TheEscapist: Rape vs. Murder in Videogames

[–]candomrhosen 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago* (48 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]damnfooldamn -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]candomrhosen 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chamoflage 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]candomrhosen -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]candomrhosen 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lecks 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]damnfooldamn -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm imagining different power dynamics.

Men being forced to penetrate have the power in the situation. They control various physical aspects of the act, which in cases of rape commonly lead to physical injuries.

I think a better approximation for "the rape of men" is "being restricted in movement and having a women perform sex acts against the man's will". However, the physical act of penetration is then controlled by the woman. In this case, I don't think it's as likely that the man will suffer injuries to the same extent as a woman being penetrated against her will.

Of course, we're not talking directly about physical trauma here, but I think that and the subsequent knowledge that it's far less likely for a man to find himself bound and being raped than a women being held down and raped almost anywhere tip the balance in favour of the trauma being greater for women.

I don't think I've answered your question, but these are some of the reasons I'd consider penetrative rape more traumatic than being forced to rape. Feel free to rebut my points, this is the first time I'm discussing this issue really.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You're suggesting that the women were struggling and uncooperative, which would have increased the chances of them suffering physical trauma. It's possible that they also have resigned to cooperate for the same reasons that the men would go through with the forced rape (i.e. they were threatened at gunpoint and had no choice but to engage in not-necessarily-destructive sex, which would have still been rape). Rape doesn't necessarily have to be physically traumatic, it's all about consent and neither party consented - a third coerced them both.

But okay, lets say they did suffer additional trauma because of physical pain. Would the psychological pain necessarily be any different? I hate to say this, but if, heaven forbid, you were forced to rape someone close to you, wouldn't you find that extremely traumatic? Your suffering would surely be not insignificant, and certainly worthy of note. If not only because you had to endure the humiliation and degradation of being forced to do heinous things you would never do of your own free will, but because you were forced to defile and destroy your own family in that way? To watch them cry and suffer at your own hands, powerless to help them?

My point is, if we're going to talk about power dynamics, the power in this situation is held by a third party, not either of those actually involved in the sex.

Of course, we're not talking directly about physical trauma here, but I think that and the subsequent knowledge that it's far less likely for a man to find himself bound and being raped than a women being held down and raped almost anywhere tip the balance in favour of the trauma being greater for women.

I understand that, during the Rape of Nanking, many more women than men were raped, because the Japanese soldiers themselves engaged in utterly unforgivable mass-rapings that didn't involve the native men. However, men were also raped (in that they were forced to engage in sexual acts without their consent), and the violence suffered by the whole population was not at all insignificant. I think it undermines the true extent of the suffering to only mention women and girls when talking about the victims.

[–]lawrencelearning 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]candomrhosen 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]damnfooldamn -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]damnfooldamn -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]AndIMustScream 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lecks 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]damnfooldamn -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]candomrhosen -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

True but it's also called the Nanking Massacre because of the horrific death toll.

There are a few reasons why rape is worse in the media which transfer into people's opinions (but murder is still worse than rape);

Degrees of Violence has been shown for much longer and thus people have watched a lot more murder than rape.
Killing (which is similar to murder) isn't as black and white as rape - things like self defence and defence of others throws things about.
Rape gets framed as something that happens to women (it's not all about women but as far as the mass media is concerned, rape is an issue for women and done by men). Since violence against women is much rarer, women get more sympathy and so a terrible crime is made even worse because it's done to a group that the audience isn't as used to getting targeted.

Rape is something people can get through, something they can be helped to overcome. Nobody's quite made the same ground with murder.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Gingor 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

Rape on the other hand, is one sided, something that women cant just physically do

BS is right. Anyone who believes that should read about and maybe watch the documentary, "She Stole My Voice."

Sterling's fallacies aside, my own take on this is pretty simple. I notice the video shows images mainly from combat games, and bases the assessment on the player-vs-combative enemy scenario. I've never seen, much less played a game which portrayed rape, so I have no context for assessing that, but if the scenarios in those games are more hunt-and-hit than player-vs-combative enemy, I can understand the feminist reaction. However, I do not agree with it.

Being a non-believer of the argument that video games shape people, I would still argue that these games should not be completely censored. Those are images kids shouldn't be exposed to, because kids should be allowed their innocence, so I'd support rating them for adults. I wouldn't be interested in playing one - the images would likely bother the fuck out of me. I'm sure there are other adults who would feel the same, and we have the right to make an informed choice on whether see those images, so I'd support a rating/warning on games as to what is portrayed and whether it is graphic, so that buyers would see more than just the title. Rating, however, is not censorship - it's the act of giving the individual a chance to make an informed choice.

