Genetic basis for rape.

[Adm_Hawthorne]

Admiral,

You choose not to be fat, cos it's bad for you. You have the choice. The knowledge is good. Rape is bad for other people. If the gene is there, in all or some men, should the choice to resist be theirs, an educated one?

Whatever happens, there should be more social 'conditioning'. It's a rare thing, anyway, isn't it? Rarer than theft?

Based on what you just said...

People (not just men) choose not to be rapists because it's bad for both them and the other party involved. They do, in fact, have that choice. The knowledge to not rape someone because it is wrong is easily accessible in may cultures. If a gene existed (which I can't give any more credibility than the idea that Kate Mulgrew is going to jump in bed with me at any moment), the choice is still theirs to make to not rape, and they are educated on it in my many societies.

Rape is not as rare as you would think.

 

[Cheapjack]

Well, I'm glad at least, this thread has gone on for so long.

I'm off to watch charlie X.

 

[The Badger]

Do we have to go over all that again:

http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/do-we-have-a-rape-gene/

I read that article. Interesting.
I then read the Newsweek article it was referring to. Even more interesting.
http://www.newsweek.com/2009/06/19/why-do-we-rape-kill-and-sleep-around.html

To summarise: Biologist Randy Thornhill suggested that there may be an evolutionary advantage to rape. It allows one man to have many offspring without the cost of finding, winning and providing for a mate. If there was a genetic component then this would be passed on to the offspring.

Anthropologist Kim Hill carried out a study to test this idea. He and a couple of colleagues looked at the Ache, a tribe who live as we did about 10,000 years ago. They calculated the most likely results of an individual committing rape. Some results were beneficial from an evolutionary perspective, passing on his genes to the next generation. Others hindered. A child born from rape might be abandoned or even killed. The perpetrator might be killed by relatives of the victim, or socially ostracised by the rest of the tribe and given no help in finding food.

Overall, Hill et al found that the potential costs of rape in such a society outweigh the potential advantages by a factor of ten to one. Hence the probability that there is any evolutionary advantage to rape is exceptionally low.

 

[Hermiod]

^There's a big if in there. Yes, a man who is willing to skip past all that pesky courting business is likely to have unprotected sex more often than someone who isn't. More unprotected sex = more children.

The problem is that there's no genuine indication that this tendency would be passed on by anything more than the fact that this man exists in a society where he isn't properly prosecuted for his actions.

 

[T'Girl]

t's about power. It's about control. It's about taking something that isn't theirs or taking away something from someone else.

It's not about sex. It's not about lack of control. In fact, it's just the opposite.

If it was just about some genetic/biological imperative to reproduce there would be no same sex rapes. Might there be a "gene" that psychologically compels dominate behavior, to establishes control over others using strength, intimidation, fear and pain? If only for a relatively brief period of time. Given that the majority of people don't commit rapes, such a gene would represent a recessive, a birth defect or a mutation. As previously stated it never about sex, let's face it, it's not that difficult to get a woman in bed.

EDIT, Referring to above, two women, one impregnated by her husband, the other impregnated by a rapist, it would seem to make sense that the woman carrying a rapists child would be the more likely of the two to seek an abortion. The genes of the rapist would not advance.

 

[Shaytan]

So what do we do if we come to that sequence of weird dots and dashes that is the genome and find out that where it is, or if it is there? Along with all the other things? Black them out? Or not even look?

The genome is not a succession of "weird dots and dashes".
The weird thing is your obsession with this topic

 

[Hermiod]

If it was just about some genetic/biological imperative to reproduce there would be no same sex rapes. Might there be a "gene" that psychologically compels dominate behavior, to establishes control over others using strength, intimidation, fear and pain? If only for a relatively brief period of time. Given that the majority of people don't commit rapes, such a gene would represent a recessive, a birth defect or a mutation. As previously stated it never about sex, let's face it, it's not that difficult to get a woman in bed.

Rape isn't about reproduction, necessarily, only partially the need to have sex. Humans, as the animals we are, also have our hierarchies and establishing dominance is another basic need. It's why dogs roll over for their owners.

