Rapists (Sensitive content warning)

Alright, if the attitudes of normal sexual behaviour is disturbing, trying to analyze the psych behind actual rapists is only going to be 10x worse.
Analyzing the psych behind rapists is something people try to do. Because, unless their reason is complete insanity, there must be some thought process behind it. And let me be perfectly clear, finding a thought process does not mean to excuse their actions. That is the trap of people who suffer stockholm syndrome. This leniency must be kept from being applied to any sort of public policy regarding rapists. Do not go soft on them.
You might wonder why I'm laying down these obvious sentiments, and I could give two reasons. We're meddling with intense, violent topics here and lines need to be drawn, no matter how obvious. And in addition these philosophies could be applied down the spectrum of sexual coercion. (Might be a future post in this topic)

This topic is sort of strange, because I once brought up rapists as a topic to somebody and they claimed "Do you know why people rape?" and I said, "It depends" and they said "Because of power". And I thought that kind of strange, because sure, power could be A reason, I would hardly dare to say all cases of rape are the same.
Similarly I once heard my mother and her friend discuss rapists. A similar statement, still odd but in a different manner "It wasn't even a crime of passion, they just want to feel in control of someone". The thing I found odd with this is why would a "crime of passion" be any different in ghastliness? I should probably ask her about that.

I do think power/control is a contributing factor. But that student I talked with echoed a sentiment I see bounced around a lot. I now bring up another case where a friend of mine brought up something their teacher said, "No one knows what drives someone to rape". My friend thought it was an odd statement to make, the idea of a rapists motive being mysterious was to him, pretentious and strange.

I suppose I sit in the middle, there's not an all-consuming reason. Still, at times, I do wonder if there is a narrative attempting to be placed on rape. (As my first example of a fellow student claiming rape was all about power).
Here's an excerpt from 
https://rapecrisis.org.uk/mythsvsrealities.php
"Rape is an act of violence and control; the perceived 'attractiveness' of a victim has very little to do with it."
"Rape is an act of violence and control, not sexual gratification. It cannot be explained away and there are no excuses."
The repeated phrase, "rape is an act of violence and control". True.
But something that you'll notice is it repeatedly dismisses the notion that it's NOT about sexual gratification. Just something I find interesting.

Because I'm not convinced.

Or, I should say that I don't think those are mutually exclusive. I mean, why do they crave violence and control? Could it be their kink? As has been admitted and displayed in various places?

http://www.christianpost.com/news/sex-slave-survivor-wished-to-die-like-the-men-instead-of-being-raped-by-syrians-iraqis-europeans-186485/

This idiocy clearly shows a discrepancy. The men were all killed and the women taken in as sex slaves. If it was purely out of wanting to control someone, why would being female/male change that?

There was a group of nuns once who upon finding that vikings were to raid their monastery, cut off their noses to avoid being raped and. It worked.
http://www.britannia.com/bios/saints/aebbeyounger.html
They did still exercise control by burning the monastery down however.

I certainly don't think that appearance has everything to do with it though. That assumes that to a rapist, a physical appearance is a prime factor in what motivates them. The idea that this "violence and control" idea IS their sexual gratification is not in conflict with that.
--------------------------------
There are cases of rapists who kept someone close to them, a daughter, a kidnap victim, locked up for a long time as a sex slave. Violence and control is definitely a factor to that. But I certainly hope that this narrative of not pointing the finger at sexuality is not purposely trying not to "kink-shame" or something.

Issues with my statements
Finally, I feel that if I were to show this thread to one who pushes the "Rape is a form of violence and control". Their main dispute would be me trying to pin their "violence and control" tendencies on sexuality. After all, that helps my narrative plenty, taking everything that's bad and claiming it's because of their sexual desire. To claim their desire for control is sexually driven.
And I suppose it's hard on that front. It certainly is grey.
Their statement "It cannot be explained away and there are no excuses." with regards to rape, is similar to my sentiments on sexuality. One ball of nonsense being confused with another ball of nonsense.

But what do you think? (For the record, there are other forms of this argument out on google. This is just my take)

In addition, do you have any other analysis about rapists? What confuses me dearly, is that link about the ISIS sex slave victim, and those kinds of CANCEROUS human-trafficking groups to begin with.

