Rape vs Violence: A Double Standard

[Labyrinth]

Because violence isn't included as a moral theme, unless maybe it's Spec Ops. It's included because games are about challenge and antagonism, and the easiest way to express this is through violence. It's design shorthand, a simple premise to enable the primary feature of games; that they're a game. Did space invaders need to be about killing aliens? No, but violence was a simple way to tell a simple story; they want to kill you, kill them first.

This works because violence and killing are a complex subject. We can separate fantasy and reality here because we understand that this violence is a) simulated and b) justified. It's usually only a premise, not an indulgence. You can tell when it *is* an indulgence, because we automatically put big labels on it like 'gore porn', 'brutal' and 'visceral'. And, even with all of this, violent media *does* affect us. It doesn't encourage us to be violent, because we are rational minds and not restrained psychopaths, but it *does* desensitize us to it.

Rape, on the other hand, is far more personal. It is, to within a fraction of a shadow of a notion of exception, always about power. From a violent assault to a drunken exploitation, rape is defined and identified by its power abuse. A video game is an exercise in power, agency and contest, and the combination of these two ideas is an extremely touchy thing. It's not 'just a game', any more than a tear-inducing symphony is 'just a song'. Do the emotions stirred by a clever story become invalid because they're from a video game? Do the ideas and notions presented in intelligent science fiction cease to matter because that Sci-Fi was Bioshock Infinite and not Star Trek or Asimov?

Rape can be included in games, because it is a valid topic for fiction and narrative as any other, but as with everything else in video games it has the potential to go very, very wrong if handled poorly. Even more so, considering the way a game's nature interacts with the power-abuse factors that define rapes and other sexual assaults.

Rape is *not* an equivalent of violence. I know that isn't what you were implying, but it is worth stating. There is no double standard, because you are comparing apples to communist theory.

EDIT: And this is actually Ultrajoe, forgetting to switch over the accounts before responding. So yeah, I'm not reposting all of this, just be aware before you get mad/respond to/offer money to Labyrinth that she didn't post this.

 

[Ultrajoe]

This is complete and utter nonsense, being alive is always superior to being dead, because only if you are alive there is a chance of getting better, regardless of how slim that chance may be.

I have to butt in here, on my own account finally, to rebound your accusations of utter nonsense. Sometimes electing for death is a rational decision. Horrific disease, mental decay and impending suffering are all reasonable instances for ending your own life. Life has no value any more to its owner, and the comparison of risk (death) and reward (a mystical cure) is theirs to make. Depression and other mental illnesses are tragic afflictions, and suicides prompted by irrational feelings inevitability, excellently explained here, are not among those cases I am talking about.

That article also gives numerous examples of rational suicides; Animals ending their lives for the safety or propagation of their species. Our cultural narratives are full of noble sacrifices and heroic foolishness, death as a taboo is not a universal notion.

I take issue only with the declaration that life is always superior to death, not the argument you were using it in support of.

 

[Chris Tian]

This is complete and utter nonsense, being alive is always superior to being dead, because only if you are alive there is a chance of getting better, regardless of how slim that chance may be.

I have to butt in here, on my own account finally, to rebound your accusations of utter nonsense. Sometimes electing for death is a rational decision. Horrific disease, mental decay and impending suffering are all reasonable instances for ending your own life. Life has no value any more to its owner, and the comparison of risk (death) and reward (a mystical cure) is theirs to make. Depression and other mental illnesses are tragic afflictions, and suicides prompted by irrational feelings inevitability, excellently explained here, are not among those cases I am talking about.

That article also gives numerous examples of rational suicides; Animals ending their lives for the safety or propagation of their species. Our cultural narratives are full of noble sacrifices and heroic foolishness, death as a taboo is not a universal notion.

I take issue only with the declaration that life is always superior to death, not the argument you were using it in support of.

I want to take everything that involves sacraficing oneself or doing something with fatal risks and dying during that, out of the way first. The thing in those cases is, nobody chooses death over life there. They choose the consequences of their actions over their own life, if they could achive the same thing without risk of dying they would.

