London SlutWalk - now *11th*June, 1pm Trafalgar Square

[ViolentPanda]

But it would have to be qualified 'domination' as in 'domination of women under 30 and over 18' as that seems to account for around 80% of proven rapes - last time I looked anyhoo.

That is also an age range, of course, when most women are at their most attractive, and fertile.

So it hasn't occurred to you, even glancingly, that age groups older and younger than the one you mention might under-report?

 

[gavman]

Power is always implicated though, it always has something to do with rape, so of course it's not just about power. It's about someone else exerting power (the means) to express their "anger", "sadism" or requirement for "sexual gratification".

so that's like saying 'armed robbery is all about power', whereas power is just what is required to commit the crime

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm pretty sure Felson remains rather in a minority with that theory - amongst other criminologists and psychologists.

Yup. I Can't think of any of the basic texts, stuff like Clive Hollin's intro to criminal psychology, where new eds get printed every two - three years, that give it any credence, because there's not enough literature out there to support it.

 

[ViolentPanda]

so that's like saying 'armed robbery is all about power', whereas power is just what is required to commit the crime

What's the aim of an armed robbery compared to the aim of rape? Are they the same?

Does the power exerted fulfill the same needs/requirements of the perpetrator?

If the answer to both the above is "yes", then your first point makes sense. If your answer to either or both is "no", then very obviously it's nothing like saying "armed robbery is all about power".

 

[gavman]

the aim of the armed robbery is to commit an armed robbery. the aim of the rapist is to commit rape.

they both exert power to commit their crimes; it fulfils the same requirement. they cannot commit the crime without gaining power over the victim. this is incidental to the crime. not it's objective. the objective is to steal money or have sex with someone unwilling. i stand by my point

 

[Edie]

I kinda get where your coming from gav. Cos I mean one of the reason you go out dressed looking sexy is to play with men. Flirt. It's excersising your power as a woman, to attract men. You don't put on a small skirt and heels cos it's comfortable, you put it on to work a room. So it's kinda like an agreement innit, men can look and admire. You can even touch within reason, I think most girls aren't gonna go mad if the odd bloke grabs there arse on the way to the loo in a crowded club, or dances in a way that means your legs are touching. And men love it as much as the girls, it's a game.

But it's pretty clear when that oversteps the mark. When a bloke just wont leave you alone, even if you've asked him to, for example. Or keeps touching you. Or follows you. I've had men just blatently reach out and grab my tits (in Leeds, natch ), that's over the line. The men who are behaving like twats at the end of the night need to go and have a wank and a cold shower.

And rape is ever so clearly across any line you wanna put down.

 

[ddraig]

i think grabbing someones arse is way over the line tbh!

 

[ViolentPanda]

the aim of the armed robbery is to commit an armed robbery. the aim of the rapist is to commit rape.

they both exert power to commit their crimes; it fulfils the same requirement. they cannot commit the crime without gaining power over the victim. this is incidental to the crime. not it's objective. the objective is to steal money or have sex with someone unwilling. i stand by my point

So an aim isn't an objective in Gavworld?

 

[gavman]

how do you know about gavworld? i never mention it on here.
first rule of gavworld etc etc

 

[gavman]

So an aim isn't an objective in Gavworld?

interchangeable, really. bless my diction

 

[ymu]

thank you for your considered response. i will try to do likewise.

firstly it wasn't a 'gang rape'. she met up with them for sex.

my 'revenge' response, well that goes quite deep for me.
i have never felt such an overwhelming desire to protect someone as i did with her. but equally i have never known someone as capable of looking after themselves, but who refused to do so.
all i can say is that on my first day at school as a nippper i was overcome with the desire to protect the girls from the boys who were chasing them. i don't know if there is some freudian stuff going on there but the desire to protect girls from men has never gone away; i once intervened in a drunken date rape scenario on a beach in australia. the girl's friends all took the piss out of me and called me 'dad', but we became friends afterwards

