charity wrote: I didn't say women have an increased ability to fight back.I said their susceptiblity to be raped increases.
Women are more susceptible to rape when what occurs? When they have an increased ability to fight back this has a positive correlation to their being raped?
I think what charity was trying to say is that when women get more power, they start fighting back, whereas before they just submitted unquestioningly to their male owners, which, by charity's definition, is not rape because they weren't forced and no violence occurred.
If only we could go back to the good old times when a guy could just buy himself a wife or two, or stone them if they didn't save the bloody sheets from their wedding night, the prevalence of rape would be truly minuscule.
Ah, well then Charity would be interested in some stats I saw earlier today that most elderly women do not fight back against stranger rape. Perhaps, that's not really rape either? Wish I'd bookmarked the page. Perhaps I'll find the study later and post it.
This thread is so convoluted now!
This study would be interesting to see. Especially since sexual abuse of the elderly does not get discussed much.
On a side note, are you suffering from OCD or something?
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney
Wait a minute - does Charity live in Utah? That could explain why she hasn't noticed the legal changes in the US, attempting to eliminate institutionalized patriarchy.
(just kidding, unless Utah is worse than I suspect)
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
This is about elderly abuse that occurs. It does not go into details about resistance. Yet, it does speak to the fact that sometimes the elderly are incapable of resistance. Surely Charity considers the elderly that are senile (or the mentally impaired) as being raped even if they did not resist?
I'm still trying to find the study that found that elderly women were less inclined to resist. I was clicking on links from one site to the next and unfortunately am not on the same computer I was on earlier and can't access the history.
This study speaks to weapons used on the elderly vs. younger women:
Weapons were used more frequently on younger women; however, the same levels of physical violence and restraint were used against older and younger women.
This study (and I can find the complete study if need be) found that physical intimidation was most often all that was needed in most cases to subdue elderly victims:
On a side note, are you suffering from OCD or something?
Could be? Or just interested in this subject and had nothing better to do today.
Umm, okay. What I really wanted to ask is whether or not you always change people's spelling when you quote them.
I didn't realize I fixed any spelling errors. My browser highlights everything in red that is misspelled (and there's plenty in my posts) as I post and I just go through and fix them before I hit submit. It was unintentional, as I probably thought I had typed it since I made no notice of it as I did it.
No. I am saying that most women would not consider that resistance was an option. They do not consider themselves to have been raped.
So they don't "consider themselves to have been raped".
In your opinion, were they raped?
No, a woman is not raped unless she considers she has been. No one can define anyone else's experience. "You were raped. "No, I wasn't." "Oh, yes, you were." What kind of stupid discussion would that be?
beaste wrote:
And just when and where and what was this sea change in the legal system. Reference please.
Oh, for heaven's sake. Tell me you're not serious.
You mean equal pay and the civil rights act? Now who is joking?
beastie wrote:
You haven't come anywhere close to showing that "Mormon church institutionalized patriarchy" causes rape. That is why in my last post, I called for you to back up your theory with real data, real analysis. Since you can't, you really ought to keep off the wall speculations to yourself.
I'm simply trying to get some groundwork established. You were the one who insisted we define patriarchy to begin with. I'm still waiting for you to concede that institutionalized patriarchy exists in Mormonism, and with the exception of other extremely religious areas, Utah and other mormon-dominated states are going to have more patriarchy demonstrated than other, nonmormon (or nonEV) states. One step at a time.
Don't you think groundwork would have been preferable before the accusation that the Church fosters ideas which contribute to the rape of women? Talk about a cart before the horse!
I won't ever agree that any analysis which puts the Church in the same league with other "extremely" religious areas is going to provide anything useful.
Beastie wasn't there something said in a previous post that you had training in sociology or psychology or some other relevant field?