What I mean is that living is always a superior state of existance than being dead, since that is not existing at all. As long as you are alive, no matter the condition you are in there is a theoretical chance of it getting better, however small this chance might be.

Of course people can choose to not take the chance and end their life, if they feel these chances are too close to zero. But they are not getting better, they don't just end their suffering, they become nothing.

I will agree with you that in some cases the decision to end your life, because your chances of dying soon and feeling nothing but pain until then are as close to 100% as it can get, is perfectly understandable, even rational.

My point just is that even then you are not really "better" of. That might, of course, be coloured by my subjective definition of "better", since the definition of "good/better" is a very subjectiva one in basically any case.

Since we are at subjective things already, I would take any pain (as far as I can imagine) for even the slightest chance of "getting better".

I would be interested what your personal opinion is on that specific matter, would you rather die than suffer or suffer through anything you can imagine to live? I'm also curious what you opinion is on my "main"point in my previous post, that rape is by no means worse than murder.

 

[Chris Tian]

The reason Rape is such a touchy subject is because we live in a Rape Culture.

It might be different where you live, but I have yet to encounter such a thing in reality, and I will heavily doubt its existence in any "firstworld-country/society".

I have never ever encountert a case where the majority of people said: "The rapeing was her own fault for wearing this sexy outfit" or anything the like. I belive of course that there will always be an occaisonal nutjob who says something like that, even though I never even met one of those (but thats most likely on me and my habbit to surround myself with, at least somewhat, sane human beings).

OT: I think rape should be ok to explore as a topic or part of the story in games. But I think it has no place as a gameplay mechanic or something done by the PC in your average game.

 

[4RM3D]

Firtly rape and murder are very different things and the sense of violation experienced by victims very different.
*snip*

But how about the friends and family of the victim? In some cultures rape dishonors the family so much the victim might as well have died. Suicide is not uncommon there. In other cultures you are forced to marry the rapist. Yeah, that actually happens.

What do you suggest? Add rape to the games or remove the mindless killing to balance things up? The latter is not realistic as killing has been a part of games since the beginning.
I am quite happy to keep rape out of it. It adds nothing of worth other than to cater to sick perverts and victimize women. At least in GTA you can kill all sexes equally.

It doesn't have to be in a GTA setting. Rape could become a serious discussion and realistic depiction in a game.

The real issue isn't the rape when it's used in a story (in the game). The real issue is when it's used as a gameplay mechanic. But then again, I didn't specify it should be as a gameplay mechanic. I just said you should be able to discuss rape in games.

Until a game can do a sex scene without messing it up, then we can talk about rape.

The opening scene of The Witcher 2 (and there are a few more scenes through out the game). I did not see that one coming. I heard the game was violent and mature, but this is the first time I have seen a sex scene in a game that works in context.

 

[Ultrajoe]

I would be interested what your personal opinion is on that specific matter, would you rather die than suffer or suffer through anything you can imagine to live? I'm also curious what you opinion is on my "main"point in my previous post, that rape is by no means worse than murder.

If I had a fatal disease, or something akin to Alzheimer's, I would consider ending my life. Beyond a certain point in the first case, I would not consider my life to hold much value, it would be mostly full of sadness and pain without a likely end. In the latter case, I would be unraveling at the mental level. I would want to end my life while I was still myself, and possessed of some coherence and dignity.

As for rape vs murder... apples and communist theory. They are very different crimes, that can unfold in many different ways. I think the details are too nuanced and the variables too subjective to try and quantify their evil or the harm done. I certainly see rape as a more intentionally cruel or, equally reprehensible, more coldly self-serving crime, but quantifying its effects is a tasteless effort.

The reason Rape is such a touchy subject is because we live in a Rape Culture.

It might be different where you live, but I have yet to encounter such a thing in reality, and I will heavily doubt its existence in any "firstworld-country/society".

I have never ever encountert a case where the majority of people said: "The rapeing was her own fault for wearing this sexy outfit" or anything the like.

