* This research was supported
by a grant (R01 MH33013) from the National Center for the Prevention and
Control of Rape, National Institute of Mental Health. We are indebted to the
Virginia Department of Corrections for their cooperation and assistance in this
research. Correspondence
to: Scully, Department of Sociology/Anthropology, Virginia Commonwealth
University, 312 Shafer Street, Richmond, Virginia 23284.
In this paper we argue that the
popular image of rape, a nonutilitarian act committed by a few “sick” men, is
too limited a view of sexual violence because it excludes culture and social
structure as pre-disposing factors. Our data come from interviews with 114 convicted,
incarcerated rapists. Looking at rape from the perspective of rapists, we attempt
to discover the function of sexual violence in their lives; what their behavior
gained for them in a society seeming prone to rape. Our analysis reveals that a
number of rapists used sexual violence as a method of revenge and/or punishment
while others used it as a means of gaining access to unwilling or unavailable
women. In some cases, rape was just a bonus added to burglary or robbery. Rape
was also a recreational activity and described as an “adventure” and an “exciting”
form of impersonal sex which gained the offender power over his victim(s).
Over the past several decades,
rape has become a “medicalized” social problem. That is to say, the theories
used to explain rape are predicated on psychopathological models. They have
been generated from clinical experiences with small samples of rapists, often
the therapists’ own clients. Although these psychiatric explanations are most
appropriately applied to the atypical rapist, they have been generalized to all
men who rape and have come to inform the public’s view on the topic.
Two assumptions are at the core
of the psychopathological model; that rape is the result of idiosyncratic
mental disease and that it often includes an uncontrollable sexual impulse
(Scully and Marolla, 1985). For example, the presumption of psychopathology is
evident in the often cited work of Nicholas Groth (1979). While Groth
emphasizes the nonsexual nature of rape (power, anger, sadism), he also
concludes, “Rape is always a symptom of some psychological dysfunction, either
temporary and transient or chronic and repetitive” (Groth, 1979:5). Thus, in
the psychopathological view, rapists lack the ability to control their
behavior; they are “sick” individuals from the “lunatic fringe” of society.
In contradiction to this model,
empirical research has repeatedly failed to find a consistent pattern of
personality type or character disorder that reliably discriminates rapists from
other groups of men (Fisher and Rivlin, 1971; Hammer and Jacks, 1955; Rada,
1978). Indeed, other research has found that fewer than 5 percent of men were
psychotic when they raped (Abel et al., 1980).
Evidence indicates that rape is
not a behavior confined to a few “sick” men but many men have the attitudes and
beliefs necessary to commit a sexually aggressive act. In research conducted at
a midwestern university, Koss and her coworkers reported that 85 percent of men
defined as highly sexually aggressive had victimized women with whom they were
romantically involved (Koss and Leonard, 1984). A recent survey quoted in The
Chronicle of Higher Education estimates that more than 20 percent of college
women are the victims of rape and attempted rape (Meyer, 1984). These findings
mirror research published several decades earlier which also concluded that sexual
aggression was commonplace in dating relationships (Kanin, 1957, 1965, 1967,
1969; Kirkpatrick and Kanin, 1957). [1] In their study of 53 college males,
Malamuth, Haber and Feshback (1980) found that 51 percent indicated a
likelihood that they, themselves, would rape if assured of not being punished.
[1 Despite the fact that these
data have been in circulation for some time, prevention strategies continue to
reflect the “lunatic fringe” image of rape. For
example, security on college campuses, such as bright lighting and escort
service, is designed to protect women against stranger rape while little or no
attention is paid to the more frequent crime-acquaintance or date rape.]
In addition, the frequency of
rape in the United States makes it unlikely that responsibility rests solely
with a small lunatic fringe of psychopathic men. Johnson (1980), calculating
the lifetime risk of rape to girls and women aged twelve and over, makes a
similar observation. Using Law Enforcement Assistance Association and Bureau of
Census Crime Victimization Studies, he calculated that, excluding sexual abuse
in marriage and assuming equal risk to all women, 20 to 30 percent of girls now
12 years old will suffer a violent sexual attack during the remainder of their
lives. Interestingly, the lack of empirical support for the psychopathological
model has not resulted in the de-medicalization of rape, nor does it appear to
have diminished the belief that rapists are “sick” aberrations in their own
culture. This is significant because of the implications and consequences of
the model.
A central assumption in the
psychopathological model is that male sexual aggression is unusual or strange.
This assumption removes rape from the realm of the everyday or “normal” world
and places it in the category of “special” or “sick” behavior. As a
consequence, men who rape are cast in the role of outsider and a connection
with normative male behavior is avoided. Since, in this view, the source of the
behavior is thought to be within the psychology of the individual, attention is
diverted away from culture or social structure as contributing factors. Thus,
the psychopathological model ignores evidence which links sexual aggression to
environmental variables and which suggests that rape, like all behavior, is
learned.
CULTURAL
FACTORS IN RAPE
Culture is a factor in rape,
but the precise nature of the relationship between culture and sexual violence
remains a topic of discussion. Ethnographic data from pre-industrial societies
show the existence of rape-free cultures (Broude and Green, 1976; Sanday,
1979), though explanations for the phenomena differ. [2] Sanday (1979) relates
sexual violence to contempt for female qualities and suggests that rape is part
of a culture of violence and an expression of male dominance. In contrast, Blumberg
(1979) argues than in pre-industrial societies women are more likely to lack
important life options and to be physically and politically oppressed where
they lack economic power relative to men. That is, in pre-industrial societies
relative economic power enables women to win some immunity from men’s use of
force against them.
