Louise O Neill on rape culture.

RonFan · 13-12-2016 10:57PM

mzungu wrote: »

We have become a more liberal society and attitudes towards promiscuity have changed to reflect that. Personally, I don't see that as a problem.

There are probably a lot of clueless people out there in need of sex-ed, I agree there. However, as with my answer above, I don't think this generations acceptance of promiscuity is what leads to rapes. Unfortunately, rapes were happening long before the sexual revolution.

Not full on rapes but men chancing their arm by overstepping boundaries and women doing things their not comfortable with, that is really what the rape in "rape culture" is a complaint about, rather than being forced down a dark alley kind of thing. Then there's the side of prostitution which inevitably increases, which is a very, very dark industry.

RonFan · 13-12-2016 11:06PM

It evidently makes more sense for a society's code to be about minimising sex, which leads to optimum functionality. This society is the opposite, it is about maximising sex, but men's desire far outweighs women's so that will inevitably lead to a conflict of interests as we're seeing. The idea a sexually maximising ideal can be functional is based in the idea of gender neutrality which is a foundational ideology of the culture.

mzungu · 13-12-2016 11:49PM

RonFan wrote: »

Not full on rapes but men chancing their arm by overstepping boundaries and women doing things their not comfortable with, that is really what the rape in "rape culture" is a complaint about, rather than being forced down a dark alley kind of thing.

Overstepping those boundaries is still rape (where penetration has occurred) and /or sexual assault for cases where non penetrative assault has occurred. Cases like these also happened prior to our more relaxed attitude to sex and probably happened quite a lot, it simply went unreported due to the scarcity of services (and societal attitudes) of the time

Then there's the side of prostitution which inevitably increases, which is a very, very dark industry.

Not too drag things too far off topic, but it does depend on what reports you read as the figures are either up, down, or simply not changing all that much depending on which one you read. It really depends on the country and cultural attitudes too. For example, estimates show that nearly between 59-80% of men in Cambodia have slept with a prostitute.

Cambodian men are quite ready to admit that they seek the favours of prostitutes, even though they may be married and have two or three girlfriends on the side. It has become very much a part of life.
Link to study here

RonFan · 14-12-2016 12:00AM

mzungu wrote: »

Overstepping those boundaries is still rape (where penetration has occurred) and /or sexual assault for cases where non penetrative assault has occurred. Cases like these also happened prior to our more relaxed attitude to sex and probably happened quite a lot, it simply went unreported due to the scarcity of services (and societal attitudes) of the time

Not too drag things too far off topic, but it does depend on what reports you read as the figures are either up, down, or simply not changing all that much depending on which one you read. It really depends on the country and cultural attitudes too. For example, estimates show that nearly between 59-80% of men in Cambodia have slept with a prostitute.

Come on now. There are over 1,000 prostitutes operating in Ireland today, if you think that was the case even 10 years ago let alone further back than that you're simply deluded. Prostitution is undoubtedly on the increase and undoubtably inevitably increases as sexual more loosen.

Cambodia is a theravadan culture, and when a dharmic culture is consumed by influence from outside namely western forces as is happening all over the asiatic regions, all sorts of complications inevitably follow such as that which you mentioned

mzungu · 14-12-2016 12:24AM

RonFan wrote: »

Come on now. There are over 1,000 prostitutes operating in Ireland today, if you think that was the case even 10 years ago let alone further back than that you're simply deluded. Prostitution is undoubtedly on the increase and undoubtably inevitably increases as sexual more loosen.

Cambodia is a theravadan culture, and when a dharmic culture is consumed by influence from outside namely western forces as is happening all over the asiatic regions, all sorts of complications inevitably follow such as that which you mentioned

There was estimated to be over 17,000 prostitutes in Dublin alone back in the 1800s. In fact, Dublin (Monto district) was the red light capital of Europe back in those days! We didn't even have half the population back then either. This idea that we were all chaste in times gone past is simply not true. Prostitution has always been rife. Let's not pretend that it is some kind of new phenomenon that happened as soon as we adopted a more liberal attitude towards sex.