A rape culture is simply one in which rape is facilitated, in any small or large way, by the various mechanisms of the culture itself. Why is ours a rape culture? The best go-to example is as follows: girls are taught to avoid rapists but nowhere near as much time, effort or cultural energy is directing towards teaching boys not to rape. It is accepted that men will attempt to rape women, and that the cultural responsibility for prevention rests with the victims. As a guy, that concept is pretty goddamn insulting. That's all the term means, not that we're a culture that celebrates rape or venerates it. Hence, rape-culture. Not as alarming as its term implies, but perhaps more disturbing on the basis of its insidious nature.

 

[Chris Tian]

As for rape vs murder... apples and communist theory. They are very different crimes, that can unfold in many different ways. I think the details are too nuanced and the variables too subjective to try and quantify their evil or the harm done. I certainly see rape as a more intentionally cruel or, equally reprehensible, more coldly self-serving crime, but quantifying its effects is a tasteless effort.

I see your point and definatly agree with you that murder can be done for various reasons but rape is always a "more intentionally cruel and coldly self-serving crime" like you say.

A rape culture is simply one in which rape is facilitated, in any small or large way, by the various mechanisms of the culture itself. Why is ours a rape culture? The best go-to example is as follows: girls are taught to avoid rapists but nowhere near as much time, effort or cultural energy is directing towards teaching boys not to rape. It is accepted that men will attempt to rape women, and that the cultural responsibility for prevention rests with the victims. As a guy, that concept is pretty goddamn insulting. That's all the term means, not that we're a culture that celebrates rape or venerates it. Hence, rape-culture. Not as alarming as its term implies, but perhaps more disturbing on the basis of its insidious nature.

First, I do get what "rape-culture" means. The person I quotet specifically stated that rape would "almost always" get blamed on the victim and I am enclined to say that this is in no first world sociaty the case.

To the point you make. Is that really true? Maybe its not specifically stated to every young boy "Do not rape" but isn't that kind of implied in the very basic core value of most societies that you should not harm others? And in my experience there is far more effort invested in teaching kids not to harm others than in teaching them how not to get raped.

 

[JazzJack2]

A rape culture is simply one in which rape is facilitated, in any small or large way, by the various mechanisms of the culture itself. Why is ours a rape culture? The best go-to example is as follows: girls are taught to avoid rapists but nowhere near as much time, effort or cultural energy is directing towards teaching boys not to rape. It is accepted that men will attempt to rape women, and that the cultural responsibility for prevention rests with the victims. As a guy, that concept is pretty goddamn insulting. That's all the term means, not that we're a culture that celebrates rape or venerates it. Hence, rape-culture. Not as alarming as its term implies, but perhaps more disturbing on the basis of its insidious nature.

I am sorry but I don't see this at all, committing rape is seen as breaking the most basic forms of human morality and empathy and when cases of rape come up in the news even the coldest, most sociopathic newspapers like the Daily Mail won't attempt to blame the victim. There is universal hatred towards rapists and rape across all the developed world and people don't take it as trivially as you might suggest.

 

[Chris Tian]

Firtly rape and murder are very different things and the sense of violation experienced by victims very different.
*snip*

But how about the friends and family of the victim? In some cultures rape dishonors the family so much the victim might as well have died. Suicide is not uncommon there. In other cultures you are forced to marry the rapist. Yeah, that actually happens.

I don't know if a culture that is so backwards and dark-age-y is a good example. Especially considering that most likely none of us live there. I assume that because people in those cultures tend to not have access to internet and games.

There are examples of cultures throughout history and all over the world that would challenge every moral value you can name. It would all boil down to "morals are subjective" and render any further discussion pointless.

Until a game can do a sex scene without messing it up, then we can talk about rape.

The opening scene of The Witcher 2 (and there are a few more scenes through out the game). I did not see that one coming. I heard the game was violent and mature, but this is the first time I have seen a sex scene in a game that works in context.

You are right that The Witcher 2 is a prime example as to how it handles most of its sex scenes, but in most games romantic and sexual scenes come across very awkward and I too, don't really want to see a scene that includes rape on such a level.

