Originally Posted by Manton
I haven't read it all carefully, but the notion that men rape because of inner biological drives and proclivities does not strike me as controvesial. Men do all kinds of good and bad things based on biological drives that have been influenced by evolution. I mean, there's a biological reason why criminals of all kinds are overwhelmingly male. Rape is no different. What's the point of getting angry at that?
This isn't really what they've been saying, and the ways in which they are arguing that "biological drive" is tangential, circumstantial to the point of being utterly meaningless. "Well, because Osama bin Laden has several letters the same as Obama, and both have skin that's not quite white, and because Obama is president of the united states, and the US has Area 51, which has aliens, therefore.... Osama is an alien under the control of Obama!" I mean, that's basically what's going on here. Women getting wet to avoid pain, unattractive men seeing rape 'as a way to procreate', etc. Rape is a complex social phenomenon with vast complexity more than just "kinda forcefully trying to mate." Without incredibly narrow, specific definitions of the behaviors based on real chemical, quantifiable, or observable measures, it's all just mental masturbatory fantasy WHY these things happen. Unless the definition of rape is "the release of compound XyZ at specific time interval ABC in relation to other organism D" or something, it's goofy to try and say various complex physical reactions are anything specific. You are then thrown back onto a socialized, or social science, definition based on power and discourse, or rape as a phenomenon happening in social settings with real effects, results, and impact. THAT'S why the social-scientisty folks here are getting a little pissy at the rather slippery, "easy" categories at play by the other side. I'm seriously done here, though. Bored this morning waiting for the car to pick me up. Knew I should have just watched "Fawlty Towers" instead.