RonFan · 14-12-2016 12:38AM

mzungu wrote: »

There was estimated to be over 17,000 prostitutes in Dublin alone back in the 1800s. In fact, Dublin (Monto district) was the red light capital of Europe back in those days! We didn't even have half the population back then either. This idea that we were all chaste in times gone past is simply not true. Prostitution has always been rife. Let's not pretend that it is some kind of new phenomenon that happened as soon as we adopted a more liberal attitude towards sex.

17,000 prostitutes in Dublin? That is an absurdity. So every street in the entire city was like a parade of prostitutes every day? Perhaps there were 17,000 prostitutes during the entire 1800s solely owing to poverty. There are literally only a handful of Irish prostitutes operating at one time at the moment. There were virtually no immagrants in the 1800s. Why in 200 years has the rate of Irish prostitutes gone up by 1000 x? If you meant there were 17,000 cumulatively, at the current rate the 21st century will see far more than 100,000 prostitutes in this country. The rate has undoubtably increased.

mzungu · 14-12-2016 01:23AM

RonFan wrote: »

17,000 prostitutes in Dublin? That is an absurdity. So every street in the entire city was like a parade of prostitutes every day? Perhaps there were 17,000 prostitutes during the entire 1800s solely owing to poverty. There are literally only a handful of Irish prostitutes operating at one time at the moment. There were virtually no immagrants in the 1800s. Why in 200 years has the rate of Irish prostitutes gone up by 1000 x? If you meant there were 17,000 cumulatively, at the current rate the 21st century will see far more than 100,000 prostitutes in this country. The rate has undoubtably increased.

I am talking at one stage, and not cumulatively. A caveat is that the figure is an estimation of the numbers working as prostitutes at any one time in Dublin during the 1800s, although 1830s to 1860s were the peak years. Depending on what historians are involved, the figures of 10,000 and 11,000 are also quoted as being the max at any one time. The figure is indeed quite high no matter which one you go with.

However, when you consider that in 1856 alone, Dublin Metropolitan Police records show that they arrested 4,784 prostitutes, then it is not much of a stretch that there would have been many more who were not arrested. So, 17,000 is not totally beyond the realms of possibility, assuming that a little less than 1/3 were arrested that year. It might also be a sign of those times, and high numbers, that there was 11 Magdalen homes (in Dublin) that catered especially to try reform prostitutes (Luddy 1990, Prostitution and rescue work in nineteenth-century Ireland).

You should check out Maria Luddy's research on this, it is pretty fascinating stuff. They also made a TV documentary (TG4 IIRC) about it which aired a good few moons ago. It is an interesting watch.

Getting back to the topic at hand, remember, these figures are for Dublin alone, so who knows how high the figures are for the rest of the country.

Whichever figure you wish to go with, there was still a hell of a lot more prostitutes in nineteenth century Dublin than there is today!

RonFan · 14-12-2016 01:40AM

I'd highly doubt that, but the fact of the matter is, it's not about how prevalent promiscuity is but how normalised it is. Do you honestly reckon culture is headed in a good direction? That the Ireland of 20 years time will be a liberal utopia? Things are in truth going to hell in a hand basket, and the lossening of sexual mores is a part of that.

mzungu · 14-12-2016 02:14AM

RonFan wrote: »

I'd highly doubt that,

I disagree. Those are the figures attained from the archives and from extensive research of the time period. They are as accurate as one will find. The numbers for today are a hell of a lot less than there were back in the mid-1800s.

but the fact of the matter is, it's not about how prevalent promiscuity is but how normalised it is. Do you honestly reckon culture is headed in a good direction? That the Ireland of 20 years time will be a liberal utopia?

If by culture you mean that we continue to drop the hangups regarding sexuality that still linger, then that is a positive step. Repression of sex and living to outdated roles like we did previously gets us nowhere.

Things are in truth going to hell in a hand basket, and the lossening of sexual mores is a part of that.