 

[Starik20X6]

Thought experiment time! The Joker is an unrepentant mass murderer. He slaughters anyone he pleases and will destroy countless lives for kicks. And at the same time, he's been voted the greatest villain in the history of fiction. Would he still be the most revered villain of all time if it was revealed he was a rapist? Would he still shift millions of dollars of merchandise? Would his face still adorn countless shirts? I don't think he would, because on some level, we know that rape is worse.

 

[Ultrajoe]

To the point you make. Is that really true? Maybe its not specifically stated to every young boy "Do not rape" but isn't that kind of implied in the very basic core value of most societies that you should not harm others? And in my experience there is far more effort invested in teaching kids not to harm others than in teaching them how not to get raped.

I am sorry but I don't see this at all, committing rape is seen as breaking the most basic forms of human morality and empathy and when cases of rape come up in the news even the coldest, most sociopathic newspapers like the Daily Mail won't attempt to blame the victim. There is universal hatred towards rapists and rape across all the developed world and people don't take it as trivially as you might suggest.

You are both right, and rape is considered reprehensible in most countries, even those we tend to think of as backwards in regards to sexual liberties still treat unlawful or unrighteous sexual assault as heinous (they just have less situations where it is unlawful or unrighteous). But, while it is implied that rape is problematic the world over, why is it that women are taught specifically and pointedly how to avoid rapists while young men are not taught, directly, not to rape? Our culture is lined with male-as-actor conventions; playing hard to get, women denying sex as a form of punishment and a hundred thousand media conventions that depict a relationship as a man conquering a woman. I mean, the pick up artist community is based entirely on a notion of man-wins-sex and even if they are a thousand times less numerous, charming and/or successful than the cultural understanding would depict them, there's no denying that in most portrayals they do get a lot of action. I don't say this as a list of grievances, but a list of common examples that follow a similar theme; sex is something a man has to coerce, or win, from a woman.

I mean, step back from the rape-culture term and what I said earlier, doesn't our media and library of recurring stories use that idea a lot? The hero gets the girl, as roughly a billion tales go. There are definitely exceptions, many of them recent, but the bulk of our cultural makeup is one in which men get, and think about that word, sex from women. The bride is presented to the groom, not the other way around.

Why am I pointing this out? Because that's not sexual equality. Women are horny, horny fucks. Because they're human, and humans love us some sex. Stories where a man doesn't win sex, but rather wants it and so does a likely partner, are overwhelmed by the kinds of examples I presented above. We're a people for whom sex is a commodity surrendered by women, not an activity both parties get a ton of fun out of.

So, why did I post all of that stuff? Because it relates to a central point; we aren't a society with underlying sexual equality. We're a lot closer than most, and a lost closer than we were 50 years ago, but it's still not there. That's why girls are taught not to walk alone at night, and guys aren't sat down and told not to rape women alone in the dark. Rape is all about power, even if you think everything else I've said is utter horseshit this fact is fairly stone-set. Committed by women or men, in the vast majority of cases, a 'typical' rape (and there's a sadly colossal amount of data to determine that) is about power, about claiming something. While we still think that 'something' is a gendered activity, we're still a rape culture.

Take a look here if you don't think what I've said has relevance.

EDIT: I mean, who do you assume is the agressor when you hear the word 'rape'? If you don't automatically assume a gender, then I salute you, but most people assume that it was a man committing the crime, which itself is telling.

 

[Scott Rothman]

.............I'm not even going to touch this thread. Are you really complaining that people hate rape too much and don't hate non-sexual violence enough?

 

[Chris Tian]

To the point you make. Is that really true? Maybe its not specifically stated to every young boy "Do not rape" but isn't that kind of implied in the very basic core value of most societies that you should not harm others? And in my experience there is far more effort invested in teaching kids not to harm others than in teaching them how not to get raped.

I am sorry but I don't see this at all, committing rape is seen as breaking the most basic forms of human morality and empathy and when cases of rape come up in the news even the coldest, most sociopathic newspapers like the Daily Mail won't attempt to blame the victim. There is universal hatred towards rapists and rape across all the developed world and people don't take it as trivially as you might suggest.