[2 Broude and Green (1976) list
a number of factors which limit the quantity and quality of cross-cultural data
on rape. They point out that it was not customary in traditional ethnography to
collect data on sexual attitudes and behavior. Further, where data do exist,
they are often sketchy and vague. Despite this, the existence of rape-free
societies has been established.]
Among modern societies, the
frequency of rape varies dramatically, and the United States is among the most
rape-prone of all. In 1980, for example, the rate of reported rape and
attempted rape for the United States was eighteen times higher than the
corresponding rate for England and Wales (West, 1983). Spurred by the Women’s
Movement, feminists have generated an impressive body of theory regarding the
cultural etiology of rape in the United States. Representative of the feminist
view, Griffin (1971) called rape “The All American Crime.”
The feminist perspective views
rape as an act of violence and social control which functions to “keep women in
their place” (Brownmiller, 1975; Kasinsky, 1975; Russell, 1975). Feminists see
rape as an extension of normative male behavior, the result of conformity or
overconformity to the values and prerogatives which define the traditional male
sex role. That is, traditional socialization encourages males to associate
power, dominance, strength, virility and superiority with masculinity, and
submissiveness, passivity, weakness, and inferiority with femininity.
Furthermore, males are taught to have expectations about their level of sexual
needs and expectations for corresponding female accessibility which function to
justify forcing sexual access. The justification for forced sexual access is
buttressed by legal, social, and religious definitions of women as male
property and sex as an exchange of goods (Bart, 1979). Socialization prepares
women to be “legitimate” victims and men to be potential offenders (Weis and
Borges, 1973). Herman (1984) concludes that the United States is a rape culture
because both genders are socialized to regard male aggression as a natural and
normal part of sexual intercourse.
Feminists view pornography as an
important element in a larger system of sexual violence; they see pornography
as an expression of a rape-prone culture where women are seen as objects
available for use by men (Morgan, 1980; Wheeler, 1985). Based on his content
analysis of 428 “adults only” books, Smith (1976) makes a similar observation.
He notes that, not only is rape presented as part of normal male/female sexual
relations, but the woman, despite her terror, is always depicted as sexually
aroused to the point of cooperation. In the end, she is ashamed but physically
gratified. The message women desire and enjoy rape has more potential for
damage than the image of the violence per
se. [3]
[3 This factor distinguishes
rape from other fictional depictions of violence. That is, in fictional murder,
bombings, robberys, etc., victims are never portrayed as enjoying themselves.
Such exhibits are reserved for pornographic displays of rape.]
The fusion of these themes sex
as an impersonal act, the victim’s uncontrollable orgasm, and the violent
infliction of pain is commonplace in the actual accounts of rapists. Scully and
Marolla (1984) demonstrated that many convicted rapists denied their crime and
attempted to justify their rapes by arguing that their victim had enjoyed
herself despite the use of a weapon and the infliction of serious injuries, or
even death. In fact, many argued, they had been instrumental in making her
fantasy come true.
The images projected in
pornography contribute to a vocabulary of motive which trivializes and neutralizes
rape and which might lessen the internal controls that otherwise would prevent
sexually aggressive behavior. Men who rape use this culturally acquired
vocabulary to justify their sexual violence.
Another consequence of the
application of psychopathology to rape is it leads one to view sexual violence
as a special type of crime in which the motivations are subconscious and
uncontrollable rather than overt and deliberate as with other criminal
behavior. Black (1983) offers an approach to the analysis of criminal and/or
violent behavior which, when applied to rape, avoids this bias.
Black (1983) suggests that it
is theoretically useful to ignore that crime is criminal in order to discover
what such behavior has in common with other kinds of conduct. From his
perspective, much of the crime in modern societies, as in pre-industrial
societies, can be interpreted as a form of “self-help” in which the actor is
expressing a grievance through aggression and violence. From the actor’s
perspective, the victim is deviant and his own behavior is a form of social
control in which the objective may be conflict management, punishment, or
revenge. For example, in societies where women are considered the property of
men, rape is sometimes used as a means of avenging the victim’s husband or
father (Black, 1983). In some cultures rape is used as a form of punishment.
Such was the tradition among the puritanical, patriarchal Cheyenne where men
were valued for their ability as warriors. It was Cheyenne custom that a wife
suspected of being unfaithful could be “put on the prairie” by her husband.
Military confreres then were invited to “feast” on the prairie (Hoebel, 1954;
Llewellyn and Hoebel, 1941). The ensuing mass rape was a husband’s method of punishing
his wife.
Black’s (1983) approach is
helpful in understanding rape because it forces one to examine the goals that
some men have learned to achieve through sexually violent means. Thus, one
approach to understanding why some men rape is to shift attention from individual
psychopathology to the important question of what rapists gain from sexual
aggression and violence in a culture seemingly prone to rape.
In this paper, we address this
question using data from interviews conducted with 114 convicted, incarcerated
rapists. Elsewhere, we discussed the vocabulary of motive, consisting of
excuses and justifications, that these convicted rapists used to explain
themselves and their crime (Scully and Marolla, 1984). [4] The use of these
culturally derived excuses and justifications allowed them to view their
behavior as either idiosyncratic or situationally appropriate and thus it
reduced their sense of moral responsibility for their actions. Having disavowed
deviance, these men revealed how they had used rape to achieve a number of
objectives. We find that some men used rape for revenge or punishment while,
for others, it was an “added bonus” a last minute decision made while
committing another crime. In still other cases, rape was used to gain sexual
access to women who were unwilling or unavailable, and for some it was a source
of power and sex without any personal feelings. Rape was also a form of
recreation, a diversion or an adventure and, finally, it was something that
made these men “feel good.”
