent offenders off, claiming they have genes or a brain structure that makes them inclined toward violence. Juries don't find this sort of thing convincing, and in any case don't find that it absolves the perpetrator of responsibility.

Though this may seem like a diversion, but in the ST universe, which is the future a lot of people would like to see, I would say they have more social and cultural change and no eugenics to avoid rape. This is because Kirk attempted to rape Yeoman Rand, though admittedly only half of him did! But, half of him had the gene, or the instinct at least, so it is there, it is just more under control.

Are you seriously using an appeal to popularity here? There are aspects of the Star Trek future I like, and some I don't. But it's fiction, no matter how you slice it. No Eugenics War happened in our (real) history and I fail to see how any of this is relevant to your topic. The original series was informed by '60's sensibilities, including male chauvinism.

My guess is that it is under control too, in this time, in most men, (and, controversially, in my theory, women), due to social conditioning. And, in some cases, in some areas, less so. Whether this is due to genetics and/or culture we don't know yet.

I think it's a lot more straightforward to just say society has expressed that sexual assault is unacceptable and punishable under the law. Children are conditioned from a young age that unwanted sexual touching is absolutely forbidden. You don't need any genes to do that.

One thing I have always done, since childhood is share my ideas, maybe without thinking them through enough, first, I admit. My apologies if I have offended anyone, but it was a recent scientific article I linked to.

I don't think you've thought any of this through because you have failed to articulate a clear position, other than "I think there's a rape gene but I have no evidence for it."

 

[CaptainStoner]

This thread is a little thick with weird undercurrents.
Feminism is an enormously positive and needed energy across all cultures, really. Some women are naturally going to have a more "militant" reaction when they're just getting turned on to how FUCKED UP things have been, and continue to be.
Therefore the insinuation that feminism somehow equates to a genetic defect, maybe even the same one that causes rape behavior, is major bullshit. And I think the OP knew exactly what he was stirring up by going that way.
Genetics may play some role in finding precursors for rape, but I don't see how it could be that simple as a genetic "answer" to something that evidence and interviews indicate started much earlier, in a long progression of mentally ill thought patterns, and indeed some of those thought patterns culturally instituted, which makes the comparison of such a gene to feminism all the more insulting. And more indicative of intent, ignorance, or both.

 

[Cheapjack]

Robert, my apologies for spamming. My computer is very slow.

What does that have to do with making multiple posts in a row?

There is no scientific evidence for a rape gene, as we have not examined the gene.

That's a circular argument if I ever saw one. "We won't know the rape gene exists until we find it! So, let's keep looking until we do!"



It's not a "theory," it's a hypothesis. Scientific theories are peer-reviewed and confirmed by other scientists. Something put forth by a group of fringe scientists that is not accepted by the wider scientific community cannot be a "theory." Misuse of terms with specific meanings makes your claim that you are "qualified in the sciences" very suspect.



If--and it's a very big "if"--any gene correlated with rape could be found, I see no reason why it couldn't be addressed through genetic screening/therapy. And let's just assume there's a group of genes that correlates to the commission of rape. That does not mean the perp gets off. Rather, they would be considered to have an illness and be remanded for treatment until such time as their illness has been cured or is completely under control. If there is no treatment available, they will be incarcerated indefinitely.

I just don't see where you're going with this. No one is going to get away with rape because they have some gene or another. We would never allow it. The public outcry would be unbearable.

People have tried to use this sort of thing to get violent offenders off, claiming they have genes or a brain structure that makes them inclined toward violence. Juries don't find this sort of thing convincing, and in any case don't find that it absolves the perpetrator of responsibility.



Are you seriously using an appeal to popularity here? There are aspects of the Star Trek future I like, and some I don't. But it's fiction, no matter how you slice it. No Eugenics War happened in our (real) history and I fail to see how any of this is relevant to your topic. The original series was informed by '60's sensibilities, including male chauvinism.

My guess is that it is under control too, in this time, in most men, (and, controversially, in my theory, women), due to social conditioning. And, in some cases, in some areas, less so. Whether this is due to genetics and/or culture we don't know yet.

I think it's a lot more straightforward to just say society has expressed that sexual assault is unacceptable and punishable under the law. Children are conditioned from a young age that unwanted sexual touching is absolutely forbidden. You don't need any genes to do that.

One thing I have always done, since childhood is share my ideas, maybe without thinking them through enough, first, I admit. My apologies if I have offended anyone, but it was a recent scientific article I linked to.

I don't think you've thought any of this through because you have failed to articulate a clear position, other than "I think there's a rape gene but I have no evidence for it."

Robert, I studied physics to age 19. A scientific hypothesis, put forward by scientists, is scientific, isn't it?

I agree with you that a predisposition to rape, based on genetic evidence, if it exists,should not get you off. I did not say that. What I was hinting, was that with counselling, it may stop it happening in the first place. Is that not good? Wouldn't it be good to have that knowledge? Or not? As long as it doesn't appear on your CV!

It's not just me that thinks that there may be a rape gene. There are some on this board, too and some that write for the times. There is no evidence as yet, but we could look into it?

 

[Shatnertage]

Two thoughts:

1. I'm sure there's lots out there I haven't seen, but this might be the creepiest thread I've seen on TrekBBS yet. And that's saying something. Every time I see it up on the main page, I think it can't get worse. But it does.

2. I don't know whether to be surprised or relieved that the OP didn't introduce the "rape gangs" from Tasha Yar's homeworld as evidence.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Robert, I studied physics to age 19. A scientific hypothesis, put forward by scientists, is scientific, isn't it?

You called it a "theory." A theory is not a hypothesis.

I agree with you that a predisposition to rape, based on genetic evidence, if it exists,should not get you off. I did not say that. What I was hinting, was that with counselling, it may stop it happening in the first place. Is that not good? Wouldn't it be good to have that knowledge? Or not? As long as it doesn't appear on your CV.

Sure, it would be good to identify any genetic disorder and get it addressed. I don't see anyone disputing that.

It's not just me that thinks that there may be a rape gene. There are some on this board, too. There is no evidence as yet, but we could look into it?

There might also be a dumbass gene. Should we assume that it exists until we confirm it one way or the other?

 

[Cheapjack]

This thread is a little thick with weird undercurrents.
Feminism is an enormously positive and needed energy across all cultures, really. Some women are naturally going to have a more "militant" reaction when they're just getting turned on to how FUCKED UP things have been, and continue to be.
Therefore the insinuation that feminism somehow equates to a genetic defect, maybe even the same one that causes rape behavior, is major bullshit. And I think the OP knew exactly what he was stirring up by going that way.
Genetics may play some role in finding precursors for rape, but I don't see how it could be that simple as a genetic "answer" to something that evidence and interviews indicate started much earlier, in a long progression of mentally ill thought patterns, and indeed some of those thought patterns culturally instituted, which makes the comparison of such a gene to feminism all the more insulting. And more indicative of intent, ignorance, or both.

OK, I admit, I was being controversial. But, I said some feminists, not all of them. And, I tell you I've met some with weird tastes! Well, OK, three. And one of whom whose attitude I did not guess at, as I dated her.It may be that some behaviour may be picked up and a copied from centuries of male behaviour and may disappear. I do hope so. But there are places where a courteous, well mannered, male, is made a joke of, why, I don't know. By feminists, too, or at least three of them. I shouldn't have drawn a line to all of them.

I'm sorry.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I'm sorry.

I think we can apply that sentiment to this entire thread.

In the future, Cheapjack, please start discussions that have some actual scientific merit. I don't want to repeat this experience.

Thanks!