You are both right, and rape is considered reprehensible in most countries, even those we tend to think of as backwards in regards to sexual liberties still treat unlawful or unrighteous sexual assault as heinous (they just have less situations where it is unlawful or unrighteous). But, while it is implied that rape is problematic the world over, why is it that women are taught specifically and pointedly how to avoid rapists while young men are not taught, directly, not to rape? Our culture is lined with male-as-actor conventions; playing hard to get, women denying sex as a form of punishment and a hundred thousand media conventions that depict a relationship as a man conquering a woman. I mean, the pick up artist community is based entirely on a notion of man-wins-sex and even if they are a thousand times less numerous, charming and/or successful than the cultural understanding would depict them, there's no denying that in most portrayals they do get a lot of action. I don't say this as a list of grievances, but a list of common examples that follow a similar theme; sex is something a man has to coerce, or win, from a woman.

I mean, step back from the rape-culture term and what I said earlier, doesn't our media and library of recurring stories use that idea a lot? The hero gets the girl, as roughly a billion tales go. There are definitely exceptions, many of them recent, but the bulk of our cultural makeup is one in which men get, and think about that word, sex from women. The bride is presented to the groom, not the other way around.

Why am I pointing this out? Because that's not sexual equality. Women are horny, horny fucks. Because they're human, and humans love us some sex. Stories where a man doesn't win sex, but rather wants it and so does a likely partner, are overwhelmed by the kinds of examples I presented above. We're a people for whom sex is a commodity surrendered by women, not an activity both parties get a ton of fun out of.

So, why did I post all of that stuff? Because it relates to a central point; we aren't a society with underlying sexual equality. We're a lot closer than most, and a lost closer than we were 50 years ago, but it's still not there. That's why girls are taught not to walk alone at night, and guys aren't sat down and told not to rape women alone in the dark. Rape is all about power, even if you think everything else I've said is utter horseshit this fact is fairly stone-set. Committed by women or men, in the vast majority of cases, a 'typical' rape (and there's a sadly colossal amount of data to determine that) is about power, about claiming something. While we still think that 'something' is a gendered activity, we're still a rape culture.

Take a look here if you don't think what I've said has relevance.

You are completely right that we do not live in a society of sexual-equality, there is absolutely no arguing that. But I think that its a very far stretch from that, to something that could be called a "rape-culture".

As for your specific example of girls being taught specifically how to avoid rape and boys not being specifically taught not to rape, thats a matter of efficiency.

Its far easier to teach a young boy core values that can be applied to a myrad of life-situations than to give him a miles long list of what specifically not to do. On the other hand its far more efficient, from a tactical point of view, to teach somebody how to avoid a very specific threat as to try to tech them some basic principle to avoid all threats.

Edit: Of course I assume the attacker is a man, first of men are in most cases physically at an advantage, secondly is it far harder for a women to rape a men since she needs to administer chemicals or pharmaceuticals.

 

[4RM3D]

... and from what i've heard of the 'rape scene' in new Tomb Raider, didn't if you fail that the guy just killed her? so while he's being all creepy, yes, but its not REALLY rape... though it would make sense in the context...

Indeed. It was more implied; fighting for survival vs natural instinct. A lot of people made a fuss about the scene before the game was released. But after the discussion quickly died out.

fuck half my issue with visual media is "if they can do it in books why not -insert media here-?" because seriously, books is free reign... suppose the audio/visuals are just an added push on the trauma scale or something *shrugs* psychologically is more disturbing then just imagining it in your own head i suppose...

Well, in the Game of Thrones book the girl was 13 years old. If they wanted to show that on television, even when using an actress older than 18, that would have been too much.

Books have it easy. I guess the hierarchy goes: reading it (books), watching it (movies), doing it (games).

 

[Smeatza]

Thought experiment time! The Joker is an unrepentant mass murderer. He slaughters anyone he pleases and will destroy countless lives for kicks. And at the same time, he's been voted the greatest villain in the history of fiction. Would he still be the most revered villain of all time if it was revealed he was a rapist? Would he still shift millions of dollars of merchandise? Would his face still adorn countless shirts? I don't think he would, because on some level, we know that rape is worse.