[4 We also introduced a
typology consisting of “admitters” (men who defined their behavior as rape) and
“deniers” (men who admitted to sexual contact with the victim but did not
define it as rape). In this paper we drop the distinction between admitters and
deniers because it is not relevant to most of the discussion.]
METHODS
[5]
[5 For a full discussion of the
research methodology, sample, and validity, see Scully and Marolla (1984).]
Sample
During 1980 and 1981 we
interviewed 114 convicted rapists. All of the men had been convicted of the
rape or attempted rape (n=8) of an adult woman and subsequently incarcerated in
a Virginia prison. Men convicted of other types of sexual offense were omitted
from the sample.
In addition to their
convictions for rape, 39 percent of the men also had convictions for burglary or
robbery, 29 percent for abduction, 25 percent for sodomy, 11 percent for first
or second degree murder and 12 percent had been convicted of more than one
rape. The majority of the men had previous criminal histories but only 23
percent had a record of past sex offenses and only 26 percent had a history of
emotional problems. Their sentences for rape and accompanying crimes ranged from
ten years to seven life sentences plus 380 years for one man. Twenty-two
percent of the rapists were serving at least one life sentence. Forty-six
percent of the rapists were white, 54 percent black. In age, they ranged from
18 to 60 years but the majority were between 18 and 35 years. Based on a
statistical profile of felons in all Virginia prisons prepared by the Virginia
Department of Corrections, it appears that this sample of rapists was
disproportionately white and, at the time of the research, somewhat better
educated and younger than the average inmate.
All participants in this
research were volunteers. In constructing the sample, age, education, race, severity
of current offense and past criminal record were balanced within the limitations
imposed by the characteristics of the volunteer pool. Obviously, the sample was
not random and thus may not be typical of all rapists, imprisoned or otherwise.
All interviews were hand
recorded using an 89-page instrument which included a general background,
psychological, criminal, and sexual history, attitude scales and 30 pages of
open-ended questions intended to explore rapists’ own perceptions of their
crime and themselves. Each author interviewed half of the sample in sessions
that ranged from three to seven hours depending on the desire or willingness of
the participant to talk.
Validity
In all prison research,
validity is a special methodological concern because of the reputation inmates
have for “conning.” Although one goal of this research was to understand rape
from the perspective of men who have raped, it was also necessary to establish
the extent to which rapists’ perceptions deviated from other descriptions of
their crime. The technique we used was the same others have used in prison
research; comparing factual information obtained in the interviews, including
details of the crime, with reports on file at the prison (Athens, 1977;
Luckenbill, 1977; Queen’s Bench Foundation, 1976). In general, we found that
rapists’ accounts of their crime had changed very little since their trials.
However, there was a tendency to understate the amount of violence they had
used and, especially among certain rapists, to place blame on their victims.
HOW
OFFENDERS VIEW THE REWARDS OF RAPE
Revenge
and Punishment
As noted earlier, Black’s
(1983) perspective suggests that a rapist might see his act as a legitimized form
of revenge or punishment. Additionally, he asserts that the idea of “collective
liability” accounts for much seemingly random violence. “Collective liability”
suggests that all people in a particular category are held accountable for the
conduct of each of their counterparts. Thus, the victim of a violent act may
merely represent the category of individual being punished.
These factors - revenge,
punishment, and the collective liability of women - can be used to explain a
number of rapes in our research. Several cases will illustrate the ways in
which these factors combined in various types of rape. Revenge-rapes were among
the most brutal and often included beatings, serious injuries and, even murder.
Typically, revenge-rapes
included the element of collective liability. This is, from the rapist’s
perspective, the victim was a substitute for the woman they wanted to avenge.
As explained elsewhere, (Scully and Marolla, 1984), an upsetting event,
involving a woman, preceded a significant number of rapes. When they raped,
these men were angry because of a perceived indiscretion, typically related to
a rigid, moralistic standard of sexual conduct, which they required from “their
woman” but, in most cases, did not abide by themselves. Over and over
these rapists talked about using rape “to get even” with their wives or other
significant woman. [6] Typical is a young man who, prior to the rape, had a
violent argument with his wife over what eventually proved to be her
misdiagnosed case of venereal disease. She assumed the disease had been
contracted through him, an accusation that infuriated him. After fighting with
his wife, he explained that he drove around “thinking about hurting someone.”
He encountered his victim, a stranger, on the road where her car had broken
down. It appears she accepted his offered ride because her car was
out of commission. When she realized that rape was pending, she called him “a
son of a bitch,” and attempted to resist. He reported flying into a rage and
beating her, and he confided,
I have never felt that much
anger before. If she had resisted, I would have killed her ... The rape was for
revenge. I didn’t have an orgasm. She was there to get my hostile feelings off
on.
[6 It should be noted that
significant women, like rape victims, were also sometimes the targets of abuse
and violence and possibly rape as well, although spousal rape is not recognized
in Virginia law. In fact, these men were abusers. Fifty-five percent of rapists
ackowledged that they hit their significant woman “at least once,” and 20
percent admitted to inflicting physical injury. Given the tendency of these men
to under-report the amount of violence in their crime, it is probably accurate
to say, they under-reported their abuse of their significant women as well.]