The ills of the world today can not be attributed in any way to the "loosening of sexual mores." There is no evidence to back up that claim, in fact, the evidence points the opposite way. The knock-on effects of the sexual revolution helped to increase the sum total of happiness in certain instances (SSM etc).

me_right_one · 14-12-2016 02:30AM

I agree with you on that RonFan. Promiscuity is completely devaluing sex, the family, children etc. in a detrimental way. Its wrong and it will lead to liberalisation of all sorts of heinous things. Just the other day, I saw a poster calling for the legalisation of incest in Maynooth University.

If things keep going like this, in 50 years time, paedophila will be legal, and the govt of the day will be issuing apologies to paedos who are locked up now for putting them through "abuse".

suicide_circus · 14-12-2016 04:59AM

Does anyone seriously contend that people are getting happier?

sameoldname · 14-12-2016 06:59AM

suicide_circus wrote: »

Does anyone seriously contend that people are getting happier?

People are about the same, always have been, always will.

ivytwine · 14-12-2016 08:03AM

RonFan, I know the figures for prostitution in 18th century Dublin seem extraordinary but historians have put in the legwork on this and they're accurate. They were mainly centred on Montgomery Street, the Phoenix Park. People lived in tenements then hence the sheer numbers. There were a lot of soldiers based in Dublin at the time but they wouldn't have been the sole clientele.

If we look at London, the numbers are greater still. There's the very famous case of the journalist William Stead who "bought" a 12 year old girl in the 1890s to show the extent of the problem.

In the interest of fairness I'll paste this link which argues that a good proportion of the women who were named as prostitutes were no such thing. However it does prove that "promiscuity" is no new thing. https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/prostitution

Some other links of interest: http://rictornorton.co.uk/though13.htm

http://www.economist.com/node/14636924

Ignorance about sex was vast at the time. I've honestly lost track of how many biographies of British figures I've read detailing the shock many of them got on their wedding night. Many of the men would have felt unable to ask their wives for certain acts etc and would have gone to prostitutes.

I don't argue that modern dating can't be extremely difficult and people can be cheapened by stuff like Tinder but it's delusional to say things were better in the past.

Are people unhappier? Probably not. Everyone has a voice now, they didn't in the past, so we're talking about it. And I'd argue it's the devaluation of work and the massive information overload we're subjected to on a daily basis contributing to our current malaise, more than sexual freedom.

ivytwine · 14-12-2016 08:12AM

me_right_one wrote: »

I agree with you on that RonFan. Promiscuity is completely devaluing sex, the family, children etc. in a detrimental way. Its wrong and it will lead to liberalisation of all sorts of heinous things. Just the other day, I saw a poster calling for the legalisation of incest in Maynooth University.

If things keep going like this, in 50 years time, paedophila will be legal, and the govt of the day will be issuing apologies to paedos who are locked up now for putting them through "abuse".

Paedophilia and incest will never be legal. There were fringe groups in the 70s calling for the legalisation of paedophilia, and what's worse is they got some traction.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/10312930/Germanys-Green-Party-leader-regrets-campaign-to-legalise-paedophilia.html

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26352378

There isn't a hope in hell of similar happening now. What happened in Maynooth? Did the meeting go ahead?

On incest, it was a perfectly acceptable way to keep the royal bloodlines of Europe "pure" for hundreds of years, leading to this poor bastard: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain

While it was seen as absolutely disgusting by almost everyone else. We have a biological reason for the incest taboo, that won't go anywhere.

seamus · 14-12-2016 08:49AM

me_right_one wrote: »

I agree with you on that RonFan. Promiscuity is completely devaluing sex, the family, children etc. in a detrimental way. Its wrong and it will lead to liberalisation of all sorts of heinous things. Just the other day, I saw a poster calling for the legalisation of incest in Maynooth University.

If things keep going like this, in 50 years time, paedophila will be legal, and the govt of the day will be issuing apologies to paedos who are locked up now for putting them through "abuse".

Slippery slope fallacy. This old drum has been banged on a lot and it contains no real substance.
In fact one could argue that paedophilia and incest were more common when sex was repressed and promiscuity looked down upon.

The key part the shriekers of moral panic miss is that more open sexual values are not about liberalising everything and letting people do whatever the hell they want. But instead it's about recognising that society nor the government should have any say in what happens privately between consenting persons. That a crime without a victim is not a crime at all.