Real rape is reprehensible, regardless of who is the perpetrator, or who is the victim, but as Sterling pointed out, so is real murder, and that is tolerated in video games. I don't think participating in a fantasy is tantamount to perpetrating an action in real life, and I don't think people have the right to police other people's thoughts. I don't think personal sensibilities give anyone the right to tell anyone else what to view or how to think. In light of those opinions, I would not support government censorship via unilaterally taking these games off the market, no matter how much I personally don't like the concept of them.

Edit - I accidentally a whole sentence. :P

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Being a non-believer of the argument that video games shape people,

This is actually fundamentally not true. Games are a part of culture, and culture absolutely does shape the people in it. Difference being, video games, outside of rarities like Manhunt, almost never send the message of "kill people for giggles." What they actually send are messages like "defending your country is heroic" (which is the same message even when that country is Gondor and not literally your country of origin or current residence) or "friends are worth sacrificing/fighting for" or "American culture is pretty messed up (except for this particular piece of it, of course)." If a game was made that actually did encourage rape and view it as a normal thing, it would actually provide encouragement to people who fantasize about rape.

But, here's the thing: Manhunt was not well-received. Our culture has an almost fetishistic hatred for rape, and any game that featured as its main point raping women (and probably even men) would have to be twice as addictive as WoW to survive and actually propagate its message. Even then, it's just one drop in an ocean of culture.

[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chamoflage 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chamoflage 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

To say that culture is evidence of lack of control is ludicrous.

What did I say that was even remotely similar to that? Countercultures are just permutations. Tiny permutations. If you look at a counterculture and compare it to an actually different culture, you'll find that it is overwhelmingly more similar to its parent culture than to cultures that actually developed in different circumstances. Even if that wasn't true, the fact that a minority is different from the parent culture doesn't change the fact that the overwhelming majority of people remain part of whatever culture they were born into for their entire adult lives (regardless of digressions into counter-cultures adolescence, which are typically very temporary) and that this is true for every single culture. If people chose whatever culture they wanted regardless of what culture they came from, then there would be a similar percentage of people embracing Chinese in culture in America as in China, and yet that doesn't happen.

[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

If people controlled their own choices, culture would not be a thing.

is an if A then B statement which cites the existence of B as proof of a lack of A (a post hoc fallacy - the idea that the fact of B following A is evidence that A causes B, incidentally, one of the main ways in which personal superstitions develop.)

I also have to point out that your choice to continue to reiterate your assertion people remain in their own culture is simply more of the same argument. It does not prove your point. It only proves that you believe that the existence of culture is evidence that people don't control their own choices, an argument that traces back through the comments to my assertion that video games don't shape people - people shape themselves. And I stand by that. Embracing one's culture is a choice. Embracing cultural influences is a choice. Embracing and imitating anything one sees within that culture is a choice, and the act of permitting oneself to behave badly in response to fiction of any kind, whether it be video games, television, books, or anything else, is a choice. The existence and stated influence of minor environmental factors such as this is not a reasonable or acceptable excuse for lapses in moral judgement or behavioral self-control.

[–]Chamoflage 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chamoflage1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You are being deliberately obtuse. Your arguments aren't even related to the original concept any more. At this point, you are arguing for the sake of arguing, knowing that you're beaten and have no hope of proving that video games shape people.

That said, your argument is also ridiculous in that it assumes culture is stable. The culture of the U.S. today, for instance, is nothing like it was 200 years ago, and isn't even all that much like it was 50 years ago. There are some things that have continued, but many things have not. The world is no longer like it was at either of those times. Cultures change over time, shaped by the evolving tastes and attitudes of people, through the choices we make.

Regardless, you are still arguing that the statue created the sculptor by virtue of its existence. Repeating your argument over and over with different phrasing isn't making it more true. It's only demonstrating that you have no other ammo.

[–]Chamoflage0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You haven't actually demonstrated my argument is false even once. I'm just trying to get you to actually give a straight answer as to how people just so happen to conform to the culture around them an overwhelming majority of the time regardless of which culture that is if culture does not influence behavior at all. And you haven't. You've given incoherent answers about sculptors and statues, but you haven't actually backed the analogy up at all, and it is incoherent: Culture doesn't create choices, but it demonstrably influences them. Saying that "people's choices create culture" is tautologically true, because culture is people's expression of emotion in various ways, so when someone says "culture influences people," all it's saying is "people's choices influence other people's choices." Hoorah for humanism and all, but the fact is that from an individual perspective, "culture" is an abstract force that absolutely does guide decisions.

And again, you still have not answered this question directly or coherently: If people are not influenced by culture, why do people overwhelmingly conform to cultural norms? Since culture is nothing but human expression, why can you tell the difference between Japanese and American animation? If people made these choices regardless of their environment, why do they just so happen to make the exact same choices as people within close geographic proximity and very different choices from people who are further away?