Although not the most common
form of revenge rape, sexual assault continues to be used in retaliation
against the victim’s male partner. In one such case, the offender, angry because
the victim’s husband owed him money, went to the victim’s home to collect. He
confided, “I was going to get it one way or another.” Finding the victim alone,
he explained, they started to argue about the money and,
I grabbed her and started
beating the hell out of her. Then I committed the act, [7] I knew what I was
doing. I was mad. I could have stopped but I didn’t. I did it to get even with
her and her husband.
[7 This man, as well as a number of
others, either would not or could not, bring himself to say the word “rape.”
Similarly, we also attempted to avoid using the word, a technique which seemed
to facilitate communication.]
Griffin (1971:33) points out
that when women are viewed as commodities, “In raping another man’s woman, a
man may aggrandize his own manhood and concurrently reduce that of another man.”
Revenge-rapes often contained an element of
punishment. In some cases, while the victim was not the initial object of the
revenge, the intent was to punish her because of something that transpired
after the decision to rape had been made or during the course of the rape
itself. This
was the case with a young man whose wife had recently left him. Although they
were in the process of reconciliation, he remained angry and upset over the
separation. The night of the rape, he met the victim and her friend in a bar
where he had gone to watch a fight on TV. The two women apparently accepted a
ride from him but, after taking her friend home, he drove the victim to his apartment.
At his apartment, he found a note from his wife indicating she had stopped by
to watch the fight with him. This increased his anger because he preferred his
wife’s company. Inside his apartment, the victim allegedly remarked that she
was sexually interested in his dog, which he reported, put him in a rage. In
the ensuing attack, he raped and pistol-whipped the victim. Then he forced a
vacuum cleaner hose, switched on suction, into her vagina and bit her breast,
severing the nipple. He stated:
I hated at the time, but I don’t
know if it was her (the victim). (Who could it have been?) My wife? Even though
we were getting back together, I still didn’t trust her.
During his interview, it became
clear that this offender, like many of the men, believed men have the right to
discipline and punish women. In fact, he argued that most of the men he knew would
also have beaten the victim because “that kind of thing (referring to the dog)
is not acceptable among my friends.”
Finally, in some rapes, both
revenge and punishment were directed at victims because they represented women
whom these offenders perceived as collectively responsible and liable for their
problems. Rape was used “to put women in their place” and as a method of
proving their “manhood” by displaying dominance over a female. For example, one
multiple rapist believed his actions were related to the feeling that women
thought they were better than he was.
Rape was a feeling of total
dominance. Before the rapes, I would always get a feeling of power and anger. I
would degrade women so I could feel there was a person of less worth than me.
Another, especially brutal, case involved a young man from an upper
middle class background, who spilled out his story in a seven-hour interview
conducted in his solitary confinement cell. He described himself as tremendously
angry, at the time, with his girlfriend whom he believed was involved with him
in a “storybook romance,” and from whom he expected complete fidelity. When she
went away to college and became involved with another man, his revenge lasted
eighteen months and involved the rape and murder of five women, all strangers
who lived in his community. Explaining his rape-murders, he stated:
I wanted to take my anger and
frustration out on a stranger, to be in control, to do what I wanted to do. I
wanted to use and abuse someone as I felt used and abused. I was killing my girlfriend.
During the rapes and murders, I would think about my girlfriend. I hated the
victims because they probably messed men over. I hated women because they were
deceitful and I was getting revenge for what happened to me.
An
Added Bonus
Burglary and robbery commonly
accompany rape. Among our sample, 39 percent of rapists had also been convicted
of one or the other of these crimes committed in connection with rape. In some cases,
the original intent was rape and robbery was an after-thought. However, a
number of the men indicated that the reverse was true in their situation. That
is, the decision to rape was made subsequent to their original intent which was
burglary or robbery.
This was the case with a young
offender who stated that he originally intended only to rob the store in which
the victim happened to be working. He explained that when he found the victim
alone,
I decided to rape her to prove
I had guts. She was just there. It could have been anybody.
Similarly, another offender
indicated that he initially broke into his victim’s home to burglarize it. When
he discovered the victim asleep, he decided to seize the opportunity “to
satisfy an urge to go to bed with a white woman, to see if it was different.”
Indeed, a number of men indicated that the decision to rape had been made after
they realized they were in control of the situation. This was also true of an
unemployed offender who confided that his practice was to steal whenever he
needed money. On the day of the rape, he drove to a local supermarket and paced
the parking lot, “staking out the situation.” His pregnant victim was the first
person to come along alone and “she was an easy target.” Threatening her with a
knife, he reported the victim as saying she would do anything if he didn’t harm
her. At that point, he decided to force her to drive to a deserted area where
he raped her. He explained:
I wasn’t thinking about sex.
But when she said she would do anything not to get hurt, probably because she
was pregnant, I thought, ‘why not.’
The attitude of these men
toward rape was similar to their attitude toward burglary and robbery. Quite
simply, if the situation is right, “why not.” From the perspective of these
rapists, rape was just another part of the crime-an added bonus.
Sexual
Access
In an effort to change public
attitudes that are damaging to the victims of rape and to reform laws seemingly
premised on the assumption that women both ask for and enjoy rape, many writers
emphasize the violent and aggressive character of rape. Often such arguments
appear to discount the part that sex plays in the crime. The data clearly indicate
that from the rapists’ point of view rape is in part sexually motivated.
