Trigger Warnings and Disclaimers:
i could just say "trigger warning: rape" here, but that's a joke. you wouldn't take it as seriously as you should. no, the real concern here is an irreverence for sex and callousness towards victims of sexual assault.
if the phrase "rape is similar to a paper-cut" upsets you: you need to click off immediately.
You have been warned.
Silly Haha Brainrot Warning:
please be aware that this is trying to analyze why we believe the things we do. responding to "people believe the sky is blue because they look up and see it is blue, and it's blue because (tangent)" with "the sky is blue because it just is" is both kind of silly and literally making yourself exhibit A. try not to be a source of evidence, or at least provide something more than just evidence
I Can See Them Too You Aren't Special:
i am not in fact arguing that rape is good.
people who believe i'm saying that and think that's bad are making a strawman and should probably have read the previous two disclaimers.
people who believe i'm saying that and think that's good are making a strawman and should probably have read this disclaimer, and maybe even read the actual post it's pretty interesting
so what is rape? well in libertarian philosophy it's a property crime. specifically, violating the right to control your most important capital property: your body.
now something might immediately jump out at you, especially if you're a left-leaning individual or bluepilled generic dnc/rnc voter:
"wait, no, rape is way worse than a mere property crime, what the fuck?"
Why We Believe Rape Is Worse Than A Mere Property Crime:
War of the Sexes; Monarch of The Earthen Hells
so you all know the generic story, species where the females control the most valuable resource (female reproductive ability) and thus select mates, males try their best to get control of it- wait a second
their goal is to get control of it, not be selected. so wouldn't it be more expedient to skip the whole mating dance and just take what you want by force?
well animals actually do this, and the female reproductive strategy hates it. not for any ensouled actual human reason like "feeling violated," we're talking about ducks, chickens and squirrels here, but because it takes away the ability to control reproduction. individuals that can't control reproduction reproduce worse than individuals that can.
the male reproductive strategy however loves getting raped. like, imagine companies sent you job offers, and then paid you for not doing anything. the only thing evolution loves more than ruthlessness is not having to put effort in.
you can tell this is the case because of anti-forcible-impregnation techniques various female animals implement, like the duck's famous ludicrous internal piping; and the subsequent pro-forcible-impregnation adaptations the males respond with, like the duck's famous ludicrous external piping.
you can also tell there's no care for how the individuals themselves feel, because none of these adaptations actually give a fuck about preventing insertion unless it's an efficient way to regain control.
nature is evil and ruthless basically, and you are a tool for its agenda, believing it's not sort of implies there's a supernatural force pulling against natural selection
Okay Back to Humans (evopsych slop yay)
You can immediately see some connections here. maybe that sense of violation and trauma is programming to make you hate this happening... unfortunately, it's evopsych, so it can't explain everything. humans have souls and are more than just puppets for their biology, human men aren't feral animals raping everything they see, believing that would be ludicrous. wink. (i'm throwing shade at this idea for reference, not really an argument just felt it would be good for the flow)
in chronological order of when the cultural hypothesis would have come about:
1a. the first is just "this thing makes me feel bad, so it's bad." given the previous section it's not hard to see why this would be a thing. (combined with "this makes them feel bad so it's bad" from the unfair sex. turns out both genders define culture, weird that.)
1b. cultures that didn't abhor rape ended up extinct
cultural natural selection basically; rape is bad for the survival of your society, so if you don't crack down on it you end up not surviving.
this in effect arguing that "Rape is Degenerate." which is really funny, but anyone who'd care about that has most assuredly stopped reading
part of this might
1c. modern new stuff
listen feminism got one thing right okay? i can admit when people i disagree with on other topics are correct
i could've sworn i had more for this section
So What Does Being a Property Crime Imply:
here's the thing. in terms of direct, physical harm, a rape that doesn't result in pregnancy has a similar level of permanent physical* impact as a workout. in the most measurable form it's as bad as a papercut. it's why evolution doesn't prevent penetration, only fighting against the expensive pregnancies
(*not psychological and especially not cultural)
Retroactive Consent Withdrawal Doesn't Make Sense:
Consenting: knowingly, while in control of your faculties, able to consent, and a complex asterisk for coercion vs sweetening the deal vs gun to your head vs bread to my locked box that leads towards a generalized capitalism vs communism debate.