And in fact, the progression of society hasn't been a result of blurring the lines, but in fact as a result of clarifying the lines. Of strengthening laws alone the consent line rather than along the blurry lines where one tries to come up with different scenarios where consentless sex is and isn't OK.
"Loosening" sexual values has led to things like marital rape becoming illegal as well as far harsher penalties for rape and a much greater recognition of child abuse and paedophilia as reportable crimes.

The simple fact is that RonFan is incorrect. Things are getting better as social values have become more liberalised.

Incest may become legal (though there has never been a huge lobby for it), and tbh with the exception of a few caveats it's hard to argue against it. If two consenting adults are in a happy sexual relationship, then what business does the state have to interfere?

Wibbs · 14-12-2016 09:23AM

RonFan wrote: »

As long as the space between their legs lacks an outward genital component they will always be utterly envious.

Penis envy? Really? Jayzus. I've read it all now. Never mind the utterly daft notion that prostitution was less prevalent in the past.

pumpkin4life · 14-12-2016 09:28AM

me_right_one wrote: »

I agree with you on that RonFan. Promiscuity is completely devaluing sex, the family, children etc. in a detrimental way. Its wrong and it will lead to liberalisation of all sorts of heinous things. Just the other day, I saw a poster calling for the legalisation of incest in Maynooth University.

If things keep going like this, in 50 years time, paedophila will be legal, and the govt of the day will be issuing apologies to paedos who are locked up now for putting them through "abuse".

Lol, that last bit actually sounds nuts, but Salon.com have posted pro pedophile arguments/articles in the past few years. Some of these lads are truly sick fùcks.

Search for it yourself lads cause I'm not getting done at work for this.

pumpkin4life · 14-12-2016 09:33AM

seamus wrote: »

Slippery slope fallacy. This old drum has been banged on a lot and it contains no real substance.
In fact one could argue that paedophilia and incest were more common when sex was repressed and promiscuity looked down upon.

The key part the shriekers of moral panic miss is that more open sexual values are not about liberalising everything and letting people do whatever the hell they want. But instead it's about recognising that society nor the government should have any say in what happens privately between consenting persons. That a crime without a victim is not a crime at all.

And in fact, the progression of society hasn't been a result of blurring the lines, but in fact as a result of clarifying the lines. Of strengthening laws alone the consent line rather than along the blurry lines where one tries to come up with different scenarios where consentless sex is and isn't OK.
"Loosening" sexual values has led to things like marital rape becoming illegal as well as far harsher penalties for rape and a much greater recognition of child abuse and paedophilia as reportable crimes.

The simple fact is that RonFan is incorrect. Things are getting better as social values have become more liberalised.

Incest may become legal (though there has never been a huge lobby for it), and tbh with the exception of a few caveats it's hard to argue against it. If two consenting adults are in a happy sexual relationship, then what business does the state have to interfere?

I thought the SS fallacy was "this will happen because this happened". No evidence included.

If you say: based on past treads and have evidence from the past century in multiple countries around the world (feminism will never happen, divorce will never happen, homosexuality not illegal will never happen, gay marriage will never happen, transsexualism will never happen) that there's a good then pedophilia will become more accepted, that's not the SS fallacy.

Personally, I'm veering towards the side of no, but even then, still a modicum of doubt.

Widdershins · 14-12-2016 09:42AM

I will take your word for it, Pumpkin4Life (about the Salon articles) I don't want to read them

It shouldn't be about people doing whatever the hell they want, including genuine weirdos, but the genuine weirdos seem to feel safe enough to nudge at the idea now and then, and slowly push for 'normalisation'. They use the screen of totally open minded discussion . A friend of a friend who added me on Facebook is prone to posting about these topics and it's kind of scary to see how many people entertain him and try to look at abuse as something other than abuse. ''Another form of sexuality'' in his words!
Maybe they were doing the same thing a hundred years ago, I don't know.

