One big problem is that a good number of women who have been raped made little or no attempts to fight off their rapists. I think women should be encouraged to fight off their rapist as much as possible. If nothing else, it would leave enough physical evidence that leaves no doubt about 'consent'.

I think that it depends on the type of rapist. There are the so-called anger-retaliatory rapists whose main object is to cause pain and degradation to the victim and who may escalate the rape to a deadly attack if challenged. Unfortunately the "correct" response to an attack usually needs to be determined rapidly in a very uncertain and fluid situation while being subjected to a great deal of stress, so it's not always clear what the correct course of action is -- another sad aspect of victimization.

Most rape IS about power and subjugation. Fighting back is an indicator the victim hasn't been subjugated enough. It will almost always escalate the violence of the attack.

the most important thing for someone who is being raped to do is stay alive...all of this hand wringing is cerebral bullshit...do whatever you have to do so that you can live. period.

degsme:

Most rape IS about power and subjugation. Fighting back is an indicator the victim hasn't been subjugated enough. It will almost always escalate the violence of the attack.

That's a myth. Rape isn't "about" any one thing any more than murder or robbery is; the psychology and motives of rapists vary considerably, as does the danger of escalation of violence if the victim fights back. The type of power the rapist is after varies too: some want to prove to themselves that they can be successful with women, some feel powerless and humiliated in their relationships with women and are out to punish women in general vicariously through the victim, others are sadists who enjoy the pain and fear of their victims for its own sake. The second type are the ones who'll react more like you suggest. The third type are probably going to do their worst regardless of what the victim does or doesn't do.

If someone is raping someone to prove that they can be successful with them, well, that's about power and control (control over the other person's reaction to them). If they are out to punish women for poor previous relationships, that boils down to power/control also (forcing other people to feel the pain they felt). And if they're sadists, then, well, it's obviously about power/control.

The only time I could see rape as being about something other than power/control is where both parties were sufficiently impaired enough (through drugs/alcohol/mental retardation/etc.) to be incapable of legally consenting. In that case it is theoretically possible that one person could believe that it was consensual, while the other believed it to be rape. This is probably pretty grey, legally...

icemilkcoffee:

One big problem is that a good number of women who have been raped made little or no attempts to fight off their rapists. I think women should be encouraged to fight off their rapist as much as possible. If nothing else, it would leave enough physical evidence that leaves no doubt about 'consent'.

That's like asking a child to fight back against a child molester. The difference in strength between most men and women is _significant_. In most cases, a man who chooses to can easily beat a woman to death.

There are, however, a few things a woman can do. For example, a woman can wear a breakable vial of skunk oil and break it, if necessary. (That might be even more effective than soiling herself.) Sure, it's even more unpleasant for the woman to endure the stink, but at least she need not suffer lifelong PTSD from it.

I read of another solution that happened in South Africa. According to the story (which may be true), a rapist abducted a middle-class woman in her own car, and made her drive into the country-side to rape her. When he got on top of her she pulled out a small lock-back pocketknife clipped to her clothes somehow (with the stud for one-handed opening I presume), plunged it hard into his upper thigh and RIPPED a long, deep gash into his leg. As he lay there screaming in pain (and, one hopes, bleeding to death), she got back into her car and drove off.

Date rape, however, may be too psychologically complex to expect the woman to sufficiently de-humanize her attacker to deal with it appropriately.

"Most rape IS about power and subjugation. Fighting back is an indicator the victim hasn't been subjugated enough. It will almost always escalate the violence of the attack."

So, if women were just more submissive, they wouldn't get raped?

Or, if they submitted to any advance by a potential rapist, they'd be raped in a more gentle and considerate manner?

The strategy of limiting damage by cooperating with the bad guys has its own drawbacks.

If for no other reason than their own dignity, women should fight back. Preferably with effective weapons.

degsme:

Most rape IS about power and subjugation. Fighting back is an indicator the victim hasn't been subjugated enough. It will almost always escalate the violence of the attack.