consent in this framework is consenting to trading sexual encounter for... something. really, what matters is that at least one of them put sex in the deal. maybe both did and it's just a team effort, or maybe one's a prostitute and trading sex for money*, either way the sexual encounter's in the trade window.
once the deal has been made you can't just undo it. you can't just unfuck somebody. like withdrawing the consent makes sense if you can withdraw the act (like canceling mid session, or before you drop your pants), but you can't alter the past.
imagine you get a job, work your two weeks, get a paycheck, and then they're like "aactually we regret hiring you, we're taking the money back and we'll unhire you"
you can't unwork those hours. you might be able to unmake the product you made on company time but you won't be able to go back and work on your hobbies instead.
the HR manager just has to cope with losing that money to the company's bad decisionmaking
tl;dr: retroactive consent withdrawl is a really silly idea.
Tangent: retroactive consent is also silly, but it falls under "no harm no foul i guess?"
it doesn't make the original act not rape, but you can't really prosecute a crime if the defense is the victim of it.
*you might have noticed that this kind of has a women vibe to it, right? like how prostitution is mostly women selling to men. that's because female reproduction is a much more scarce resource than male reproduction, and thus fetches a significantly higher price
this is pretty clear and i've gone over it before, but it does lead to an interesting question: if property rights crimes are considered worse the more valuable something is, what about theft of an asset worth very little and easily replaced?
Male Victims of Having Your Uterus Stolen:
rape against men is treated a lot more like the papercut it is physically on the legal side and the "free stuff gifted to you" it is evolutionary on the cultural side. almost all of the "hey maybe raping men should be punished" that exists in the modern day is just bleed from women
like obviously it hurts them psychologically, but none of these forces that provide an objective value to an event actually care about psychological damage. or at least, not this specific kind dealt to men
"Male Victims of Having Your Uterus Stolen" is a triple entendre; the phrase "male victims of violence against women and girls" is the gift that just keeps. on. giving.*
So What Do We Do With This?:
honestly, i don't know. i just thought it would be interesting to think about and wrote my thoughts down on a page; it doesn't really change or advocate for changing anything.
negative emotions being borne of chemistry and biology doesn't make them less valid; "we only think rape against women is bad because we were programmed to; so thinking that is bad" is a really stupid argument,
humans are fundamentally irrational creatures at their core
side note: i forgot to actually say anything about women or people who are victims of sexual violence and aren't men; so women again. this is because they're kind of not really the point?
what do you want me to say that hasn't already been said?
if you need everyone to repeat "this is bad it's bad when it happens" every time sexual violence is brought up, then you really, really should have read my disclaimers
Stuff I Couldn't Fit In The Flow:
tangent, and also killing one really bad argument i've seen: patriarchal societies without feminism are actually capable of feeling things when women feel things, like caring about what half the population thinks wasn't invented in 1920 in the US.
it's blatantly obvious animals can feel things and they communicate non-verbally. a hypothetical human man who doesn't realize someone who is the same species, came out the same place, in the same way, and speaks the same language, is actually the same thing as him isn't a "brutish man in a patriarchal society," he has a developmental disorder.
like imagine someone telling you with a straight face "matriarchal societies didn't even subconsciously consider male feelings on being tortured to death because men look slightly different and can't give birth so they're obviously less aware of what you do to them than actual plants"
the second entendre: was originally supposed to be in there, but ruined the flow
Tangent: while i'm on the topic, a certain bad take can be executed right now: "society doesn't care when women are raped"
like, no, sorry, society cares, a lot. we can tell it cares because it's illegal. a society that doesn't care wouldn't criminalize it. still to this day there are countries men don't show up in rape statistics because it turns out you can't fit a clit inside a dick
anyone who gives you stats that say shit like "men commit 99% of rapes" is too unaware of even the most basics of the topic to be worthy to say literally anything. sure it's an ad hominem fallacy but someone who will say with their full chest "rape is when men forcibly sex women" and then in the next breath say "women are better than men because they don't rape" is completely clueless.
this post is a half finished mess; i might come back and edit or improve it as i think up new ideas. this is a shockingly interesting topic in fact