Indeed, it is the sexual aspect of rape that distinguishes it from other forms
of assault.
Groth (1979) emphasizes the
psychodynamic function of sex in rape arguing that rapists’ aggressive needs
are expressed through sexuality. In other words, rape is a means to an end. We
argue, however, that rapists view the act as an end in itself and that sexual
access most obviously demonstrates the link between sex and rape. Rape as a means
of sexual access also shows the deliberate nature of this crime. When a woman
is unwilling or seems unavailable for sex, the rapist can seize what isn’t
volunteered. In discussing his decision to rape, one man made this clear.
All the guys wanted to fuck her
... a real fox, beautiful shape. She was
a beautiful woman and I wanted to see what she had.
The attitude that sex is a male
entitlement suggests that when a woman says “no,” rape is a suitable method of
conquering the “offending” object. If, for example, a woman is picked up at a
party or in a bar or while hitchhiking (behavior which a number of the rapists
saw as a signal of sexual availability), and the woman later resists
sexual advances, rape is presumed to be justified. The same justification
operates in what is popularly called “date rape.” The belief that sex was their
just compensation compelled a number of rapists to insist they had not raped. Such was the case of
an offender who raped and seriously beat his victim when, on their second date,
she refused his sexual advances.
I think I was really pissed off
at her because it didn’t go as planned. I could have been with someone else. She
led me on but wouldn’t deliver ... I have a male ego that must be fed.
The purpose of such rapes was
conquest, to seize what was not offered.
Despite the cultural belief
that young women are the most sexually desirable, several rapes involved the
deliberate choice of a victim relatively older than the assailant. [8] Since
the rapists were themselves rather young (26 to 30 years of age on the
average), they were expressing a preference for sexually experienced, rather
than elderly, women. Men who chose victims older than themselves often said
they did so because they believed that sexually experienced women were more
desirable partners. They raped because they also believed that these women
would not be sexually attracted to them.
[8 When asked towards whom
their sexual interests were primarily directed, 43 percent of rapists indicated
a preference for women “significantly older than themselves.” When those who
responded, “women of any age” are added, 65 percent of rapists expressed sexual
interest in women older than themselves.]
Finally, sexual access emerged
as a factor in the accounts of black men who consciously chose to rape white
women. [9] The majority of rapes in the United States today are intra-racial.
However, for the past 20 years, according to national data based on reported
rapes as well as victimization studies, which include unreported rapes, the
rate of black on white (B/W) rape has significantly exceeded the rate of white
on black (W/B) rape (La Free, 1982). [10] Indeed, we may be experiencing a
historical anomaly, since, as Brownmiller (1975) has documented, white men have
freely raped women of color in the past. The current structure of interracial
rape, however, reflects contemporary racism and race relations in several ways.
[9 Feminists as well as
sociologists have tended to avoid the topic of interracial rape. Contributing
to the avoidance is an awareness of historical and contemporary social
injustice. For example, Davis (1981) points out that fictional rape of white
women was used in the South as a post-slavery justification to lynch black men.
And LaFree (1980) has demonstrated that black men who assault white women
continue to receive more serious sanctions within the criminal justice system
when compared to other racial combinations of victim and assailant. While the
silence has been defensible in light of historical racism, continued avoidance
of the topic discriminates against victims by eliminating the opportunity to
investigate the impact of social factors on rape.]
[10 In our sample, 66 percent
of black rapists reported their victim(s) were white, compared to two white
rapists who reported raping black women. It is important to emphasize that
because of the biases inherent in rape reporting and processing, and because of
the limitations of our sample, these figures do not accurately reflect the
actual racial composition of rapes committed in Virginia or elsewhere.
Furthermore, since black men who assault white women receive more serious
sanctions within the criminal justice system when compared to other racial
combinations of victim and assailant (LaFree, 1980), B/W rapists will be
overrepresented within prison populations as well as over-represented in any
sample drawn from the population.]
First, the status of black
women in the United States today is relatively lower than the status of white
women. Further, prejudice, segregation and other factors continue to militate
against interracial coupling. Thus, the desire for sexual access to higher
status, unavailable women, an important function in B/W rape, does not motivate
white men to rape black women. Equally important, demographic and geographic
barriers interact to lower the incidence of W/B rape. Segregation as well as
the poverty expected in black neighborhoods undoubtedly discourages many whites
from choosing such areas as a target for house-breaking or robbery. Thus, the
number of rapes that would occur in conjunction with these crimes is reduced.
Reflecting in part the
standards of sexual desirability set by the dominant white society, a number of
black rapists indicated they had been curious about white women. Blocked by
racial barriers from legitimate sexual relations with white women, they raped
to gain access to them. They described raping white women as “the ultimate
experience” and “high status among my friends. It gave me a feeling of status,
power, macho.” For another man, raping a white woman had a special appeal because
it violated a “known taboo,” making it more dangerous and, thus more exciting,
to him than raping a black woman.
Impersonal
Sex and Power
The idea that rape is an
impersonal rather than an intimate or mutual experience appealed to a number of
rapists, some of whom suggested it was their preferred form of sex. The fact
that rape allowed them to control rather than care encouraged some to act on
this preference. For example, one man explained,
Rape gave me the power to do
what I wanted to do without feeling I had to please a partner or respond to a
partner. I felt in control, dominant. Rape was the ability to have sex without
caring about the woman’s response. I was totally dominant.