That is, unless the victim fights back with overwhelming counter-violence, of the sort that (at least temporarily) destroys the aggressor's ability to inflict harm. (That's why they say, "You don't shoot to wound; you don't shoot to kill. You shoot to _stop_. If he dies from it; he dies.")

From a legal standpoint, the woman is on a lot steadier ground if her assailant is covered in bruises/scratches.

From a safety standpoint, fighting back is almost always a terrible idea. Adult men are about three times as strong as adult women, given comparable weight (and men weigh more on average as well). That's why rape defense courses almost always emphasis getting in a single 'cheap shot' and running away. If a rape victim-to-be actually tries wrestling with her assailant, she has about as much chance as an adult male would wrestling with a bear.

The woman also wants to avoid the situation where she turns a rape into a murder.

The difficulty is that it is a bit of a Catch-22. If women generally fought back to the best of their ability, we'd have a lot fewer rapes and they'd be a lot easier to prosecute. But for any individual woman finding herself about to be raped, it would generally be a bad strategy.

"From a safety standpoint, fighting back is almost always a terrible idea. "

Rapists provide the necessary force to do the job of sex, not to kill or disable the victim. From an evolutionary stnadpoint, there is little interest in killing or maiming the victim of a reproductive assault. From a practical standpoint, fighting is tiring. If the job is too tough or risky, as in, the woman fights back, it will be aborted. Most date rapes occur with little force and certainly no beating. Fighting back is a woman's obvious way of saying No in those situations.

"That's why rape defense courses almost always emphasis getting in a single 'cheap shot' and running away. If a rape victim-to-be actually tries wrestling with her assailant, she has about as much chance as an adult male would wrestling with a bear. "

Rape courses are run by people that are falsely educated that rape is not about sexual desire and other such rape myths that have been put forth by feminists authors sequestered in the offices of universities. All that I have observed also teach these stupid tricks (usually from a "certified" martial arts instructor that has no fighting experience) that work very well in the rape class within a very specific context : attacker that is not attacking and not reacting to defensive maneuver.

As an experienced ring fighter, I can assure you that all of the stupid rape course tricks other than a good bite will not work on an enrage or aroused man because they can not be executed properly under pressure and also, the man can not feel them. Kneeing a man in the groin? That's easy only in the movies. Stomping on his foot or shin? Yeah, right. A shoulder throw ? Car keys? Chuckle. Biting? YES.

Women with a few months (6+) or so of training in jujitsu ground fighting will make it difficult for even a much larger man to retain control. The trouble is that women in general (90%) have nearly zero interest in investing one day, let along one month of such training. They want to take a 1 day "Rape Self-Defense Course" and feel safe forever.

I've wrestled/grappled with men that are 50% heavier than I as well as with men that are 2/3 my weight. If they are skilled, it's a tough match.

My guess is that the rape of strangers is usually about power and ego. Date rape and statutory rape are usually about sex. The three are mutually quite different, and using the same word to denote them does not increase their similarity. (It's more an attempt to harness our outrage against one crime to apply it to the other.)

Fighting back with one's hands to the best one's ability is probably a good defense against date rape, and will aid in the prosecution. Against stranger rape fighting back will probably only make the injuries far more severe; in that case, the woman needs to use a deadly weapon, and ruthlessly.

Your gun fetishism comes to the fore again.

You once again seem to forget that to make this work the woman has to shoot everyone who approaches her more closely than 30' (circle of danger).

degsme:

Your gun fetishism comes to the fore again.

You once again seem to forget that to make this work the woman has to shoot everyone who approaches her more closely than 30' (circle of danger).

Degsme, the last time you claimed this, to prove it wasn't true I posted a dozen links to newspaper articles, each about an individual who successfully used a firearm in defense against one or more gun-armed violent criminals. (None of them had to habitually shoot everyone who came within 30'. See page 2 of <link>)

Perhaps you should see a neurologist about your memory problem.

I am a survivor. Mine was date, and i actually consented, but my perp still acted out rape anyway. If you dont fight back usually nothing will happen to you. He turned out the lights and i could not see a thing anyway. Rapists look and act just like anyone else, you never know if a man is or not.