as to why i am so certain she was lying....you would need the benefits (?) of my experience to understand that, and i'm sure nothing i will say here will be enough to persuade people. it was an incredibly destructive relationship; as a recovering crack user she was unpredictable and incredibly violent. as an ex-public school type i believed that if a girl attacked you you just stood there and let her hit you until she calmed down. but she didn't calm down, and would regularly stick one on me mid-conversation. this does begin to grind you down....but not as much as her telling my friends and fellow collective members that i was the violent one.
this was the point that i started to feel like i was losing my mind.
this girl that i wanted to cherish love and protect, was not only abusing me physically but was now denying the deepest part of me, that i would never hurt her. it wasn't until she was witnessed punching me in the face by others that the tide began to turn.
my only logical explanation for all this was that she wanted to 'ride me into the manor'. we got together at just the time i was moving into haz manor, home of the exodus collective, with whom i had been involved for several years. she wanted to move in as well, but wasn't welcome.
so her strategy, having seen some of the domestic violence that took place and the collective's reaction to it, was to claim domestic abuse and distance herself from me. when this got short shrift she came back to me again. it was my weakness to take her back


going to the issue of sex and control, this girl was always in control. if she got you aroused, before you knew it she had you mounted and inside her with professional expertise. when she did her psycho bitch from hell routine halfway through sex she'd spit you out before you even knew something was up. before we got together she would be with a different man most days and claimed to have several stalkers. she was also the most dishonest person i have ever met.

thing is, i know where her abberrant sexual behaviour came from, and it wasn't about a lack of control. i knew her family. she was an incredibly spoilt jewish girl who had a her parents / granparents wrapped around her little finger, and her sexual behaviour was in order to manipulate them. as far as i could tell, she couldn't really tell the difference between a parental relationship and that between lovers. she loved to publicly tell stories about dangerous situation she got herself into, just to manipulate your feelings for her. there was no attendant trauma; these were her experiences that made her the cool, street smart cat she was

Sounds extraordinarily like a friend's ex.

London-based - 6 letters, starts with M?

If it is, you're wrong. She fucked him up too, but he doesn't share your analysis of why.

If it isn't, you're still wrong.

The fact that she hurt you does not mean she was, and is, not hurting. You weren't able to 'save' her. Neither was he. Tough shit. You don't get to decide she's just evil instead.

Abuse does weird stuff to people. If you can't comprehend it, rescue women who don't need rescuing cos otherwise you're a fucking liability.

i don't respect promiscuous men. i think it would be a terrible shame for women to emulate the behaviour of the worst men, in the name of equality.
occasionally you do come across them, telling tales of how they've bedded women with the help of coke, but i think 'shallow tw@' and move quickly on. i don't think it's ok for men anymore than for women

e2a @mikemcc

What gives you the right to tell other people what they can and can't do in private?

Why the fuck do you think promiscuous women are aping men, as opposed to exercising a freedom denied them by control-freaks like you?

Fuck's sake. You can choose who you sleep with, but you need to respect every human being gav, not just those who are exactly like you. You never know, you might even learn something.

 

[ymu]

That's really interesting, cheers. Also gives a number of other reasons for rape, other than power. Like anger, sadism and sexual gratification. I think that places the whole 'power' argument in context for me. Rape isn't always just about power, but it sometimes is.

I have equally muddled thoughts, and I'm supposed to be sleeping, so obviously, I'm going to try and outline them.

Firstly, 'rape is about power' has to be a generalisation because there are too many circumstances in which rape occurs to have one model. But I think you can put power in most models somewhere.

Women and children are more vulnerable to rape because they are physically weaker. The power differential makes it possible.

Stranger rape is rare. It's a sexual deviance. It may be about sexual gratification for some (not all), but they're getting off in a particular situation - where they have all the power. Street girls just aren't expensive enough, nor stranger rapes common enough, for it to be plausible that it is just about getting sex.

Rape by family members, friends, partners ... now you get into very complex territory.

It can be purely about sexual gratification. Non-withdrawal is one obvious example. I raped a man in this way: coitus interruptus, me on top, simultaneous orgasm, I was weak. It was rape - I just didn't realise it at the time. I think this is likely to be the case for most non-withdrawals. Lack of self-control and/or confuddlement about the situation. Worth noting that the only reason I could rape him was that he was powerless to stop me. Had he been on top, I'd have had no such opportunity.