Another rapist commented:
Seeing them laying there
helpless gave me the confidence that I could do it ... With rape, I felt
totally in charge. I’m bashful, timid. When a woman wanted to give in normal
sex, I was intimidated. In the rapes, I was totally in command, she totally
submissive.
During his interview, another
rapist confided that he had been fantasizing about rape for several weeks
before committing his offense. His belief was that it would be “an exciting
experience a new high.” Most appealing to him was the idea that he could make
his victim “do it all for him” and that he would be in control. He fantasized
that she “would submit totally and that I could have anything I wanted.”
Eventually, he decided to act because his older brother told him, “forced sex
is great, I wouldn’t get caught and, besides, women love it.” Though now he
admits to his crime, he continues to believe his victim “enjoyed it.” Perhaps
we should note here that the appeal of impersonal sex is not limited to
convicted rapists. The amount of male sexual activity that occurs in homosexual
meeting places as well as the widespread use of prostitutes suggests that
avoidance of intimacy appeals to a large segment of the male population.
Through rape men can experience power and avoid the emotions related to
intimacy and tenderness. Further, the popularity of violent pornography
suggests that a wide variety of men in this culture have learned to be aroused
by sex fused with violence (Smith, 1976). Consistent with this observation,
recent experimental research conducted by Malamuth et al., (1980) demonstrates
that men are aroused by images that depict women as orgasmic under conditions
of violence and pain. They found that for female students, arousal was high
when the victim experienced an orgasm and no pain, whereas male students were highly
aroused when the victim experienced an orgasm and pain. On the basis of their
results, Malamuth et al., (1980) suggest that forcing a woman to climax despite
her pain and abhorrence of the assailant makes the rapist feel powerful, he has
gained control over the only source of power historically associated with
women, their bodies. In the final analysis, dominance was the objective of most
rapists.
Recreation
and Adventure
Among gang rapists, most of whom were in
their late teens or early twenties when convicted, rape represented recreation
and adventure, another form of delinquent activity. Part of rape’s appeal was
the sense of male camaraderie engendered by participating collectively in a
dangerous activity. To prove one’s self capable of “performing” under these
circumstances was a substantial challenge and also a source of reward. One gang
rapist articulated this feeling very clearly,
We felt powerful, we were in
control. I wanted sex and there was peer pressure. She wasn’t like a person, no
personality, just domination on my part. Just to show I could do it - you know,
macho.
Our research revealed several
forms of gang rape. A common pattern was hitchhike-abduction rape. In these
cases, the gang, cruising an area, “looking for girls,” picked up a female
hitchhiker for the purpose of having sex. Though the intent was rape, a number
of men did not view it as such because they were convinced that women
hitchhiked primarily to signal sexual availability and only secondarily as a
form of transportation. In these cases, the unsuspecting victim was driven to a
deserted area, raped, and in the majority of cases physically injured.
Sometimes, the victim was not hitchhiking; she was abducted at knife or gun
point from the street usually at night. Some of these men did not view this
type of attack as rape either because they believed a woman walking alone at
night to be a prostitute. In addition, they were often convinced “she enjoyed
it.”
“Gang date” rape was another
popular variation. In this pattern, one member of the gang would make a date
with the victim. Then, without her knowledge or consent, she would be driven to
a predetermined location and forcibly raped by each member of the group. One
young man revealed this practice was so much a part of his group’s recreational
routine, they had rented a house for the purpose. From his perspective, the
rape was justified because “usually the girl had a bad reputation, or we knew
it was what she liked.”
During his interview, another offender
confessed to participating in twenty or thirty such “gang date” rapes because
his driver’s license had been revoked making it difficult for him to “get
girls.” Sixty percent of the time, he claimed, “they were girls
known to do this kind of thing,” but “frequently, the girls didn’t want to have
sex with all of us.” In such cases, he said, “It might start out as rape but,
then, they (the women) would quiet down and none ever reported it to the police.”
He was convicted for a gang rape, which he described as “the ultimate thing I
ever did,” because unlike his other rapes, the victim, in this case, was a
stranger whom the group abducted as she walked home from the library. He felt
the group’s past experience with “gang date” rape had prepared them for this
crime in which the victim was blindfolded and driven to the mountains where,
though it was winter, she was forced to remove her clothing. Lying on the snow,
she was raped by each of the four men several times before being abandoned near
a farm house. This young man continued to believe that if he had spent the
night with her, rather than abandoning her, she would not have reported to the
police. [11]
[11 It is important to note
that the gang rapes in this study were especially violent, resulting in
physical injury, even death. One can only guess at the amount of
hitchhike-abduction and “gang-date” rapes that are never reported or, if
reported, are not processed because of the tendency to disbelieve the victims
of such rapes unless extensive physical injury accompanies the crime.]
Solitary rapists also used
terms like “exciting,” “a challenge,” “an adventure,” to describe their feelings
about rape. Like the gang rapists, these men found the element of danger made
rape all the more exciting. Typifying this attitude was one man who described
his rape as intentional. He reported:
It was exciting to get away
with it (rape), just being able to beat the system, not women. It was like
doing something illegal and getting away with it.
Another rapist confided that
for him “rape was just more exciting and compelling” than a normal sexual
encounter because it involved forcing a stranger. A multiple rapist asserted, “it
was the excitement and fear and the drama that made rape a big kick.”