RonFan · 14-12-2016 10:11AM

Perhaps I was ignorant about the extent prostitution is increasing, but no one can convince me it's significantly decreasing. The sexual craziness was well underway by the 1800s in any case. A weak religious system in the west caused mass sexual repression, via conversion of the shame element humans naturally feel towards sex (just as there is a natural shame about toilet matters for example) into unnatural guilt, and we've been feeling the effects of this for centuries now in the form of the prevalence of over-expression of sexuality, the exaggerated rates of prostitution being included in this. It is not a pleasant industry, the very opposite in fact. I'm not saying women are forced as some do, but rather tempted into making a sacrifice they are not truly capable of and end up scarred.

It seems to be the consensus that human culture is getting better, when all the real evidence says otherwise. You'd literally have to be blind to what is going on around you to think that it's the case. Marriage breaking down? Sure that just means the end of oppression of women by men. Mental health epidemic? Brains have simply spontaneously started malfunctioning. Nothing to do with a society that is collapsing all around you at the communal level. As you get older you naturally calm down, so because you are getting calmer you naturally tend to think that the world around you is getting better too. Also if you've kids, or even if you don't since we all posses a parental instinct, you want to think you're bringing them into a better world, but the truth is we live in a collapsed social system and the effects of it are getting faster prevalent all the time.

seamus · 14-12-2016 10:33AM

pumpkin4life wrote: »

I thought the SS fallacy was "this will happen because this happened". No evidence included.

If you say: based on past treads and have evidence from the past century in multiple countries around the world (feminism will never happen, divorce will never happen, homosexuality not illegal will never happen, gay marriage will never happen, transsexualism will never happen) that there's a good then pedophilia will become more accepted, that's not the SS fallacy.

But it is the fallacy. It's exactly what you state in your first paragraph. "Legal paedophilia will happen because legal divorce happened". No evidence, no link between the two. That's the fallacy.

It would be like saying legalising cannabis means that eventually kids will be able to buy heroin in the newsagents.

There is no evidence from anywhere in the world that legalising any of the items you mention above will lead to legalised paedophilia. In fact legalised/decriminalised paedophilia is strongly associated with countries where most of the stuff above is criminalised or heavily restricted.

Personally, I'm veering towards the side of no, but even then, still a modicum of doubt.

I would never say never, I don't have a crystal ball. But the trend is towards criminalising non-consensual acts and decriminalising consensual ones. There is no general trend towards legalising all sexual activity in all forms.

RonFan wrote: »

It seems to be the consensus that human culture is getting better, when all the real evidence says otherwise.

Please provide this "real evidence". I guess it should probably start with an objective statement that defines "better" and "worse" in terms of human culture.

Wibbs · 14-12-2016 10:35AM

RonFan wrote: »

Perhaps I was ignorant

Yeah… perhaps...

but no one can convince me it's significantly decreasing.

Indeed. I suspect your worldview is set in stone and the lady's not for turning regardless of evidence to the contrary.

The sexual craziness was well underway by the 1800s in any case. A weak religious system in the west caused mass sexual repression, via conversion of the shame element humans naturally feel towards sex (just as there is a natural shame about toilet matters for example) into unnatural guilt,

I hate to break it to you but "shame" and "sexuality" varies hugely by culture(and time). The shame stuff came mostly from Abrhamic faiths mixing with Roman thought.

It seems to be the consensus that human culture is getting better, when all the real evidence says otherwise. You'd literally have to be blind to what is going on around you to think that it's the case. Marriage breaking down? Sure that just means the end of oppression of women by men. Mental health epidemic? Brains have simply spontaneously started malfunctioning. Nothing to do with a society that is collapsing all around you at the communal level. As you get older you naturally calm down, so because you are getting calmer you naturally tend to think that the world around you is getting better too. Also if you've kids, or even if you don't since we all posses a parental instinct, you want to think you're bringing them into a better world, but the truth is we live in a collapsed social system and the effects of it are getting faster prevalent all the time.

I would love to know what planet you think you're living on where you can claim a belief that western society is getting worse. I'm way more contrarian than most, but IMH that's beyond cracked a view.

me_right_one · 14-12-2016 10:38AM

ivytwine wrote: »

Paedophilia and incest will never be legal. There were fringe groups in the 70s calling for the legalisation of paedophilia, and what's worse is they got some traction.