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Chamoflage0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Chamoflage0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If you had actually had a point to make, you would've complied with my extremely simple request that you quote the comment wherein you supposedly proved why people end up conforming to cultural norms if they are not actually influenced by cultural. And of course you can't do that because you never did because that's contradictory.

I have an actual argument. It goes "people end up with values which are almost or completely identical to those of the culture they live or were raised in, as compared to people who lived or were raised in other cultures, even when they are aware of the existence of other cultures. Occam's Razor dictates that the simple answer, specifically that cultures influence people's values, is correct, and that therefore all components of culture, including video games, have some amount of influence over people proportionate to the amount they dominate the culture." And if that weren't true, we wouldn't care about things like posters that imply or say outright that men can't be the victims of domestic violence, because those posters aren't laws.

You, however, have been able to muster no counterargument whatsoever. You've provided metaphors and cited logical truths, but you haven't actually connected them to anything either of us have said. I can say your argument is just an Appeal to Authority, and I can even throw fancy latin words at you and give an example of an Appeal to Authority in a metaphor or using variables, but none of that will actually make it true because you haven't actually said that. Likewise, you can go on about post hoc fallacies all you like, but I haven't actually made one, so it's not relevant.

Do you even know what a post hoc fallacy is? It's to do with the sequence of events, but we're not talking about a sequence of events. We're talking about cultural influence, which is constant and ever-present. Nobody alive has ever come before or after culture, it was there long before we were around. There's no sequence of events to build a post hoc fallacy around in the first place. The post hoc fallacy is used to call out people who assume there is correlation when it could just be coincidence, as in superstition, but it is blatantly absurd that the people of China just so happen to have a radically different culture from the people of America if neither of us are actually subject to cultural influence. Why do we celebrate Christmas every year instead of Hannukah or Kwanza? If we weren't influenced by culture, wouldn't we change up which holiday, if any, we celebrate pretty much at random? If you tell everyone you expect to receive gifts on the anniversary of your first bee sting, and would like to know when their first bee sting was so you can give them gifts as well, do you actually think this idea would immediately (or ever) have the exact same traction as a birthday? Do you actually think the reason public nudity (weather permitting) is frowned upon in modern Greece but not in ancient Greece is because all the people who independently chose to believe public nudity was okay just so happened to be born at the exact time?

No. Of course not. Your argument is trivially reduced to the absurd, something which I can do by citing actual evidence. I don't just namedrop logical fallacies and debate tactics. I actually apply them to the subject at hand. You have yet to do the same, despite multiple promptings. Of course I am going to continue repeating the same argument over and over until you actually acknowledge it and debate with it, because you haven't actually offered any evidence that it's wrong. You claim to have, but when I asked you to point to it and show it to me, you couldn't.

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Chamoflage1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]altmehere -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alecbenzer 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]girlwriteswhat 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

His assumption of no victim-blaming in murder is a complete fallacy, considering he engages in it. He claims that many killings in video games don't even have a victim? Wha?

He also says something along the lines of, 'he had too much life, so he was asking for it,' the way we supposedly say, 'she has too much sex, so she was asking for it.' The proper comparison would be, 'he had too much violence, so he was asking for it.' And he neatly seals that comparison by denying the villains killed in video games and fiction as not being victims.

I also find it bizarre that he can, out of one side of his mouth, spout Rape Culture BS (rape is normalized and encouraged), while at the same time out of the other side of his mouth, come out and admit that the easiest way for a writer to make a reader hate a character is to have him rape a woman. These two concepts simply cannot coexist.

[–]blackmanplayt1 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]girlwriteswhat 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The primary way to generate hatred of a character in a reader is to have him rape a woman. How many black men were lynched over rape accusations? How many men lose their jobs, reputations, friends and families over an accusation? How similar are the sentences for rape and murder? How many legislative changes have been made to encourage female rape victims to come forward? How much due process has been eroded to make rapists easier to convict?

Even telling women they ought to take precautions to keep themselves safe is evidence against the existence of rape culture--it's an acknowledgement that rape is a horrible thing and that because there are horrible people out there who rape (you know, just as there are horrible people who murder, and beat their children, and kill and mutilate the neighbor's cat) you should do what you can to avoid being a victim of something that horrible.

The entire body of western literature contains villains who were designated as villains because they raped or otherwise harmed or threatened or were even mean to women, and who were justifiably killed because of it--and women who were avenged by the "hero", that is, the socially acceptable and laudable male.

In fact, the only mainstream genre of fiction where rapey men are in any way acceptable or desirable is one written by mostly women for mostly women--that is, the old school romance. Even when feminist attitudes nipped the rapey romance hero in the bud in the mid to late 80s, all they did was drive the trope into a less mainstream subgenre of even more heavily eroticized fiction.