Feeling
Good
At the time of their
interviews, many of the rapists expressed regret for their crime and had
empirically low self-esteem ratings. The experience of being convicted,
sentenced, and incarcerated for rape undoubtedly produced many, if not most, of
these feelings. What is clear is that, in contrast to the well-documented
severity of the immediate impact, and in some cases, the long-term trauma experienced
by the victims of sexual violence, the immediate emotional impact on the
rapists is slight. When the men were asked to recall their feelings immediately
following the rape, only eight percent indicated that guilt or feeling bad was
part of their emotional response. The majority said they felt good, relieved or
simply nothing at all. Some indicated they had been afraid of being caught or
felt sorry for themselves. Only two men out of 114 expressed any concern or
feeling for the victim. Feeling good or nothing at all about raping women is
not an aberration limited to men in prison. Smithyman (1978), in his study of “undetected
rapists” rapists outside of prison found that raping women had no impact on
their lives nor did it have a negative effect on their self-image.
Significantly a number of men
volunteered the information that raping had a positive impact on their
feelings. For some the satisfaction was in revenge. For example, the man who
had raped and murdered five women:
It seems like so much
bitterness and tension had built up and this released it. I felt like I had
just climbed a mountain and now I could look back.
Another offender characterized
rape as habit forming: “Rape is like smoking. You can’t stop once you start.”
Finally, one man expressed the sentiments of many rapists when he stated,
After rape, I always felt like
I had just conquered something, like I had just ridden the bull at Gilley’s.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper has explored rape
from the perspective of a group of convicted, incarcerated rapists. The purpose
was to discover how these men viewed sexual violence and what they gained from their
behavior.
We found that rape was
frequently a means of revenge and punishment. Implicit in revenge-rapes was the
notion that women were collectively liable for the rapists’ problems. In some
cases, victims were substitutes for significant women on whom the men desired
to take revenge. In other cases, victims were thought to represent all women,
and rape was used to punish, humiliate, and “put them in their place.” In both
cases women were seen as a class, a category, not as individuals. For some men,
rape was almost an after-thought, a bonus added to burglary or robbery. Other men
gained access to sexually unavailable or unwilling women through rape. For this
group of men, rape was a fantasy come true, a particularly exciting form of
impersonal sex which enabled them to dominate and control women, by exercising
a singularly male form of power. These rapists talked of the pleasures of
raping-how for them it was a challenge, an adventure, a dangerous and “ultimate”
experience. Rape made them feel good and, in some cases, even elevated their
self-image.
The pleasure these men derived
from raping reveals the extreme to which they objectified women. Women were
seen as sexual commodities to be used or conquered rather than as human beings
with rights and feelings. One young man expressed the extreme of the
contemptful view of women when he confided to the female researcher.
Rape is
a man’s right. If a women doesn’t want to give it, the man should take it.
Women have no right to say no. Women are made to have sex. It’s all they are
good for. Some women would rather take a beating, but they always give in; it’s
what they are for.
This man murdered his victim because she
wouldn’t “give in.”
Undoubtedly, some rapes, like
some of all crimes, are idiopathic. However, it is not necessary to resort to
pathological motives to account for all rape or other acts of sexual violence.
Indeed, we find that men who rape have something to teach us about the cultural
roots of sexual aggression. They force us to acknowledge that rape is more than
an idiosyncratic act committed by a few “sick” men. Rather, rape can be viewed
as the end point in a continuum of sexually aggressive behaviors that reward
men and victimize women. [12] In the way that the motives for committing any
criminal act can be rationally determined, reasons for rape can also be
determined. Our data demonstrate that some men rape because they have learned
that in this culture sexual violence is rewarding. Significantly, the
overwhelming majority of these rapists indicated they never thought they would
go to prison for what they did. Some did not fear imprisonment because they did
not define their behavior as rape. Others knew that women frequently do not
report rape and of those cases that are reported, conviction rates are low, and
therefore they felt secure. These men perceived rape as a rewarding, low risk
act. Understanding that otherwise normal men can and do rape is critical to the
development of strategies for prevention.
[12 It is
interesting that men who verbally harass women on the street say they do so to
alleviate boredom, to gain a sense of youthful camaraderie, and because it’s
fun (Benard and Schlaffer, 1984) - the same reason men who rape give for their
behavior.]
We are left with the fact that all men do not
rape. In view of the apparent rewards and cultural supports for rape, it is
important to ask why some men do not rape. Hirschi (1969) makes a similar observation
about delinquency. He argues that the key question is not “Why do they do it?”
but rather “Why don’t we do it?” (Hirschi, 1969:34). Likewise, we may be
seeking an answer to the wrong question about sexual assault of women. Instead
of asking men who rape “Why?”, perhaps we should be asking men who don’t “Why
not?”
REFERENCES
1.
Abel, Gene, Judith Becker, and Linda Skinner
1980
“Aggressive behavior and sex.” Psychiatric
Clinics of North America 3:133-51.
2.
Athens, Lonnie
1977
“Violent crime: a symbolic interactionist study.” Symbolic Interaction 1:56-71.
3.
Bart, Pauline
1979
“Rape as a paradigm of sexism in society victimization and its discontents.” Women’s Studies International Quarterly
2:347-57.
4.
Benard, Cheryl and Edit Schlaffer
1984 “The
man in the street: why he harasses.” Pp. 70-73 in Alson M. Jaggar and Paula S.
Rothenberg (eds.), Feminist Frameworks.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
5.
Black, Donald
1983
“Crime as social control.” American
Sociological Review 48:34-45.
6.