As intelligent animals, though, we're also able to override that as much as anything else. Consider this - amongst the D/S community it's estimated that submissives (i.e. those who gain sexual pleasure through submissive behaviour) actually outnumber dominants (i.e. those who gain sexual pleasure by dominating others) by roughly four to one. In addition, male dominants considerably outnumber female dominants, and female submissives considerably outnumber their male counterparts. (Yes, this flies in the face of the stereotypical image of the middle aged man paying a Dominatrix)

 

[Adm_Hawthorne]

(Sadly, this flies in the face of the stereotypical image of the middle aged man paying a Dominatrix)

Fixed that for you.

 

[Cheapjack]

OK, I'm back again.

What we should do, is just have a referendum on it, and say:

'Do we really want this knowledge? Do we really want to know? Are we better off not knowing, cos let's face it, the bloke who commissions the survey might find out some surprising things!'

That's better than some people who are not geneticists saying there is no such thing. I must admit, there may only be a few things genetically loaded onto the hardware of our developing brain and that might not be one of them. And the knowledge might make us paranoid, too. We might never leave to house!

T'Girl, it's not that difficult to get a girl into bed, but there are some cultures you can disapprove of, that make you think a bit, that can make you feel a bit Q like, when you're sat in a bar!

And carrie, talking about rape isn't weird. Talking about murder, isn't either. Or theft. It happens.

 

[The Badger]

Consider this - amongst the D/S community it's estimated that submissives (i.e. those who gain sexual pleasure through submissive behaviour) actually outnumber dominants (i.e. those who gain sexual pleasure by dominating others) by roughly four to one. In addition, male dominants considerably outnumber female dominants, and female submissives considerably outnumber their male counterparts. (Yes, this flies in the face of the stereotypical image of the middle aged man paying a Dominatrix)

Do you have a source for this data?

 

[Hermiod]

(Sadly, this flies in the face of the stereotypical image of the middle aged man paying a Dominatrix)

Fixed that for you.

Why is that sad ?

I thought one of the fundamental principles of feminism was that women should feel free to enjoy their own sexuality. If that enjoyment comes from being dominated then what of it ?

 

[Hermiod]

Consider this - amongst the D/S community it's estimated that submissives (i.e. those who gain sexual pleasure through submissive behaviour) actually outnumber dominants (i.e. those who gain sexual pleasure by dominating others) by roughly four to one. In addition, male dominants considerably outnumber female dominants, and female submissives considerably outnumber their male counterparts. (Yes, this flies in the face of the stereotypical image of the middle aged man paying a Dominatrix)

Do you have a source for this data?

No, sadly. Or, at least, nothing I can link to here.

 

[Adm_Hawthorne]

(Sadly, this flies in the face of the stereotypical image of the middle aged man paying a Dominatrix)

Fixed that for you.

Why is that sad ?

I thought one of the fundamental principles of feminism was that women should feel free to enjoy their own sexuality. If that enjoyment comes from being dominated then what of it ?

That may be a more personal preference thing than an actual comment on the thread topic on the whole.

*whispers* I was cracking a joke.

 

[Hermiod]

That may be a more personal preference thing than an actual comment on the thread topic on the whole.

*whispers* I was cracking a joke.

Sorry, my fault.

 

[Cheapjack]

It's interesting too, that there's a lot of what used to be called 'nasty' sex going on at the moment too, just listen to Rihanna's latest single.

That might in someway be a sort of watered down rape. Or at least, a simulation. And women do get called a lot of derogatory terms, too, during 'the act'. But I notice, that isn't done during the chatting up bit !As long as a woman is under no threat, if she refuses a date, and I have heard that happening, (and I have heard women encouraging others to date abusive men), that's OK.

 

[Hermiod]

^The point of my comments was to separate the relationship between D/S and rape some people have formed in their minds, not reinforce it.

 

[Cheapjack]

I notice though, with D/S, you know what you are getting. People practically arrange a contract. You don't with some men, charming as they are.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Every day I wake up thinking it's the 21st Century, and every day I'm reminded it's still... what? The 1950s? The Dark Ages? The Pleistocene?

"Some evolutionary scientists... claim" even though there's "no scientific evidence." And Feminists have it. I think these are the kind of "evolutionary scientists" that we read about in The Intelligence Report.

This is fringe science. Tinfoil-hatted nonsense. I think everything that needs to be said has been said.