Poll on Rape
 

James' story about his friend's "odd sexual experience" reminded me of a question some friends & I were discussing the other day:

Which is worse, to be raped by a stranger, or to be raped by a date?

Both have obvious implications, but I'd like to hear what others think about the question.

I think the raped by a stranger is more terrifying. Date rape can be swept under the rug and covered up with denial. Both suck.

Both suck... I cannot see how either one is worse than the other.

Assuming all other factors are equal . . . I would say a date.

With a stranger, you wouldn't have to see them walking around campus. You wouldn't be subject to the same amount of societal pressure to not press charges. You would have far fewer people accusing you of it somehow being your fault, etc.

I would still choose neither because they suck in equal ways.

At least if you get raped by someone you know, you might have information on them that you can give to police such as their name, address, phone number, etc. With a stranger, you don't have that info and there's a greater chance the rapist won't get caught.

It depends.

I imagine that stranger rape is usually worse because it generally involves violence and violent coercion.

Date rape that resembles stranger rape is probably just as bad. Where the acquaintance uses violence or violent conversation.

For example, being dragged out of a parking lot at knife point and raped while being visciously beaten for resisting . . . might be a tad more tramautic than say, having a few drinks and then getting passive agressive because the situation is confusing and unfamiliar allowing the person to go much farther than you are comfortable with.

Some people are familiar with my story. I was raped by an exboyfried. It was easy for me to imagine my guilt and why it could be my fault than I think it would be if I had been raped by a stanger. That's really the only way I could think it would be worse being raped by a date. I at least could somewhat console myself that he didn't have HIV/AIDS, STD's, etc. You can't know that about a stranger. But in the end, it all sucks really bad, so I don't know if there is one worse than the other. Was that clear as mud?

It would depend, though I'm probably going to lean towards date rape. Like others have said, you don't have to see the stranger ever again, while you may have to face someone you know around campus, or even at a party, when you don't know who's going to be there.

Reading some of the above responses, I am wondering if women's libbers have done too good of a job redefining date rape.

The concept of date rape got so little notice for so many years that the only way to really draw attention to it was to make it as horrific in the minds of the populace as violent stranger rape.

Hence you have people saying that there is no difference between violent stranger rape and date rape for a woman.

I think this idea has become so prevalent that when many young women think of Rape today, they think in terms of date rape settings which are usually non-violent.

Girl was drugged. Girl had too many drinks. Girl was on the verge of sex out when she said no, he didn't stop but didn't use violent force.

So then, when we say stranger rape, many women think of those same scenarios and replace the acquaintance with a stranger.

I think this shows a certain naivetie. A concept more shaped by political correctness than a true appreciation of the viscitudes of life.

Stranger rapes are usually violent or violently coercive.

Getting pulled out of parking lot at knife point and being beaten into submission when you try to resist, knocking your teeth out, breaking your cheekbones, shattering ribs, maybe fracturing your pelvis . . . is horrific.

Or being forced to have sex with a knife to your throat or a gun to your head , not knowing if this total stranger is going to take your life . . .

If you guys are telling me that you think your average date rape scenario is worse than that, I think your arguments are rather academic and need to be rethought.

Stranger rape doesn't have to be violent. You can be drugged by someone you don't know as well. Also, how many times have you heard of people gone home with someone they didn't know?

ETA: Why is it that a female is always the victim if she goes to a guy's house drunk and has sex with him, but it isn't always the case the other way around? A drunk guy going home with a not-so drunk girl is just as much a victim. Same thing if both are drunk.

That argument would be counterproductive to feminist viewpoints.

It actually states on one web site that if you have sex with a drunk woman it is rape, however, it doesn't matter if you are drunk because intoxication is not a defense.

According to these viewpoints, would it still be rape it was the other way around? For example, if a girl were to have sex with a drunk guy, would the guy be a rape victim. The girl isn't drunk. Anyway, if both the guy and the girl were drunk, and they did it, then really, both should be considered victims.

James, I don't think you're understanding the deep emotional violation that rape conjures up in a woman. I would rather be beaten until unconscious, every bone in my body broken, than be raped. It's an emotional torture to know that someone has violated what is most private to a woman. A man who rapes a woman steals who she is, her inner being is shaken, her confidence is damaged. She feels dirty and .. violated. The shame, humiliation and psychological effects are far more damaging to a woman than just the physical.

Dee

Y'all bring up some interesting facts & ideas. Dee, I so agree with what you've had to say.

In the discussion(s) that started this thread, the main arguements were:

1) It's harder if it's a stranger. This could be a good looking guy (like Ted Bundy) or a killer (like Ted Bundy). You don't know if you'll live through the experience. You don't know if he'll be caught, tried, and convicted. You may have to testify and relive the whole experience. You have NO idea about his health, especially sexual health. Many people won't believe you.

2) It's harder if it's a date rape. You made the decision to go out with this person. Your judgment is called into question. You may never trust another man. You have to see this person in class, on campus, at parties. Concerning pressing charges, you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. You could become the campus pariah. You don't know about his sexual health. Many people won't believe you.


My own feeling is that the date rape would be harder, because of the massive peer pressure, and the harder ability to prove that it was rape, not consenual (think: the woman raped by William Kennedy Smith). But, I wanted to hear what others thought.

Also, should these perpetrators (I refuse to call a rapist a "man") be tried in the same manner?

Uh, James? Notice the part where I said, "All other things being equal . . ."? Yeah.

Plus, not all stranger rapes are necessarily overly violent, and not all date rapes lack violence. Stranger rapes can use the threat of violence just as effectively as violence itself. And date rape can use violence just as effectively as you're imagining a stranger rape might. NOT all date rapes are simple "misunderstandings" the way you're defining them. Plenty of them do not involve alcohol, or only involve alcohol on one side or another, or involve the girl getting drugged, etc. etc. I think the number that involve straight up misunderstanding the way you think they do is actually quite slim.

Furthermore, taking a stereotypically male viewpoint, you assume violence is the worst thing that can happen. Often the feelings of guilt, self-questioning, and self-blame can be FAR more traumatic than any violence involved.


Although, as I have said many many times, you clearly have little conception about what rape is about and to debate it with you is effectively pointless.