It’s a shame that your life experiences have conditioned you to think many / most men are bad men.
- if that happens to you then you seriously need to stop visiting jails. There is no way that men say that.
- statistics? sources? And don’t use the prostitution stat because those women want to have sex.
With all due respect folks, when is this merry-go-round going to stop spinning?
Of course I have statistics.
http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/vio.2014.0022?journalCode=vio
There weren’t any statistics in that link you provided. Maybe the full copy has some but I wasn’t going to pay $24 to view the actual article. All the summary said was that the statistics are higher if you phrase the question differently versus calling it rape. It never said if the different question methodology raised the numbers from 1% to 3% or 90 to 95%.
ETA- It also isn’t even the right demographic. I think that was college kids, but it certainly wasn’t married men which is what we have been talking about.
This one is also interesting: the difference between the way men think when they are not sexually aroused and when they are sexually aroused. To my mind, the most surprising thing about this experiment is that they conducted it.
http://people.duke.edu/~dandan/Papers/PI/Heat_of_Moment.pdf
For example:
Scale of 0 (No) to 50 (Possibly) to 100 (Yes):
Would you keep trying to have sex after your date says ‘‘no’’?
Unaroused, mean 20, sd 4.32
Aroused, mean 45, sd 3.44
The hypothetical comatose wife living at home is there 24/7, including when the husband is horny and his moral code is, shall we say, more flexible.
I just found a couple of papers with some stats. It looks like 8-14% of women reported being sexually assaulted by either a husband or ex-husband. I think the inclusion of the ex-Hs in the stats throws things off dramatically. Of course an angry ex is going to be more likely to rape his ex-wife than a still married couple.
I haven’t read the duke study you linked above, but my first impression is “duh”. Of course a sexually aroused male is going to “keep trying to have sex”. That is a completely different animal than forcing someone to have sex. “Keep trying to have sex” could be anything from begging to persuasion.
In the New Mexico study, 14% said they’d act on intentions to rape a woman if they could get away with it, and 32% said they’d act on intentions to force a woman to have sexual intercourse if they could get away with it. Many of us think that’s a distinction without a difference, but what I wanted to call your attention to is that both numbers are big.
Even if every single case is an ex-husband, and even if the lower number, 8%, is correct, that’s a lot of ex-husbands raping. And it’s got to be mostly distinct guys; it’s not like one guy keeps marrying, divorcing and then raping lots and lots of different women. If you want to demonstrate that only a small number of men who would have sex with women without their consent, saying 8% of women were assaulted by their ex-husbands tends to prove the opposite, at least if you believe 8% of women is a substantial percentage of women, which I do.
I presume this was 8% of women who had ever been married, and didn’t include never married women.
I haven’t seen a reference to a New Mexico study???
Oh, sorry, I meant the North Dakota study. This one: http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/vio.2014.0022?journalCode=vio
Should have said: In the New MexicoNorth Dakota study, 14% said they’d act on intentions to rape a woman if they could get away with it, and 32% said they’d act on intentions to force a woman to have sexual intercourse if they could get away with it.
I must have had New Mexico on the brain because I’m going there for a few weeks this summer.
“Keep trying” doesn’t mean “will therefore forcibly rape.” Good lord. If you asked my husband will he “keep trying” if i’ve said not tonight dear, of course he will “keep trying.” That means he’ll keep rubbing my back in hopes I’ll change my mind. Not tie me down and force me. I think sometimes you don’t get interpersonal cues and you take “keep trying” too literally.
Do you interact with men at all, CF, given how dangerous they are?
Because *some men might rape, we should assume that this 78 yo, by all accounts loving and devoted husband, had to have done so? Would it be right if I presumed all black men were criminals because some are?
On another thread some of us acknowledged living in a bubble. I have the luxury to choose my social circle, which doesn’t include racist, sexist, homophobic individuals. Yet I know those individuals exist.
Because abusive husbands don’t exist in the bubble, doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
I guess one question these threads bring up is whether it is a societal good to point out unpleasant realities, so as to try and change them. The internet seems a potentially important instrument for change. We get to read experiences of those who aren’t in our bubble. jmho
Another way I think about this: What kind of husbands will the boys in the Steubenville and Vanderbilt cases be? We know there are young men filming sexual assaults of unconscious women. Not all of them are caught. Sometimes it is just fortuitous. There was something all over the news recently about a Florida spring break case. The victim had no idea what had happened. Are these young men going to suddenly turn into decent, loving husbands?
ETA: I am frequently on a different thread than the rest of you. On the thread I’m reading, the news story in the OP is being used as a springboard to a larger discussion.
@alh you bring up an excellent point. A small percentage of those kids will turn things around for one reason or another (religious conversion etc) but most will not. Most will end up as horrible husbands. However, I also think it is important to realize what a small percentage of the population they encompass. There were tens of thousands of kids in just that one city in FL where the Spring Break case happened that you referenced. A handful of kids were involved (at the most). That isn’t even a tenth of 1%. Stories like that make the headlines but they are still anomalies.
No one is saying that abusive husbands don’t occur. The fact pattern in this case isn’t consistent with one.
TV4caster: I think you bring up an extremely important point: no one intervened. The more headlines show up, the less I am able to consider these cases anomalies. I’m not going back to find the article, but my memory is that the local police seemed to say this was a problem beyond a very few incidents. It was becoming the culture. They had to take dramatic steps to protect women on the beaches during spring break. Perhaps I misread.
ETA: the fact this behavior is inconceivable among the young people I know, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen in other circles.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/15/us/florida-panama-city-beach-spring-break/
Okay, I wondered if I was misremembering. I wasn’t. While I like to believe in the evolution of society, this doesn’t support that view. ymmv.
I’m assuming these are mostly middle class college boys who will eventually be husbands. Maybe they aren’t, maybe they are a non-college criminal element showing up where there are easy victims and no good samaritans.