Dissertation on Rape

Rape has existed since primitive times yet theorists including Krafft-Ebing, who was pioneer of sexual disorders, were reluctant to address the underlying causes of it (Brownmiller, 1975). Once the issue was addressed many theories have been proposed. This paper will critically discuss three of those theories; initially it will discuss evolutionary theory followed by feminist theory. Many theorists believe that one concept theories are insufficient to explain rape, therefore the final theory discussed is confluence theory which attempts to provide a wider explanation for rape. The final section of this paper will address the patterns of rape including environmental and cultural patterns.

Evolutionary theory states that rape is behavior left over from a more primitive time. In those earlier times rape allowed men to have intercourse with more women and therefore increasing their reproductive success (Lafond, 2005). Thornhill and Palmer (2000, as cited in Koss, 2003) support this theory, however they added an additional factor which is that males have a desire for a higher number of sexual partners than do females. This idea also dates back to earlier times where males in general dedicated less of themselves to raising children than did women and therefore could afford to produce more children (Smuts, 1996). The underpinning of this theory arises from Darwin’s natural selection with all behavior being driven by the desire to pass on one’s genes (Koss, 2003). Feminists have argued that this theory is completely incorrect. Feminists argue that acceptance of the evolutionary theory of rape is detrimental to the position of women in society, believing it could be used to justify the suppression of women (Wheeler Vega, 2001). It has been suggested that this could lead to the evolutionary theory being used as a defense of rape charges within the judicial system (Wheeler Vega, 2001). Because of these and other concerns feminists have developed a theory of their own (Wheeler Vega, 2001).

Prior to the women’s movement, rape was considered to be a sexually deviant act rather than a crime and relatively uncommon (White & Post, 2003). Brownmiller (1975) claims that men have used rape to control women, through the act of rape itself and the unspoken threat of rape. The feminist explanation of rape states that rape is a behavior based in a patriarchal system which socializes males to dominate females and females socialized to allow this domination (Lafond, 2005). This theory is not based on sexual desires but the desire to have power over and control woman (Lafond, 2005). Clearly the two theories discussed stand in complete opposition to each other, the main difference being the underling motivator for rape, feminists claiming it is power and evolutionists claiming it is reproduction. However, there is another view point that argues a one perspective theory, such as feminism and evolutionary theories will never be able to provide an adequate explanation of rape and a multifaceted theory is the solution to this problem (Ward & Hudson, 1998).

Malamuth (1996) and associates propose a confluence model of sexual aggression, which attempts to take into account both evolutionary and feminist perspective of rape. This model proposes two pathways to male sexual violence. The first pathway is the impersonal sex path, which suggests that boys will develop an impersonal sex attitude when they are raised in an atmosphere were sexual conquests are highly valued, more highly valued than interpersonal relationships (Malamuth, 1996). The second pathway is hostile masculinity which is further broken down into two parts, the first is an insecure, defensive hostile personality style and the second part is a personality which is gratified by controlling and dominating women. It is suggested these pathways are the results of early exposure to rejection, anger and pain (Malamuth, 1996). This model shows some similar beliefs to the feminist theory, that is, that sexual aggression is a culturally learned phenomenon. This is further demonstrated in the following discussion on rape patterns within different cultures.

There are a number of patterns in the incidence of rape which have been studied. Firstly there is a positive correlation between the temperature and the number of rapes, as there is with many violent crimes (Anderson & Anderson, 1998 as cited in Lalumiere,  Harris, Quinsey& Rice, 2005) studies have shown rape is more common in the summer time when temperatures are warmer (Anderson & Anderson, 1998 as cited in Lalumiere,  Harris, Quinsey& Rice, 2005). Sanday (2003) investigated the incidence of rape across numerous cultures, results showed that rape incidence is affected by the society in which it is being measured and is not equal throughout all societies. Sanday claims that this is because sexual gratification is shaped by the culture in which a person is raised. This is supported by Muehlenhard, Danoff-burg  & Powch (1996) who claim it is culture which shapes a rapist’s perception of the acceptability of their behavior. Sanday’s (2003) study further demonstrated that rape rates vary from common to rare across cultures, it was also noted that societies with a high incidence of rape were also societies were woman had little power or authority. The final pattern of rape to be discussed is the age of the offenders. Lalumiere, Harris, Quinsey& Rice (2005) claim that rape is most commonly committed by men in their late teenage years or early adulthood. They offer young male syndrome as the reason for this. It is suggested that men in this age group are more prepared to take risks to obtain their desires and as their responsibilities increase there is a reduction in risk taking behavior, accounting for the lower rates of older rapist.

In conclusion it has been demonstrated the there are numerous theories which attempt to explain rape, these theories are often contradicting of each other. However, the theories presented all appear to have one common theme, that there is some form of cultural learning involved in rape, although in each theory this is explained in a different way, learning does appear to be the link between them all.  This is further supported by the variation of rates of rape across cultures and the links shown between authority of women and the amount of rapes which occur in a particular society.
 

References

• Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will: Men, women and rape. Middlesex England:     Penguin Books.
• Koss, M. P. (2000). Evolutionary models of why men rape: Acknowledging the         complexities. In C Travis (Ed.). Evolution, gender, and rape, pp. 191-     205. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press
• Lafond, J. Q. (2005). Preventing sexual violence. Washington DC: American     psychological Association.
• Lalumiere, M. L., Harris, G. T., Quinsey, V. L., & Rice, M. E. (2005). The causes of     rape: Understanding individual differences in male propensity for sexual     aggression. Washington DC: American psychological Association. 
• Malamuth, N. M. (1996). The confluence model of sexual aggression: Feminist and     evolutionary perspectives. In     D Buss & N Malamuth (Eds.). Sex power     conflict: evolutionary and feminist perspectives, pp. 269- 295. New York:     Oxford University Press.
• Muehlenhard, C. L., Danoff-burg, S., & Powch, I. G. (1996). Is rape sex or     violence? Conceptual issues and implications. In D Buss & N Malamuth     (Eds.).     Sex power conflict: evolutionary and feminist perspectives, pp. 119-     137. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Sanday, P. R. (2003) Rape-free verves rape prone: How culture makes a difference. In     C Travis (Ed.). Evolution, gender, and rape, pp. 337- 361. Cambridge,     Mass: MIT Press
• Smuts, B. (1996). Male Aggression against women: An evolutionary perspective. In     D Buss & N Malamuth (Eds.). Sex power conflict: evolutionary and     feminist perspectives, pp. 231- 268. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Ward, T., & Hudson, S. M. (1998).The construction and development of theory in the     sexual offending area: A metatheoretical framework. Sexual Abuse: A Journal     of Research and Treatment, 10, 47-63.
• Wheeler Vega, J. A. (2001). Naturalism and feminism: Conflicting explanations of     rape in a wider context. Psychology, Evolution & Gender, 3, 47-85.
• White, J. W., & Post, L. A. (2003) Understanding rape: A metatheoretical framework.     In C Travis (Ed.). Evolution, gender, and rape, pp.383- 411.     Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.