Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Savage Clone
Yes, but it is an act of sexual violence. You have to be turned on (as a male at least) in order to commit penetrative rape, which means that to some extent the brutalizing of another human turns the aggressor on sexually. Otherwise they would just go for straight-up torture. An awful lot of murderers link their violence with sexual gratification, whether or not rape is part of their M.O.
Yes, it is violence, but it is violence that is specifically sexual in nature.
Yes, it's about "power," but the "power" is linked to the sexual impulses.
To separate rape from sex is to ignore what it is.
|
Doesn't this imply then that rape is part of a natural range of sexual expression and male gratification need and thus acceptable?
Sex implies consent. Anything else is violence and oppression. I think it legitimizes rape when you say it is a sexual act. Perhaps psychologically there is a transference of libido, but I still don't see it as 'sex', that would be a disease or pathology you are describing. Tumours absorb nutrients from the blood and grow in the body, but its a CANCER, not a new body part! The rapist may or may not get satisfaction out of the act, but there is no consent, and I don't think its useful to refer to it as sexual. Just because the genitals are involved doesn't automatically make it sexual in my book...
And really, it is a terrorism.
Historically, rape has been used as a tool of oppression and control...Royalty would rape virgin brides as an act of social control.