I'll of course add more later, but I agree that people rape for various reasons, like someone refusing to have sex with them and they decided to rape them. I've read statements saying that rape has nothing to do with sex which is bs and it makes me wonder how do these people come to silly conclusions like that. Just because you're willing to be manipulative by ways of flirting etc. with someone whom you find attractive (or not) to get consensual sex from them doesn't mean that there aren't people out there that'll skip most of that and rape.

I also think for more extreme sadistic reasons because they enjoy harming someone in that matter (but still, it's like why? Out of the many ways to hurt someone you choose this).

By saying that rape has nothing to do with sex,they're defending their stupid favorite thing(sex).They probably can't stand that this thing can lead to many many bad stuff.

Yeah that's another reason I agree with too, it does show that they don't like how it's one of many examples of how it takes a piss on what they unfortunately love and hold sacred. It shows the lack of considering all possibilities with sex. Again, these sexuals....just because some or most of them aren't capable of raping people because the thought doesn't come to mind or they don't act on that thought doesn't mean there isn't someone who will commit this act on others with the same feelings they have when finding someone sexually attractive.

Well these are "appeal to motivation" arguments (Personally I'm not finding them convincing until I talk to one person who thinks this head on). But I suppose it couldn't hurt to ask someone if I ever get confronted with it again.

Yeah it could be seen as such, but I'm just adding an idea. It still isn't something that shouldn't be considered, probably not as the only motivation but a part of it. Because why is the statement "Rape doesn't have anything to do with sex" sort of common?

I'm curious to see what would be said if you were to ask. I think it would probably be similar to what we said, how most of them can't fathom someone raping another for similar reasons as to why they would want sex with someone. 

But then again, I've heard and read from people about having rape fantasies of various types. And then you also have rape porn which is probably a bit of both fake and real rape, who knows?

Another thing I remember reading a while ago was some info on (and also briefly discussing with my Psychology instructor when she was raped) how some rapists can't get an erection or loses it during rape. This is just an assumption, but I figure some sexuals would interpret this as rape isn't sex, and/or a violent way of taking out their sexual frustrations with being inadequate on certain people. Idk, I'll have to read some info on studies to see what's going on with that.

.

.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4872156/Migrant-raped-killed-EU-official-s-daughter-cries.html

Awhile ago, similar story. Some migrant or something raped a little boy calling it a "sexual emergency". What is the most striking, is what the #*$( kind of rhetorical excuse is that?

So, here we are at this story. And it's sort of political, regarding immigration policies. So red flags are up for potential narratives. However what I'm going to extrapolate, hardly has anything to do with politics. What I'm extrapolating is this persons defense.

For his actions of raping a girl and then drowning her.

'When I saw how pretty she was, I wanted to have sex with her,' he said

And he continues to try to play the victim, and apologizes.

What do you think of this?

His narrative that the rape was planned by "how pretty she was".
Also not that it matters too much, but he claims he was drunk, while others suspect he planned it.

But what possible motive is this. I don't see it as a display of power considering he's now (at least pretending to) whine like a wimp. Is "When I saw how pretty she was, I wanted to have sex with her" the real deal here? Or is this fake political news somehow?

What do you think of this line, the honesty of this line or the use of this line.

When I saw how pretty she was, I wanted to have sex with her

And, heck, I'll bring up the other story for another quote.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/austria-swimming-pool-rape-theresienbad-vienna-iraqi-refugee-a7473441.html

Amir confessed to the attack in initial police questioning, telling them it had been a “sexual emergency” because he had not had sex for four months.

Are these people real, honest, people.

Speaking of "sexual emergency" I was talking to my friend about how people's sexual behaviors change, how momentarily they "betray" who they are so-to-speak under certain conditions and sometimes ends up being a permanent state (the exact words weren't used, but that's the jist of it). 

The example of prison came up, and my friend told me that if he was in prison for a few months he wouldn't engage in homosexual behavior, compared to 15 years well...that's too long, and he would either rape someone or find a willing participant to take care of his urges. I told him that's pretty scary that you would see yourself doing that and to make a long story short, he told me that I wouldn't understand because I don't share the same feelings about sex.

Anyway, the two men are both from a country where it's ok to marry children (Iraq had a amendment they withdrew from as to whether it's ok for muslim girls as young as 9 to marry. But it's still a problem of course). I think they're honest to a certain extent
"I don't see it as a display of power considering he's now (at least pretending to) whine like a wimp."
It's because he's tried to avoid punishment or try to make it less severe, the sick piece of shit. In most cases the person would try to convice the person they deem pretty to have sex with them and if they went without sex for a while (supposedly his reasoning) they would masturbate or find someone willing to have sex with them with "no strings attached". Not rape and drown, and drag into a stall or whatever and rape. It's levels to the mentally ill or whatever one wants to call them. 