But yep, I'm basing my bullshit-calling of rape culture on "one instance of a rape making a man look bad."

Are you intentionally this retarded?

[+][deleted] 14 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]girlwriteswhat 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A LOT of people who murder think beforehand that it's justifiable. That it's okay in this instance.

And the fact that you would claim that the 99% male victims of killings in video games are a-okay because they are objects without humanity is also retarded. According to feminism, isn't objectification supposed to encourage and normalize violence against the objectified group? Or does that only apply when the objectified group is women?

Are all those women in snuff porn a-okay? How about all the images of women we see in the mainstream that render them down to nothing but titis and ass? It's okay to see them as only tits and ass because they're objects? It's okay to lust after them based only on their tits and ass because we aren't shown any other part of their wholeness?

Oh, wait, according to feminists, this is NOT okay. Objectifying women, and feeling certain ways about them or wanting to do certain things to them based on their object status is WRONG. So very wrong. But killing a man in a video game is okay because he's presented to us as an object?

What's the difference? An object of lust or an object of violence?

For someone who says s/he qwestions everything, you sure do buy into a lot of doublethink.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago* (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]SkyrimNewb2 points 14 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SkyrimNewb 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 14 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]lawrencelearning 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]altmehere 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Chamoflage 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]inkall 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

He makes a couple of good points about the general strange acceptance of murder over rape but as others have pointed out he falls down in a few areas.

His idea that there is a "grey area" of morality about rape is rediculous.

Yes there are people who would want to make rape a grey area, but his entire view on why murder is okay is based on a grey area of morality he totally misses.

He says that killing and murder is okay in situations where it is kill or be killed, soldiers in warzones and the like, which is fair enough but the way he says it is just so nonchalant. To me killing should always be a last resort, a VERY last resort, in any situation yet in much of society the "grey area" of acceptable killing is much wider.

Just because some nutters might want to create (or have already created) moral grey areas for things which are totally wrong by any common notion of humanity does not mean that there is a cultural norm for it.

Also it is a good thing it is called "Rape vs. Murder", because if it was called "Rape vs. Violence" then his argument of "well the dead are dead so it doesn't matter while rape victims can carry the wounds for life" would fall down instantly.

Victims of non-lethal violence can carry just as many issues as rape victims, if not perhaps more in some cases (loss of limbs, sight...etc...).

[–]lawrencelearning -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]inkall 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]mrmacky 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]altmehere 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]babno -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]inkall 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[+]babno -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]girlwriteswhat 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

There are also several other stats in that survey that may be heavily skewed simply by how differently men and women see unwanted sexual attention.

For three of the other forms of sexual violence, a majority of male victims reported only female perpetrators: being made to penetrate (79.2%), sexual coercion (83.6%), and unwanted sexual contact (53.1%). For non-contact unwanted sexual experiences, approximately half of male victims (49.0%) reported only male perpetrators and more than one-third (37.7%) reported only female perpetrators (data not shown).

I have the feeling that even something like a woman flashing her boobs at a straight guy is going to be much more cavalierly received (even if he's not interested) than a man very politely hitting on him. He'd be more likely to feel amused by the former, and threatened or made uncomfortable by the latter. Same with an all-out groping by a woman on the dance floor, compared with a caress on the arm that accompanies an offer of a drink from another man. Typical straight guy might consider the former less offensive than the latter.

This would skew the numbers of female perpetrators of non-contact unwanted sexual experiences against men down, and the numbers for male perpetrators up.

Even looking at the way we ALL consider a woman exposing herself (non-threatening) compared to a man exposing himself (OMG!).

Perception of male and female sexuality is going to have a lot to do with whether an [otherwise] identical experience is going to make it into the answers on these surveys.

Edited

[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Typical straight guy might consider the former less offensive than the latter.

This reminds me of one time when a gay guy offered me a drink.

"Well, I must say you've got balls. But that's the problem, pal. You've got balls!"

We both got a chuckle out of that, and he bought me the beer anyways.

Perception of male and female sexuality is going to have a lot to do with whether an [otherwise] identical experience is going to make it into the answers on these surveys.

Aye. And that's why it's such a scary indication of female behavior. They would have to be so much more sexually aggressive than men to get those types of percentages. But this also falls back to my belief that people form bell curves of behavior around expectations/standards. The problem is that the standards for female behavior are near rock bottom.

[–]girlwriteswhat 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mrmacky 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]babno 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	TheEscapist: Rape vs. Murder in Videogames
Author	Gingor
Upvotes	14
Comments	109
Date	June 26, 2012 11:47 AM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/vmif5/theescapist_rape_vs_murder_in_videogames/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/theescapist-rape-vs-murder-in-videogames.1019070 https://theredarchive.com/post/1019070

Comments