|
Are All Men Potential Rapists? |
|
|
|
A new book says YES, all men are potential rapists and girls should be taught to be careful in their appearance and social activities...because rape is a "natural" impulse for men. |
|
|
|
An old myth comes back to life in this offensive new book....which disempowers and demeans men by labeling them helpless to their "natural" urge to rape and further perpetuates the notion that victims could have prevented being raped simply by dressing more carefully. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Haven't We Progressed Beyond This? |
|
|
|
|
|
According to Thornhill and Palmer, "all men - under the right circumstances - could be potential rapists." - APB News, Jan 28, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
"A guy, regardless of how he has been raised...finding a female in a real vulnerable situation...in some conditions rapes her," Thornhill said. - APB News, Jan 28, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Others Are Not Convinced: |
|
|
|
"These authors claims vacillate between the trivial and the unconfirmable," says Elisabeth Lloyd, professor of Philosophy of Science at the University of Indiana, "Their work fails to meet nearly every requirement for serious claim to evolutionary science." - Westward.com, Feb 10, 2000 |
|
|
"Back at the turn of the century, people were saying immigrants had low IQs and we shouldn't let them into the United States. They should be put in prisons and not be allowed to mate, because it's all genetically based. It's a sad statement that this kind of stuff is being rehashed. It's irresponsible to make some of the statements Thornhill & Palmer are making. It reminds me of why people are suspicious of scientists. This makes us look bad and makes science look bad. " says Michelle Sauther, a Primatologist at the University of Colorado. - Westward.com, Feb 10, 20000 |
|
|
|
|
"We are an evolved society. Why didn't they choose to look at burglary?
They did it on rape because they have this theory that women should be blamed
," says Susan Brownmiller. - APB News, Jan 28, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Stillerman, co-executive director of the Men's Rape Prevention Project in Washington DC fears that Thornhill's message is the wrong thing to teach.
It "comes dangerously close to blaming women for being sexually assaulted.
" - Washington Post, Jan 28, 2000 |
|
|
"It's harmful and inconsistent with the American way of life. Not to go out or wear provactive clothing takes away constitutional freedoms to move about, freely associate and self-expression," says Mary Koss, psychology professor at the University of Arizona, who co-chaired the American Psychological Association's Task Force on Violence Against Women. "Rapists have been acquitted when defense attorneys argued that the woman was 'provactively dressed' in a turtleneck and knee-length skirt." - APB News, Jan 28, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
"
Thornhill gives sociobiology a bad name
...rape is a crime of violence that has mostly to do with young male agression and also with cultural attitudes," says Susan Brownmiller. - Washington Post, Jan 28, 20000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other scientists and academics feel the book's premise is based on sloppy science, dimisses the important contributions of social influence to rape prevention and could have potentially harmful consequences. - APB News, Jan 28, 2000 |
|
|
It is the fear that victims will again be blamed for causing rape, just by being biologically present - or that rapists will somehow be excused by Darwinian imperative. - Washington Post, Jan 28, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
"
It's confused, scientifically weak and naive
," said Jerry Coyne, a professor of evolutionary biology at the University of Chicago. "The big question is, is it nature or are we responsible? I don't believe that [it is nature]. It's a pathology, a byproduct of agression. If they say that men will rape if they think they can get away with it, why are the vast majority of men incapable of rape?" - APB News, Jan 28, 2000 |
|
|
To prevent rape, the authors suggest "that every male should complete a program that teaches him, in order to get a driver's license, to 'restrain his sexual behavior.' Women should be taught how to reduce their risk by not wearing 'provocative clothing' and avoiding situations like drunken fraternity parties." - Washington Post, Jan 28, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
"
It's absurd. This theory doesn't fit what we know about sexual assault
," says Robert Geffner, psychologist & president of the Family Violence & Sexual Assault Institute in San Diego. - USA Today, Jan 18, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
What's It All About?
The basic premise of the book is that women make a greater biological investment in their children than men do, therefore, women tend to be very picky about mates...searching for a man who not only has good genes, but who will stick around to bring home the bacon and maybe help change a few diapers. Men, on the other hand, are biologically geared to impregnate as many women as possible - and rape is simply a way to take away a woman's ability to choose. |
|
|
The book goes further to suggest that the reason rape is traumatizing to women is because it takes away her ability to choose the quality of her children's genes. Therefore, the book states, fertile women suffer most after being raped (children, post-menopausal women and men don't take it quite as hard).
If the raped woman is married, her suffering is greater still - because now she has to worry about her insecure husband getting jealous....male jealousy, you see, is all about sex. Female jealousy, on the other hand, is about the risk of losing economic and material resources to another woman.
If, however, the raped woman is lucky enough to have been physically injured, then her suffering is less. Why? Because, the authors claim, the more violent the rape, the less likely her jealous husband will think the sex was consensual.
Where do the authors get their scientific evidence?
After making a disclaimer that observations about primate behavior do not provide relevant information about human nature (but the behavior of dung flies and scorpion flies apparently does), they find a couple of orangutans and chimps...ignoring that the majority of primates (and other animals for that matter) do not exhibit sexual coercion. When not relying on hunches & best guesses, the bulk of their scientific support comes from Thornhill's area of expertise....bugs.
The authors make a serious mistake by confusing a chosen behavior - rape - with a biological imperative to reproduce.
This misguided work is similar to the books published years ago that attempted to explain racial differences with "biology." The people who disguised their bigotry with "science" then are frighteningly similar to the many people who now are quick to applaud this book which is, in essence, another attempt to blame bad male behavior on genes, the environment, the way women dress, where women go...everything except the perpetrators themselves.
The book is unoriginal and outdated...reminiscent of attitudes that prevailed a few centuries ago, when men were viewed as utterly helpless against their physical urges, women were seen as materialistic, sexually teasing and coy, and rape was more a pastime then a crime. |
|