For right now, what I think about these two quotes is that these are two are downplaying how horrible their acts are, more than likely it is what they actually thought but they left out further detail. In the second story what he really means is "I haven't had a little boy in four months". And the with the 19 year old woman, "I want to play out my sick fantasy of harming pretty women." The whole "When I saw how pretty she was, I wanted to have sex with her," the sex being rape, and leaving out drowning. It mentioned he threw a woman off a cliff in Greece, he hates women and probably due to rejection of some sort (it's a bit tired this reasoning but that's what I think for now).

Sexual arousal is a painful state, so obviously people unfortunate enough to get caught up in it, or naive enough to put themselves in it, are desperate to get out of it. So, the shortest answer is that people rape to escape the tense state of sexual arousal through the tension release of orgasm. Basically, they rape for the same reason they have sex. Let's not make this more complicated than it is. Sex is just mutual rape anyway.

The individual pseudo-reasons and excuses people make to pretend to have acted on free will may differ, depending on the culture and religion.

I once talked to someone who justified rape, and it influenced where I took my antisexualism afterward. It helps to see these peoples true face.

Those are the kind of people who should be locked up or castrated for even saying that.

That's not even far-fetched by todays law. If I told someone dead serious that I would blow up a building if I didn't get to shoot off fireworks this 4th of July or something. Then I'd be detained.

I wonder if I SHOULD say that to like my university dean just to set a precedent so we could get your peers @xenosimiana detained. Thing is...ehh it might already BE a precedent? Also then I'd have to pay a fine or go to jail over it.

Sexualism is rape.

source: I'm a male, I would know quite well what men think based on experience and what I know from other men.

@Biscotti That's the thing, I remember the FBI coming over to a family member's house after they called a church telling them their feelings about their racism and how they should no longer hold services, all to be confronted by the FBI because of "terroristic threats". But, situations I mentioned more than likely wouldn't be taken serious because a crime hasn't occurred yet. The difficulty of thoughtcrime, people's interpretation of free speech, and trying to prevent these from turning into actions are very tedious to deal with. Especially if it's concerning people who are considered undesirable, such as inmates raping each other and what I shared before.

@Guest it is a tad bit complicated some of the time because of someone's psyche. A few that rape have difficulty getting an erection for example or maintaining one.

@radarerror31 I do too to a certain extent. Though I'm not a male obviously, I had to find out in other ways.

https://www.mjfacts.com/was-mj-a-child-molester/

Michael J was never a pedophile. I have watched the 4 hours documentary as well. And I have to defend him against filthy liars. So I will paste these links below for people to watch so they don't believe stuff which has no evidence at all. It's just based on claims. There are however many evidences against these filthy liars, so we hope that both of those guys will go to jail for the slander!

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISkSOoV848c

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPSv_ejCraE

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2in_41gz9EA

4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww4jDsyOaXE

5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZs_FCaBabI

6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YiGcqCNKFQ

7. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XjxX3AZ2DE

8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbwuxas72G4

9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8M-sORA6Dc

10. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24QuSFa3LNI

11. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKHSKwyRZvQ

12. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU4BFM_R1KI

13. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FbxHL69RPw

14. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxFWgn43BwI

15. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9v-L9Dcmft8

16. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GPfiRT8erU

17. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5Zpkiahefs

18. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmt-wh5fqnU

19. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmmWoO2nd2Y

20. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eydTdYhEPcs

21. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdjrgM7_PmskB0SETMqlojw/videos

22. https://twitter.com/markgeragos/status/1106934761585426435

23. https://twitter.com/tajjackson3/status/754497161417596928

24. https://www.accessonline.com/articles/la-toya-jackson-michael-forgave-me-for-speaking-out-against-him-in-1993-103191

25. https://twitter.com/iambrettbarnes/status/1090577892155678725

26. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/no-child-porn-found-at-neverland-thenor-now-the_us_577fdfbce4b0f06648f4a3f8?guccounter=1&guce_referrer_us=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_cs=nuOr34BwAMFm0VVPaEgkNA

I hope all those filthy women will be exposed too for lying about Bill Cosby!

