|
|
|
Lars_H
SFN Regular
Germany
630 Posts |
 Posted - 07/19/2001 : 07:27:44
|
|
|
|
|
comradebillyboy
Skeptic Friend
USA
188 Posts |
Posted - 07/19/2001 : 13:21:26 [Permalink]
|
i think that they picked a title that would maximize the attenion the book got. i saw some news coverage of this a few months ago, and got the impression that this was pretty much a scholarly work-which means no one outside of the academic community would read it, hence the attention getting title.
comrade billyboy |
 |
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 07/19/2001 : 20:47:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
What do you think about Thornhills and Palmers theory and the evolutionary approach to social science in general?
I think the uneducated masses will hear about it on the news, and immediately start believing that the authors' intent is to justify rape.
------------
Ma gavte la nata! |
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 07/19/2001 : 21:36:14 [Permalink]
|
(TD) "I think the uneducated masses will hear about it on the news, and immediately start believing that the authors' intent is to justify rape."
And later, they'll read the book (perhaps), and find out that the authors' intent is to justify rape.
I reviewed this book at my old job...it relies on anecdotal evidence and flimsy (IMO) suppositions to arrive at a conclusion that it seems they had at the beginning of their 'research'.
Not worth the paper it's printed on.
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2001 : 12:46:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
And later, they'll read the book (perhaps), and find out that the authors' intent is to justify rape.
Ok. Never read it, or heard about it. The book itself wasn't what my point was about.
------------
Ma gavte la nata! |
|
|
|
Greg
Skeptic Friend
USA
281 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2001 : 22:09:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I reviewed this book at my old job...it relies on anecdotal evidence and flimsy (IMO) suppositions to arrive at a conclusion that it seems they had at the beginning of their 'research'.
Zandermann, What are the author's arguments?
Greg.
|
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2001 : 23:00:18 [Permalink]
|
Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to this. The 'dot-bomb' for which I worked when I reviewed this book has since folded, taking all my work with it into a black hole, so I've had to try to remember what it was about this 'scientific' work that so disturbed me. I read and reviewed it sometime during Dec/Jan/Feb of 1999/2000, and my memory is a little shaky. Here are my recollections (augmented by some of the comments on Barnes&Noble's website -- I needed a memory jolt to get me started):- Rape is about sex, a by-product of the male's evolutionary onus to reproduce. Since the male wishes to spread his genes as much as possible, he will turn to rape to accomplish this.
- Rape is so harmful to the woman's psyche and sense of well-being because it stymies the woman's choice of whom she will mate with.
- Young males must be trained to resist their natural tendency to rape.
- All men, given the correct circumstances, are potential rapists.
- The evolutionary basis for rape is illustrated using scorpion flies. The 'normal' sequence of events is that the male scorpion fly will present what the authors call a "nuptial gift"; females will gravitate toward potential mates who present this gift (food or a glob of solidified saliva). In the absence of such a gift, some males will still attempt to mate. This is their scientific basis for the evolutionary component.
- Women can avoid rape by not dressing provocatively and by removing themselves from possibly dangeerous situations.
- "Human rape arises from men's evolved machinery for obtaining a high number of mates in an environment where females choose mates."
If memory serves me correctly, not a word is spoken regarding those species of the animal kingdom in which the males should have the same genetic imperative toward rape yet do not exhibit this behavior. Also, nothing is said (as far as I recall) regarding the number of male-on-male rapes, instances where females force males to copulate, the times when males rape then kill their victims, or the vast number of events in which males rape females out of child-bearing age (either the very young or post-menopausal women). All of these would play against the authors' contention that rape is a vehicle for procreation.
The two things which I found most objectionable about this book were the suppostition that all human males have a biological imperative to rape and the victim-blaming that the authors engage in. I was unconvinced by the 'scientific' reasoning that the authors used to bolster their contentions. The Times Literary Supplement is quoted on B&N's site: "... causes cannot be inferred from consequences. It is one thing to say that the end product of rape can be biological, it is quite another to infer from this that the motive is biological."
I think this is a dangerous book, because there's just enough scientific language that the general public may believe the premises in it. Another factor is the authors' reliance on their form of sociobiology, which is an approach to an analysis of social structures using a sort of Darwinian viewpoint...a perspective that strikes me as iffy in the extreme.
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 02:30:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Rape is about sex, a by-product of the male's evolutionary onus to reproduce. Since the male wishes to spread his genes as much as possible, he will turn to rape to accomplish this.
Um, thought rape was shown to be about dominance.
quote:
Rape is so harmful to the woman's psyche and sense of well-being because it stymies the woman's choice of whom she will mate with.