Partners and dates? Twenty years ago. men had the right to rape their wives. 1991 the law changed. That's serious power. And three whole living generations of men who had that right. Some may be rather bitter about giving it up, and if they have wives who are used to it, they can and will abuse that power. I've had some deeply unpleasant exchanges with some of these older men. Extreme culture shock.

I just keep coming back to the stranger rapist here. It's hard for a man not to know he is forcing a woman to have sex. A man who forces a date or a partner must, surely, be getting off on something more than just sex. I can allow some cases where it is lack of self control and/or a terrible misunderstanding of the 'banter' that so many men seem to think is harmless, but not all.

And, again, it comes down to power.

Because they can.

So, power in a very literal way - physically being able to force someone - and power as a means of achieving sexual gratification.

But there's also powerlessness as a motive to do something powerful. We live in a society that demands all men be alpha-males, but only allows a minority to achieve that. Of course there are some men who feel inadequate and powerless, and they may find the opportunity to be powerful quite irresistible. There's probably a bit of that in some stranger rapes and in some date rapes.

The criminal justice system hands the rapist another powerful weapon, of course. A very difficult ordeal in court.

And casual sexism means they'll probably be under the impression, rightly or wrongly, that their mates will approve. Peer approval is likely to be the main driver of gang-rape, especially amongst teenagers. And gaining peer approval is all about power, if you're in a gang.

So yeah. Dunno if that makes any sense.

 

[ymu]

A fair point.

Out of interest this link provides stats (per capita and by total reported):
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita

The scandiavian countries (which many consider the hotest when it comes to equality) don't do quite as well as expected (No stats for Sweden unfortunately).

To be honest there are quite a few surprises there imo.

I would have thought Canada and Italy would have been the other way around. Whats Australia doing so high up the table.

The Scandinavian countries have much more stringent laws, AFAIK. Like with like. If women are more or less likely to report, then it will make a difference.

You should also, arguably include all misogynistic hate crimes. All sexual assaults, acid attacks, scarring, 'honour' killings, all the other things that twisted men do to take it out on the women who don't make them feel powerful enough. Cultural factors might influence the nature of the crime.

I'd love to see a proper comparative study across all categories. Based on British Crime Survey methods to avoid reporting bias.

 

[gavman]

Sounds extraordinarily like a friend's ex.

London-based - 6 letters, starts with M?

If it is, you're wrong. She fucked him up too, but he doesn't share your analysis of why.

If it isn't, you're still wrong.

The fact that she hurt you does not mean she was, and is, not hurting. You weren't able to 'save' her. Neither was he. Tough shit. You don't get to decide she's just evil instead.

Abuse does weird stuff to people. If you can't comprehend it, rescue women who don't need rescuing cos otherwise you're a fucking liability.




What gives you the right to tell other people what they can and can't do in private?

Why the fuck do you think promiscuous women are aping men, as opposed to exercising a freedom denied them by control-freaks like you?

Fuck's sake. You can choose who you sleep with, but you need to respect every human being gav, not just those who are exactly like you. You never know, you might even learn something.

first off, no, this isn't the same person. and i don't believe she is evil- just sociopath who manipulated and used me. you're in danger of transferring your prejudices about that situation to mine. i don't know the person you refer to, but i do know that no two people are alike

i didn't set out to rescue her- she persued me, wanted to use me as a safe haven to get a break from the insanity she created in the rest of her life. perhaps i did then want to help / save her, guilty as charged

when first i met this person i couldn't believe the horrendous things that had happened to her, or why she had so many bad experiences of horrible people. then i met some of the people she told horrible stories about, and i couldn't believe they were true- i couldn't match these people with the things she had said they had done. her life was compartmentalised so that none of her friends / family could ever speak and find out the truth- that she was surrounded by people who cared for her, that she was relentlessly manipulating. then, later, i heard from others that now she was telling dreadful, untrue stories about me, and it all became clear. she made this stuff up to avoid any feelings of guilt or responsibility to that person for her own actions. you say she was feeling bad? i'm sorry, that just proves how little you know of this type of behaviour; she was shallow enough to believe her own lies and that would outweigh any positive aspects of a relationship, so she could characterise it as an abusive relationship and treat the person accordingly (with contempt, 'til she needed something)