Freddy Krueger, Sabretooth (Marvel), Glen Quagmire, Pyramid Head, Hercules (DC).
With the possible exception of Hercules these are all very popular characters.
Hell DC comics even has a female rapist on it's roster (Shado).
And I don't even watch/read Game of Thrones, I hear there are many popular rapist characters in that show.

Rape is certainly a more mature subject than murder (due to the sexual element), so the most popular villain is never going to be one that is associated with such a mature, audience-limiting subject.

 

[Ultrajoe]

But I think that its a very far stretch from that, to something that could be called a "rape-culture".

Why? I get what that sentence means, but why is it so hard to apply that term? We're a culture that holds a lot of gender disparity, a great deal of sexual assault and a veritable legion of cultural tropes that reinforce these problems. If I'm right, as you have said, about the disparities between the sexes... then what's the difficulty in using the term rape-culture? Why is it a far cry? Rape happens a lot, our culture is obsessed with some creepy, rape-ish ideas (men take sex from women, even in the nicely depicted romances) and

I want to ask a question, one that I hope won't offend you but fear it might; Does the idea that we live in something that *could* be called a rape culture offend you?

As for your specific example of girls being taught specifically how to avoid rape and boys not being specifically taught not to rape, thats a matter of efficiency.

Its far easier to teach a young boy core values that can be applied to a myrad of life-situations than to give him a miles long list of what specifically not to do. On the other hand its far more efficient, from a tactical point of view, to teach somebody how to avoid a very specific threat as to try to tech them some basic principle to avoid all threats.

If that's true, why do young men have trouble spotting the difference between media intended for them as sexual counsel and the defensive comments of convicted rapists? If young men didn't need to be taught specific examples to avoid committing rape, why does it still occur? Should driving education consist of a mantra that reads 'Respect other drivers and stay safe', and not a process of learning all the rules associated with safe operation of a motor vehicle? It's much more efficient. Since when is 'Practice sex ethically' not a core value we should use exactly as you say; to cover a miles-long list of different examples?

And, to follow on with this; How would that list be miles long? We already teach our children thousands of moral exceptions every day, our constructs of etiquette are automatically taught out of habit ('Now say please') and are shockingly complex. I'm not asking for a boot camp that covers every instance of sexual assault, but just a simple principal; 'Don't rape'. How do you not rape? Get an unequivocal 'Yes' before any sexual encounter. I mean, it's not rocket science.

And the fact that there is a 'very specific threat' that dis-proportionally targets women isn't indicative of a culture with a problem of rape? Is there a term for that, I wonder?

 

[Smeatza]

snip

We also don't teach our male children not to commit genocide, or not to enslave people, or not to be cannibals.

An individual that is prepared to rape is not normal. Educating young boys not to rape is a wasted effort, because they are either never going to rape anyone in the first place, or there is something wrong with them that simple education will not fix.

 

[Ultrajoe]

snip

We also don't teach our male children not to commit genocide, or not to enslave people, or not to be cannibals.

An individual that is prepared to rape is not normal. Educating young boys not to rape is a wasted effort, because they are either never going to rape anyone in the first place, or there is something wrong with them that simple education will not fix.

Really? So is this class just full of rapists or is there maybe something wrong with the way we teach children about consent?

http://accidentaldevotional.com/2013/03/19/the-day-i-taught-how-not-to-rape/

Why do so many rapists defend themselves with the idea that what they did could happen to anyone, that everyone does it and that it's normal? That's either the most uniform pathology in the world or they're just fucked up people who didn't know any better. What's wrong with telling them straight up what's right and wrong? Why is this idea offensive?

EDIT: And we do teach them not to do those things, by the way. Hitler is the go-to example of evil across most of the developed world. Cannibals are nigh-universally depicted as evil and cruel, and slavery has been the watchword for abusive behavior for so long it's reflexive. It's ingrained in our culture that these things are bad, we teach it with every negative example we provide to ourselves.