Um, no. From personal experience here - rape is harmful because it is the most intimate type of violation anyone can suffer. Not only does rape violate the individual physically, it violates their sense of who they are, their sense of personal safety, their sense of worth. Often times the victim of a rape believes that somehow this awful violation of their person and mind was somehow their fault.
quote:
Women can avoid rape by not dressing provocatively and by removing themselves from possibly dangerous situations.
Um, wasn't dressed provacatively when I was raped. Was in a midcalf length skirt and a blouse that buttoned to my throat. And I did everything that I was supposed to do.
quote:
"Human rape arises from men's evolved machinery for obtaining a high number of mates in an environment where females choose mates."
Huh? Always thought rape was an act of violence. Without regard for the sex act itself. It's about dominance over the woman not choosing mates.
RANT: (Personal Opinion!)
OK. Who the hell do these sons of bitches think they are trying to use evolution to justify the rape of a woman. Rape is the fault of the person commiting the crime. No matter a womans profession, past sexual history or personal choice of dress no man has a right to violate her person in any way, shape or form! It's not the womans fault when a man uses violence to force himself on a woman. What's their frickin' problem. I would seriously question their mentality and would wonder if they were in some part trying to justify their own desires to force themselves on women. Sick sadistic bastards!
(I had to go back and change a few words - wouldn't want one to think I swear all the time.)
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 05:26:41 [Permalink]
|
yeah...what she said.
I raised such a stink about being forced to review this piece of tripe that I'm certain it was a factor in their decision to lay me off several months later.
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 09:45:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
OK. Who the hell do these sons of bitches think they are trying to use evolution to justify the rape of a woman.
While it could very well be the case that the authors are "sick sadistic bastards" trying to justify rape, we must be careful here. They could just be honestly showing what they believe to be valid evidence.
What I believe is dangerous in this, is that in the attitude you have displayed here can be indicative of a larger problem in general (not with you personally, of course! You have every right to "rant" as you did).
How would we find out anything new about a subject such as this, if any results other than "rape is the result of evil men trying to dominate women, and is not about sex at all" is attacked in such a way? This kind of atmosphere makes people afraid to even raise questions.
Rape, race (I prefer the term 'ethnicity' myself), other gender issues, etc., are so inflammatory, that any attempt to look at other angles is met with anger and outrage (sometimes even violence). I think we must work hard at trying to control our emotional biases, and give people a more fair hearing before jumping to conclusions.
DISCLAIMER: Like I said before, I'd never heard of this book, or it's authors before, and the above statements are solely for example purposes, and in no way reflect my own feelings toward the book, the authors, or the subject of rape. 
------------
Ma gavte la nata! |
|
|
|
Greg
Skeptic Friend
USA
281 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 09:49:15 [Permalink]
|
Zandermann,
Thanks for the review. I have a slightly different take than you on whether this book justifies rape. Your bullet points make it clear to me that what they want to justify is sexual repression - particularly these three points.
quote:
Young males must be trained to resist their natural tendency to rape.
All men, given the correct circumstances, are potential rapists.
Women can avoid rape by not dressing provocatively and by removing themselves from possibly dangeerous situations.
What do you think?
Trish,
quote:
Often times the victim of a rape believes that somehow this awful violation of their person and mind was somehow their fault.
And this book will reinforce this belief.
I don't know too much about this subject but I have heard that the vast majority of rapists were phsically and/or sexually abused as children. It looks like the rape problem lies in domestic violence not promescuity (that has it's own problems).
Greg.
|
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 10:42:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I have a slightly different take than you on whether this book justifies rape.
Yeah...after a few rethinks, my take is a little different too. "Justify" is too strong a word to use in trying to explain their position; my original response to Lars and TD should have been something like "the authors explain (excuse?) rape using an evolutionary standpoint."
Perhaps if I knew more sociobiology I could be more informative on whether their research actually holds water or not. (From what I've read, in this text and others, like Wilson's Sociobiology, Palmer/Thornhill's arguments don't seem to work, but hey, I'm primarily a mathematician who's somewhat literate in other sciences.)quote:
Your bullet points make it clear to me that what they want to justify is sexual repression - particularly these three points.quote:
Young males must be trained to resist their natural tendency to rape.
All men, given the correct circumstances, are potential rapists.
Women can avoid rape by not dressing provocatively and by removing themselves from possibly dangeerous situations.
Interesting perspective. I don't recall getting that feeling from them as I read their book. But I did have a very hard time trying to keep my prejudices from kicking in...it's a little tough to keep some semblance of objectivity while being called a "potential rapist".
I don't think they had repression in mind so much as education and training (not the same thing)...at no point did I ever get the feeling that they were saying "OK, it's evolution, so we can't do anything about it". They did express the view that knowing the sources of rape should lead to better methods of avoiding it.
It's their insight (?) into those sources that I have to question.
quote:
(addressed to Trish, but I'd like to comment)quote:
Often times the victim of a rape believes that somehow this awful violation of their person and mind was somehow their fault.