There isn't a hope in hell of similar happening now. What happened in Maynooth? Did the meeting go ahead?

While it was seen as absolutely disgusting by almost everyone else. We have a biological reason for the incest taboo, that won't go anywhere.

We also have biological reasons against gayness and even straight anal sex.

Unfortunately you will eat your words soon. Thats where attitudes are heading. I dont know if the meeting in Maynooth went ahead, I do know that that "panty" was knocking around that week.

me_right_one · 14-12-2016 10:44AM

Wibbs wrote: »

I would love to know what planet you think you're living on where you can claim a belief that western society is getting worse. I'm way more contrarian than most, but IMH that's beyond cracked a view.

Well............ According to the young Louise O'Neill, we have a rape culture now. We certainly didn't have one 30 years ago when I was growing up!!!

Widdershins · 14-12-2016 10:46AM

me_right_one wrote: »

We also have biological reasons against gayness and even straight anal sex.

Unfortunately you will eat your words soon. Thats where attitudes are heading. I dont know if the meeting in Maynooth went ahead, I do know that that "panty" was knocking around that week.

We have biological reasons for not having incestuous relationships but someone on this thread has already said it's not so bad and why not.

The idea of adults and, non coercive incest doesn't actually bother me. I suspect it's romanticised a bit though. E.g, Cersei and Jamie in Game of Thrones.

I suspect incest is often much more about one sibling brainwashing the other and the brainwashed one feeling dependent on them or scared of them.

Pac1Man · 14-12-2016 10:49AM

me_right_one wrote: »

Well............ According to the young Louise O'Neill, we have a rape culture now. We certainly didn't have one 30 years ago when I was growing up!!!

Louise O'Neill is your evidence?

RonFan · 14-12-2016 10:49AM

Wibbs wrote: »

I hate to break it to you but "shame" and "sexuality" varies hugely by culture(and time). The shame stuff came mostly from Abrhamic faiths mixing with Roman thought.

I would love to know what planet you think you're living on where you can claim a belief that western society is getting worse. I'm way more contrarian than most, but IMH that's beyond cracked a view.

The GUILT stuff came from them. It is perfectly natural to feel shame about your sex organs, it's the reason we wear clothes. And this shame serves as a perfectly sufficient regulator of sexual behavior. People in countries outside of those based on the Abrahamic faiths even today tend to act quite conservatively generally speaking in regards sex. The west made a balls of religion because it based it on overt dualism, seperating the eternal "mind" from the wicked "flesh". This and many other complex factors.

Western society is getting better from the standard view that economic growth as well as "individual rights" = stability, well-being and happiness for people, which is a total delusion. The obvious truth is that culture is rapidly degrading and disintegrating. All the good is being demoted and the bad promoted. Low quality of relationships between man and woman fundamentally, and by extension people in general. There is a highly distorted view of the past people possess which obscures these facts.

Widdershins · 14-12-2016 10:50AM

I think people confuse shame with sanctity and privacy.

I think this is a sign there's something badly wrong with society compared to a half century ago

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex

kunst nugget · 14-12-2016 10:52AM

Widdershins wrote: »

I think people confuse shame with sanctity and privacy.

I think some people also confuse profound insight with utter bollocks…

ivytwine · 14-12-2016 10:52AM

me_right_one wrote: »

We also have biological reasons against gayness and even straight anal sex.

Unfortunately you will eat your words soon. Thats where attitudes are heading. I dont know if the meeting in Maynooth went ahead, I do know that that "panty" was knocking around that week.

If you mean Panti Bliss, please point me to when Rory O'Neill has advocated for either paedophilia or incest. Are you sure this wasn't a LGBT meeting and you've conflated this with incest somehow?

Homosexuality is actually widespread across mammals, and some theorists actually think it rose as a means for extra hands on deck to help with child rearing.

I agree with Seamus, everything is so focused on consent now (and rightly so) that these acts won't be legalised. Stuff like the scandals emerging in the U.K. regarding football will re-energise public disgust at paedophilia at least.

Louise O Neill on rape culture.

Comments