We don't send the same message about rape. That's why Steubenville coverage couldn't get over the fact that the poor rapists lives had been ruined by their own... deliberate sexual assault, I guess? That's why the victim was subjected to mockery, threats and even the initial assault itself. Multiple news stations covered the fact that these kids were normal, upstanding boys on their way to successful lives, not fringe cases to be written off as time-bombs who just went off. That's why our cultural depictions of romance can't get over the idea of men as uncontrollable sexual gluttons. Beauty and the Beast, the 'Tale as Old as Time', is about an abusive relationship whose victim must tame and comfort her abuser. And that's a kid's movie, for Christ's sake! If we treated rape like we did cannibalism, genocide and slavery, there'd be a lot fucking less of it.

 

[Chris Tian]

But I think that its a very far stretch from that, to something that could be called a "rape-culture".

Why? I get what that sentence means, but why is it so hard to apply that term? We're a that holds a lot of gender disparity, a great deal of sexual assault and a veritable legion of cultural tropes that reinforce these problems. If I'm right, as you have said, about the disparities between the sexes... then what's the difficulty in using the term rape-culture? Why is it a far cry? Rape happens a lot, our culture is obsessed with some creepy, rape-ish ideas (men take sex from women, even in the nicely depicted romances) and

I want to ask a question, one that I hope won't offend you but fear it might; Does the idea that we live in something that *could* be called a rape culture offend you?

First I'm not offended, its pretty hard to offend me.

I do get your point, but if you look at it that way, then we are also a murder-culture, thief-culture, racist-culture... and the term becomes meaningless again. Calling it a rape culture somehow implies, at least for me, that rape is a far bigger problem than other things of equal nature.

As for your specific example of girls being taught specifically how to avoid rape and boys not being specifically taught not to rape, thats a matter of efficiency.

Its far easier to teach a young boy core values that can be applied to a myrad of life-situations than to give him a miles long list of what specifically not to do. On the other hand its far more efficient, from a tactical point of view, to teach somebody how to avoid a very specific threat as to try to tech them some basic principle to avoid all threats.

If that's true, why do young men have trouble spotting the difference between media intended for them as sexual counsel and the defensive comments of convicted rapists?

Well its a bit hard to argue an article who doesn't really quote anything specific and is clearly intended to shock people (not by you by the author) and has very little scientific value.

I can just say that some basic mindsets will be similar, both might see women as sexual objects, its still very different since one group choose to employ violance to get what they want.

If young men didn't need to be taught specific examples to avoid committing rape, why does it still occur?

Again I can just say murder happens too, are we a murder-culture too? And do we to little to prevent murders?

Since when is 'Practice sex ethically' not a core value we should use exactly as you say; to cover a miles-long list of different examples?

And, to follow on with this; How would that list be miles long? We already teach our children thousands of moral exceptions every day, our constructs of etiquette are automatically taught out of habit ('Now say please') and are shockingly complex. I'm not asking for a boot camp that covers every instance of sexual assault, but just a simple principal; 'Don't rape'. How do you not rape? Get an unequivocal 'Yes' before any sexual encounter. I mean, it's not rocket science.

Well again, I think thats coverd with:

"Do not use violance to get what you want"

There is no real need to sinlge out:

"Do not use violance to get sex"

The later statement is specific and the first one is the core value that already covers it.

And the fact that there is a 'very specific threat' that dis-proportionally targets women isn't indicative of a culture with a problem of rape? Is there a term for that, I wonder?

And again I can just say that rape is not an disproportional problem in our culture so the term "rape-culture" is not really appropriate. Of course you are right that its dis-proportionally a problem for women, but so are bar-fights for men and I have never heard the term "bar-fight culture".

Like i stated earlier, the term "rape culture" blows the problem of rape out of proportion compared to other problems our society faces. Dont get me wrong I am not saying rape is not a problem or a little problem, its just not a bigger problem than other violent crimes.

 

[KOMega]

I think violence is one thing whereas rape is tackling two things (or perhaps more).

Rape is the combination of both violence and sexual conduct.

Now say what you will about nudity or sexual acts or whatever. Whatever your stance on it is, we can agree that the majority of people don't like even the idea of nudity in public eyes.

So when people compare violence and rape, it's comparing A and A+B.
A=/=A+B unless B is treated as moot.