Blumberg, Rae Lesser
1979 “A
paradigm for predicting the position of women: policy implications and
problems.” Pp. 113-42 in Jean Lipman-Blumen and Jessie Bernard (eds.), Sex Roles and Social Policy. London: Sage Studies in International Sociology.
7.
Broude, Gwen and Sarah Greene
1976
“Cross-cultural codes on twenty sexual attitudes and practices.” Ethnology 15:409-28.
8.
Brownmiller, Susan
1975 Against Our Will. New York: Simon and
Schuster.
9.
Davis, Angela
1981 Women, Race and Class. New York: Random
House.
10.
Fisher, Gary and E. Rivlin
1971
“Psychological needs of rapists.” British
Journal of Criminology 11:182-85.
11.
Griffin, Susan
1971
“Rape: the all American crime.” Ramparts,
September 10:26-35.
12.
Groth, Nicholas
1971 Men Who Rape. New York: Plenum Press.
13.
Hammer, Emanuel and Irving Jacks
1955
“A study of Rorschack flexnor and extensor human movements.” Journal of Clinical Psychology 11:63-67.
14.
Herman, Dianne
1984 “The
rape culture.” Pp. 20-39 in Jo Freeman (ed.), Women: A Feminist Perspective.
Palo Alto: Mayfield.
15.
Hirschi, Travis
1969 Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
16.
Hoebel, E. Adamson
1954 The Law of Primitive Man. Boston:
Harvard University Press.
17.
Johnson, Allan Griswold
1980
“On the prevalence of rape in the United States.” Signs 6:136-46.
18.
Kanin, Eugene
1957
“Male aggression in dating-courtship relations.” American Journal of Sociology
63:197-204.
1965
“Male sex aggression and three psychiatric hypotheses.” Journal of Sex Research
1:227-29.
1967
“Reference groups and sex conduct norm violation.” Sociological Quarterly 8:495-504.
1969
“Selected dyadic aspects of male sex aggression.” Journal of Sex Research 5:12-28.
19.
Kasinsky, Renee
1975
“Rape: a normal act?” Canadian Forum,
September:18-22.
20.
Kirkpatrick, Clifford and Eugene Kanin
1957
“Male sex aggression on a university campus.” American Sociological Review 22:52-58.
21.
Koss, Mary P. and Kenneth E. Leonard
1984 “Sexually
aggressive men: empirical findings and theoretical implications.” Pp. 213-32 in
Neil M. Malamuth and Edward Donnerstein (eds.), Pornography and Sexual Aggression. New York: Academic Press.
22.
LaFree, Gary
1980 “The effect of sexual stratification by
race on official reactions to rape.” American
Sociological Review 45:824-54.
1982
“Male power and female victimization: towards a theory of interracial rape.” American Journal of Sociology 88:311-28.
23.
Llewellyn, Karl N., and E. Adamson Hoebel
1941 The Cheyenne Way: Conflict and Case Law in
Primitive Jurisprudence. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
24.
Luckenbill, David
1977
“Criminal homicide as a situated transaction.” Social Problems 25:176-87.
25.
Malamuth, Neil, Scott Haber and Seymour Feshback
1980
“Testing hypotheses regarding rape: exposure to sexual violence, sex
difference, and the ‘normality’ of rapists.” Journal of Research in Personality 14:121-37.
26.
Malamuth, Neil, Maggie Heim, and Seymour Feshback
1980
“Sexual responsiveness of college students to rape depictions: inhibitory and
disinhibitory effects.” Social Psychology
38:399-408.
27.
Meyer, Thomas J.
1984
“‘Date rape’: a serious problem that few talk about.” Chronicle of Higher Education, December 5.
28.
Morgan, Robin
1980 “Theory
and practice: pornography and rape.” Pp. 134-40 in Laura Lederer (ed.), Take Back the Night: Women on Pornography.
New York: William Morrow.
29.
Queen’s Bench Foundation
1976 Rape: Prevention and Resistence. San Francisco:
Queen’s Bench Foundation.
30.
Rada, Richard
1978 Clinical Aspects of Rape. New York:
Grune and Stratton.
31.
Russell, Diana
1975 The Politics of Rape. New York: Stein
and Day.
32.
Sanday, Peggy Reeves
1979 The Socio-Cultural Context of Rape. Washington,
DC: United States Department of Commerce, National Technical Information
Service.
33.
Scully, Diana and Joseph Marolla
1984
“Convicted rapists’ vocabulary of motive: excuses and justifications.” Social Problems 31:530-44.
1985 “Rape
and psychiatric vocabulary of motive: alternative perspectives.” Pp. 294-312 in
Ann Wolbert Burgess (ed.), Rape and
Sexual Assault: A Research Handbook.
New York: Garland Publishing.
34.
Smith, Don
1976
“The social context of pornography.” Journal
of Communications 26:16-24.
35.
Smithyman, Samuel
1978 The Undetected Rapist. Unpublished
Dissertation: Claremont Graduate School.
36.
West, Donald J.
1983 “Sex
offenses and offending.” Pp. 1-30 in Michael Tonry and Norval Morris (eds.), Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37.
Weis, Kurt and Sandra Borges
1973
“Victimology and rape: the case of the legitimate victim.” Issues in Criminology
8:71-115.
38.
Wheeler, Hollis
1985 “Pornography
and rape: a feminist perspective.” Pp. 374-91 in Ann Wolbert Burgess (ed.), Rape and Sexual Assault: A Research Handbook.
New York: Garland Publishing.
No comments:
Post a Comment