These are people who use their brain,

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tWsbwuGnZE

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yrzqajxc47I

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6NE-rXz5vc

4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0riGtw-NV94

Michael Jackson was a pedophile, if you do some unbiased research esp. about how pedophiles maneuver. Some women may be lying about Bill Cosby but not all of them esp. in 2004 or 05 (I can't remember her name) but reading some court documents suggest strongly he violated her. You gotta look outside Youtube videos (and even some personal bias you have), look at both sides of these situations, and read legal documents etc. to get a better understanding. 

Certain things you have to ask yourself, why would jackson pay about $22 million in '93 to the Chandlers when he could've simply went to trial (which more than likely would've been cheaper or about the same) to prove his innocence? If I was being accused of a heinous act as this, I would've went to trial no matter how long or tedious it would've been, I would never just pay them off, esp. if all of them supposedly wanted "just" money like most naysayers say, well they would have to work for it.

I'm curious, what info do you have to suspect that Robeson and Safechuck are lying? Is it really just money like many say? Because at the end of the day everyone has motives but it doesn't always mean they are lying. For example, Norma Staikos who used to work for Jackson was still on his payroll after '93 for a while, maybe it's because she knows things and is just using that to her advantage to get money from Jackson before he died, so keep her silent and she keeps her pockets pretty full. A lot of things can be quite complicated.

I don't let celebrity status get in the way, yes it's disappointing and it hurts, but at the end of the day we don't know these people personally so it's best to be neutral and try to figure it out from there.

I just read 1 sentence and that's enough. I will never reply to any of your post and also I will block you. Bye.

@Sigh... Thanks for telling me you didn't bother to read anything. Stop being sensitive and just do more research, don't let celebrity status get in the way, simple as that. I don't care about you blocking me it doesn't hurt my feelings just as long as others on this forum aren't in denial and willing to see the other side. It just shows Michael Jackson fans refuse to do that in order to make more educated conclusions. This is one of the many reasons why various forms of rape rarely gets punished and why people don't come forward esp. if it involves someone of high status.

http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/011805pltreqaseemd.pdf

http://www.mjfacts.com/the-settlement/


It's funny how this woman shares so many videos and articles of rape and molestation, but when it comes to some well known celebrities then it's a long list of ill-conceived and biased You Tube videos, twitter posts, and articles instead of taking the time out to look at court and police documents. I'm not trying to be confrontational, I know when it comes to celebrities it's a touchy subject because normally people look up to celebs - including the ones perceived to be decent - because they grew up with them and it's heartbreaking but understand there's people out here who do many humanitarian things but behind closed doors are committing some heinous crimes...and sometimes they get away with it.

Also, for those who have a "brain" and understand a little about the criminal justice system here in the U.S. but even in general in different parts of the world the understanding that some people sometimes get away with the crimes they've committed because of various reasons. Reasons such as insufficient evidence, evidence tampering, issues with jurors, a witness drops out because of intimidation etc. "Not Guilty" or being acquitted doesn't necessarily mean innocent.

Not only that, there was evidence, mainly circumstantial because that's usually what people have to rely on with molestation and even rape that wasn't penetrative (if it was esp. for children there's been times where doctors still don't find any indication of such even after 48 hrs because of how fast children can heal sometimes). It's what makes it difficult at times to convict. 

Jordan Chandler describing Jackson's genitalia (Unlike some people saying that the description didn't match & Chandler supposedly said Jackson was uncircumcised or not, there's no evidence of J Chandler making any comment on circumcised or uncircumcised. Neither that drawing of Jackson's genitals online was by J. Chandler - it's still locked away along with photos of Jackson's genitalia: Only a handful of police and legal officers have seen them and the fact that one has to go through three ppl plus a judge's approval in order to see or release them - and saying that he lied about child abuse which was proven to be a hoax. 

Including the misreading by some ppl of Chandler's light or dark spot description. Also, lies and misinformation from MJ fans about why certain evidence from 93' wasn't used in 03-05 is because their wasn't any, is ridiculous. Part of the reason the photos and other evidence wasn't used in the Arviso trial was because J Chandler wasn't going to testify.) is more than likely the reason Jackson and his team decided to settle. Don't get me wrong, Jordan Chandler's parents failed to protect him and are flawed, but it doesn't mean that he (and others) weren't abused.

Michael Jackson's porn collection reveals something we should already know   

Idolizing celebrities is stupid.That Michael Jackson guy is even worse than porn obsessed average men if he was a pedophile.   
I refuse to believe that someone would lie about something as horrible as rape.