for example
we were introduced by a mutual friend, who is no longer with us. she was an old friend of her family, and also a member of the collective, who used to mother her, and then both of us once we were together. it round to her's that we went for a decent meal once a week, or for advice on the (frequent) occasions things broke down. she had always looked after ****, feeding her up and generally being loving. this had gone on for the whole of her life, she had been a link when her life was going off the rails
whenever **** and i got into difficulty, she was there with some straight talking, some of which didn't go down well with my ex, as a result of which they fell out.
when our friend's cancer came back, she wouldn't speak to or go and see her. she was ill for the best part of a year, and the whole time she refused to see or talk to this friend, right up to her death. slagged her off and derided her, this person who had done nothing but care for her, just because she would no longer accept ****'s lies about me, her family, the collective...and so on

so, to your angrier 'points'. i have no interest in telling other people what to do in private. blokes can use cocaine to bed women- that's up to the two of them. i just feel absolute contempt for those who do, and wouldn't be friends with them. we all exercise moral judgements about what sort of behaviours we consider acceptable and would like to be surrounded by. shallow people who use cocaine for sexual conquests, i have every fucking right to despise. i'm not trying to control them; i just feel contempt for their actions, and wouldn't behave that way myself.
is this permissable to you? or should i hate myself for having my own moral framework?

i understand from some of your posts (ymu) that you have a happy sex life, and have enjoyed being promiscuous at times. good for you. i couldn't be happier for you, and it's none of my business to ask whether people have been hurt by your actions. it's just peronally, i'm not like that, and personally, i'd prefer to be with someone else who isn't either

finally, the control freak. i've spent some time thinking about it since my earlier post, and i think it's to do with having a younger sister who was born with a heart condition, my desire to protect girls. as a toddler i probably played too rough or something, and then had it drilled into me that i was to protect my little sister. that's my best guess from what my parents say- apparently i was always very protective towards her

now your final gift- you have to respect everyone.
bollocks do you

a year after the death of our friend, ****' s father died in an rta. at the time they hadn't spoke for several months, even though she was living back in her parent's home- she was punishing him for something or other. and i realised something, that if i stayed with her i was guaranteed the lonely, miserable death that those closest to her had suffered,more than likely preceded by misery and insanity.

so, do i have to respect someone who behaves like this?

 

[ymu]

Fair enough gav. Great post, and my apologies for being harsh. Sociopath might well be correct, from those details. Sociopaths are chaotic, disorganised versions of psychopaths. We just realised a 'friend' of ours is probably a psychopath and used this article to help us extricate ourselves: http://www.hare.org/links/saturday.html

There's also lots of forums for those who have fallen for one of these predators, and some for the predators themselves. You might find it useful for finding closure: http://www.google.com/m?hl=en&gl=us&client=ms-null&source=android-browser-goto&q=psychopath+forum

On respect for other people's lifestyle choices, I think it goes hand in hand with not being a bigot. You can criticise people for hurting others without transferring that criticism to an entire demographic. I happen to have written about how I conducted myself when I was free to sleep with anyone who wanted to sleep with me, so I need not explain it again: http://fidelitypornletters.blogspot.com/2011/05/on-fidelity-and-sexual-responsibility.html

Finally, I know about trying to rescue people. You can't. Not unless they are able to give you something back to replace the emotional energy you expend on them. You can be a carer or a lover, but not both. I lost a year of my life to a manipulative abuser, and he is the reason I stayed single for 16 years.I do understand the harm these people can cause.

I don't understand how you are coping with being single for so long if you don't have casual sex though. Not prying nor condemning, but casual sex for me was an alternative to wasting time on meaningless relationships just to get sex. Being celibate just isn't an option for me. I'd be going insane within weeks.

