Rape

[DeistPaladin]

As others already pointed out, not every rapist is a determined criminal. Many rapes are committed by men who don't think they have done anything wrong at all, or who rationalize their actions by blaming the victim. This is probably the case when a husband rapes his wife, because he believes that forcing himself upon her cannot possibly be rape since they are married. Changing the attitudes at that level may help to reduce those incidences of rape, which are probably the majority of cases (not just the married couple, I mean).

This is part of why "teach men not to rape" is a better idea than some may think at first glance. The issue is much more complex when you move away from the thug-in-the-dark-alley scenario.

Think of it this way, if we lived in a culture where it was considered acceptable to rob someone if they left their wallet out or were careless in some other way, we'd probably see more robberies. When the culture sets up an excuse or easy rationalization, you'll see more abuse.

For this reason, I have no doubt that if we knew all the cases of rape, reported and unreported, we'd probably see less rape in cultures where the woman isn't considered to be "asking for it" based on how she dresses or if she was careless or whatever. Cultures that blame the victim readily, or even punish her as an "adulteress", will see more of such crimes because crime will increase when it's easy to rationalize.

Our society is getting better, I think, about the misconception that the victim "asks for it" based on her dress or behavior. However, this old notion is dying hard and stubbornly persists.

Another easy rationalization it's important to educate against is the idea of "husband's rights". As absurd as it sounds, it's actually more pervasive than some people might think. I'm not talking about 3rd world nations with old paternalistic traditions. I'm talking about here in America. I once knew this woman who confided in me that she would wake up with her ex-husband as he was already having sex with her. "You know that's called 'rape', right?" I asked. It amazed me that I had to point that out to her. I'm not sure if she didn't realize that or if she was testing me somehow.

The issue gets really complicated when alcohol is introduced into the equation. Even I find the exact lines a little fuzzy and the laws vary from state to state. At one crime education seminar I attended while in college, the speaker passed around the DC law regarding rape. The first thing I noticed is that men are not protected by the way the law was written (this was back in the late 80s, early 90s). The wording of the law was "having carnal knowledge of a woman without her consent". So gay men who are date raped are apparently out of luck.

The second thing I noted is that ANY alcohol in her system rendered her unable to give consent. Really? She has one drink and so she can legally drive a car but she can't give consent? I kind of thought that was a bit extreme. On the other hand, I get the reason for the law. If she is so drunk that she is unaware of what's going on, obviously she can't give consent. What if she's a little tipsy and she's the "aggressor"? What if a husband and wife are both drunk after a party and 'consensually' make love? Did they rape each other?

I think there's some room for debate as to where the line should be drawn on her (or his) capacity to offer consent.

Regardless, this is an issue worthy of formal education. While it is true the sociopath is never going to be reached, a more borderline person might be dissuaded if all the easy rationalizations can be taken away.