And this book will reinforce this belief.
Yeah. Palmer/Thornhill say in several places that they are not "victim-blaming", but I couldn't help but have that impression as I was reading. So it wasn't their intent, but I think that error in thought will be reinforced.
|
|
|
|
Court Jester
New Member
United Kingdom
5 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 11:00:27 [Permalink]
|
| Bottom line is this: there's NO excuse for rape! |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 11:29:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Bottom line is this: there's NO excuse for rape!
Sure. But there are causes. And to find them, we need to make sure people who look do not have to worry about being immediately attacked and assumed the worst of.
------------
Ma gavte la nata! |
|
|
|
Greg
Skeptic Friend
USA
281 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2001 : 12:38:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I don't think they had repression in mind so much as education and training (not the same thing)...
Perhaps repression is too strog a term also. I think that the real intent (I base this only on your synopsis) is somewhere in-between repression and education. i think the argument is something like this;
Boys should be taught to stop or control their sexual urges.
Girls should be taught to not make themselves sexually appealing.
Then, rape will be less likely to occur.
Sounds very Victorian to me. Maybe we should also be very careful to cover furniture legs so that we can control any latent sexual fury in these boys.
I find the insect argument laughable. Are there any anthropologists out there who can give us some real insight by comparing rape in different cultures?
Again, I could be wrong. I have not read the book and don't see myself doing so any time soon. I just wanted to know what kind of argument they could have possibly made that rape was evolutionary in nature.
Greg.
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2001 : 01:20:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
What I believe is dangerous in this, is that in the attitude you have displayed here can be indicative of a larger problem in general (not with you personally, of course! You have every right to "rant" as you did).
How would we find out anything new about a subject such as this, if any results other than "rape is the result of evil men trying to dominate women, and is not about sex at all" is attacked in such a way? This kind of atmosphere makes people afraid to even raise questions.
Rape, race (I prefer the term 'ethnicity' myself), other gender issues, etc., are so inflammatory, that any attempt to look at other angles is met with anger and outrage (sometimes even violence). I think we must work hard at trying to control our emotional biases, and give people a more fair hearing before jumping to conclusions.
TD, having personally experienced a rape (both rape and molestation, yikes! I could be really screwed up) I have strong feelings regarding the issue of rape. It is an act of violence. I *prefer* to trust in the psychology (? am I spelling this right? it doesn't look right...) that I have taken and researched regarding rape. Rape is about dominion over and violence against women.
Questioning the issue is all well and good. Trying to figure the motivations behind rapists is all well and good. However, to try to justify rape, that's a stretch for me to consider. There is no justification for rape, just as there is no justification for any criminal act.
TD, I'd like to see more research done into a lot of issues facing us today. Despite the controversial nature of the subject. If a study were to come out tomorrow that said rapists have a chemical imbalance that pre-disposes them to rape and that study survived peer review - fine. I don't have a problem with that. What I'm ranting against is the fact that they appear, to me, to make an attempt at the justification of rape. That to me is an abhorent concept.
quote:
I don't know too much about this subject but I have heard that the vast majority of rapists were phsically and/or sexually abused as children. It looks like the rape problem lies in domestic violence not promescuity (that has it's own problems).
As to referring to rapists being the victims of molestation and rape themselves or victims of domestic violence - this has been shown to be a minor number of rapists. I'll have to dig up my abnormal psych book if you want the actual studies done regarding this, which is not currently handy, because I can't find it.
Even so, prior sexual abuse is not an excuse for not enacting control over yourself. This concept is so irrational as a justification for anything that it is ridiculous IMO. People are looking to place blame anywhere but the *poor* bastard/bitch who commited the crime. There must be *some* reason for them to be screwed up. Well, it's time people begin to take some personal responsibility for their own actions.
I have never in my life used my childhood experiences as an excuse for any of my actions, with the exception of relationships or an inability to stay in them, but this is personal and does not impact society in any specific way. Nor have I used the fact that I was raped as an excuse for anything. If that were the case I'd have an excuse for going out and finding the son of a bitch who molested me and ending his life. I'd also have an excuse for doing the same to my rapist. Though I have in the past seriously considered these options to give myself some peace of mind I have not acted upon those desires. I chose to take responsibility and get myself some frickin' counselling. (Tho that was a waste, my counsellor was of the opinion that I was lying about who my molestor was, she kept trying to convince me that it was my father.)
We need to quit trying to make excuses for peoples aberrant behavior and force people to take personal responsibility for their actions. The only case where an individual can possibly have an *excuse* for their aberrant behavior is where the individual has an actual documented medical condition. If this condition can be treated then and only then do they deserve the option of a second chance following treatment. If the condition can not be treated then society must be protected from these individuals until such time as a treatment becomes available.
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