 

[gavman]

sorry for the grumpiness. thank you and believe me, i will explore the links. i think the fact that it's a bit of a theme in my current postings means i'm trying to work stuff out, now i have some time elapsed since it all happened, so i really appreciate that

the bigotry is probably rooted in the white hot pain i still feel when discussing promiscuity. it was used as a knife to wound me on so many occasions, and regularly done for no other reason. and then described in terms of 'i was thinking of you the whole time'. coached in the argument of 'this is the life i fall back into when not with you'
headfuck city

edited to add
the word that haunts from this time me is 'relentless'. there was never any respite, softening or awareness of the damage she was doing to everyone who cared for her. caring was a currency she would spend spend spend

 

[gavman]

I don't understand how you are coping with being single for so long if you don't have casual sex though. Not prying nor condemning, but casual sex for me was an alternative to wasting time on meaningless relationships just to get sex. Being celibate just isn't an option for me. I'd be going insane within weeks.

fuck...now there's a can of worms. supper first, then see how i feel

 

[ymu]

You had every right to be grumpy. I was to tired when I wrote that and should have been gentler.

Working it out takes a lifetime. There's always more shit to deal with. Trick is to work out how to immunise yourself from the stuff that knocks you sideways.

Casual sex only is how I learnt to stop myself trying to rescue people who couldn't rescue me. Going self-employed means I get paid for taking on too much work instead of being taken for a mug by an organisation that can't even reign in the bureaucrats and jealous 9-5ers whilst expecting, and getting, the output of two people (this has been measured, because jealous 9-5ers used to force workload audits to try and get at me).

That's my stuff. Your stuff will need different solutions. You can't change the world, only how you relate to it and it to you. We're all fucking weird one way or another. Find a way to be you without getting punished for it.

 

[gavman]

fuck...now there's a can of worms. supper first, then see how i feel

i think i'll leave it til i'm among friends to answer that one. been burned like that on here before, and your response to me seems to change every time you post. so thanks but no thanks

 

[ymu]

I said I wasn't prying. I do not want to know. I was trying to make you understand something, as it happens.

I respond to the posts, not the people. I don't know anyone who is always right, nor anyone who is akways wrong. Heroes and villains, suckups and enemies … we're not in the playground, and sometimes truth matters.

The world doesn't care if you go off in a huff. People relate to you as you relate to them. You don't get to be treated better than you treat others, because how you treat others largely determines how they treat you.

I don't care. You probably should.

 

[gavman]

not sharing my intimate sexual details is hardly going off in a huff.

and i have responded to people exactly as they have responded to me. i'm nice until people are horrible. blagsta has been turning up on threads where i post fairly consistently and having a pop. i just got sick of it.
as for trashpony, well that's someone who has wished a lonely miserable death upon me so yes, now the gloves come off. when people seek me out or say things that are unjustified and hurtful i fight back.
you've only seen half the story, i'm afraid, and gone off half cocked. but think what you like- i was in danger of trusting you, so a salutory lesson for me

 

[ymu]

Llike I said, could not give a flying fuck. Not dealing with huffy children today, thanks.

 

[gavman]

very wise. better to deal with your own moodswings

 

[Edie]

gav you are a little strange. And your attitudes to women are quite fucked up. Not sure if you realise that.

 

[gavman]

i do

 

[Edie]

i do

Fair enough

 

[ymu]

But he ain't gunna change unless you stay nice to him however mild the criticism.

 

[gavman]

criticism fine, laying the boot in not. i'd already apologised for what you were attacking me for, so what was the point?
just looked like ganging up to me

 

[ymu]

I apologise if I missed your apology.

You were being obstinately wrong long after the thread nailed it because you couldn't even be arsed to read anyone else's posts, bar pantomiming with blagsta. It ruins important threads like that for everyone else.

I know I shit on threads too sometimes. But I hold my hands up and apologise if I realise it,. Like grown-ups do.

It's OK to be wrong. If you never are, you can never learn anything. Ruining a thread because you can't back down, over beef from a different thread … You might do better to wonder if people are having a go for an actual reason, not just because they're nasty bullies.

blagsta can be bad on pantomime shit, but he's often correct. It does make a difference, on issues where truth matters.

Nice includes considerate as well as anodyne, yeah? So play nicer, and maybe people will be nicer.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

Who needs soap operas?