Taking the Red Pill - The Truth about Gender Politics: Sexual Abuse of Adult Men

Blog pieces

BBC Double Standards
Con not Consultation
Pakistani Boys
Reply to Robert Webb
Afghan Boys
Iran - Those Poor Oppressed Women
The Rise Of The Ironic Man-Hater
Do You Know Any Women, Mike?
Who Is It That's Oppressed?
Compulsory feminism from the EU
Who can be more feminist?
Who are the sick fucks?
Karen Woodall responds to Yvette Cooper
Are UK universities only for women now?
Global Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict
Elliot Rodger, the Alta Vista killings and the MHRM
Richard Scudamore and free speech
Killing Boys is Not News
Quiet Riot Girl responds to Kirsty Wark
Porn - Where's The Harm?
More Sins of the Guardian
The Day After Men (fiction)
The Propaganda Inundation and Circumcision
Lord Rennard
Female Serial Killer, Joanna Dennehy
Flesh and Buns
Tweet Trolling and Real Discimination
STEM Calendars and Men's Hour
Forget Rebranding Feminism
Blurred Lines
Let's hear it for Sharking
Le Week-End (film review)
Hack the Home
Sex Fiend or Victim?

Of all the issues which feminists have high on their agenda, sexual assault is the one which they regard as absolutely their own - even more so than domestic violence. But they are wrong. Men may be, and are, raped. They may be raped by either other men or by women (even if the law does not recognise the possibility). Both are discussed here.

Two myths that men are not able to be raped by women include: Men always want sex, so women do not have to force themselves on men. And men must be aroused to have an erection - so it's not rape, is it? But men do not always want sex. That is just the image of men promulgated in our misandric society. And, much like female genital response, male erectile response is involuntary, meaning that a man need not be aroused for his penis to become erect and be placed in a woman's vagina; mechanical stimulation is all that is necessary. In fact men can be scared or intimidated into an erection, especially if the person is older or an authority figure. Arousal and stimulation are not the same thing. Stimulation is a physical response to a stimulus. It does not imply consent.

If a women were to become lubricated during a violent rape, would it be a valid defense for the rapist to claim she was aroused and therefore wanted sex? No it would not. For precisely the same reason, a man's erection is not an indication of consent. If a man is forced or coerced into sex without his consent, this should be regarded as rape. Any other view is sexist since grossly different standards are being applied to men and women. Unfortunately our society is sexist in exactly this respect. The rape of men by women is not recognised as a possibility in English law.

Male victims of sexual abuse by females face social, political, and legal double standards. Many of the myths about male sexual victims are centered on cultural and sexual stereotypes that a proportion of society holds against such victims. Some of the major myths about male sexual victims include the following: boys and men cannot be victims; most sexual abuse of boys is committed by gay males; boys are less traumatized than girls by sexual abuse; and physical arousal in boys means that they were willingly participating in the encounter. Each of these myths can be countered by sociological, psychological and scientific evidence.

Feminists insist that we live in a "rape culture", referring, of course, exclusively to female victims. Whilst rape of women certainly happens, our culture is not one which condones rape, even covertly, since rapists are universally regarded as vile scumbags. Rape cultures do exist, in two places: in certain war zones (where men and women are both victims) and in men's prisons in some countries. In the USA far more men are raped than women, due to the prison rape culture. Australia is similar. I believe the situation may not be as bad in UK prisons, though this is unclear since no one cares enough to collect the data.

In English law, rape is defined as non-consensual penetration with a penis, hence women cannot rape. No element of force whatsoever is required. Rape hinges upon consent. It is no defence against an accusation of rape to claim that the penetrated party gave no sign of lack of consent. The onus is on the man to pro-actively obtain explicit consent. The mere absence of any indication to the contrary is not sufficient to avert the crime of rape. Advice on the interpretation of the law has been given by the Crown Prosecution Service, "the Law imposes an evidential burden on the defendant to adduce sufficient evidence that the complainant consented". This effectively means that every man is a rapist on every sexual encounter since such evidence is never available in practice. Sex is therefore not legally advisable for men - at all, ever, even in marriage - unless extreme precautions are taken such as video evidence of verbal consent or a signed contract. Even these would be legally challengeable.

There is much talk of better sex education in schools. The most important fact that boys should be told is that sex for men is extremely hazardous. Sex can become rape simply because the woman chooses to regard it as such. This is how the law now stands, incredible though that seems.

Women force or coerce men into having sex with them equally often as the reverse. The latter is rape whereas the former is no offense in law. This is simply double standards. It reflects the societal prejudice that women and girls are vulnerable and precious, but that men and boys are not. A man's consent is not required, a woman can force sex upon any man with impunity. And it happens frequently. US data indicates that the prevalence of non-consensual sex imposed on men by women is 1.1% per year (the same as the incidence of rape of women). No comparable UK data are available since the surveys have not asked the relevant questions regarding male victimisation.

US and Canadian data indicate that boys and girls are raped equally often, and that the rape of boys is committed by women about 50% of the time (female rapists are recognised in the USA). Similarly, about half of boys reporting to UK Childline of being sexually abused by a parent are abused by their mothers. But women are rarely prosecuted for sexual assault. In the UK, only 3% of people on the sex offenders register are women, and for every 100 men in prison for sexual offenses there is only one woman in prison for a sexual offense. On the other hand, between 60% and 80% of men convicted of sexual offenses against females have a history of being sexually abused by women in their childhood (US, Canadian and UK data). There is a wild inconsistency here, implying that female sex offenders are going undetected. This is aided by the societal prejudice that women do not do such things ("men bad, women good").

Read my review of the sexual abuse and rape of adult men

Headline conclusions,
  • English law defines rape as penetration using a penis, hence females cannot rape by definition.
  • The offense of rape hinges upon consent, no element of force whatsoever being required. Yet the law only requires the female to be consenting. A woman may with impunity force or coerce any man into sex without his consent.
  • US data indicates that the prevalence of non-consensual sex imposed on men by women is the same as the incidence of rape of women.
  • Boys and girls are raped roughly equally often (US data)
  • Sexual abuse of boys is carried out by women roughly 50% of the time (US, UK and Canadian data)
  • In the USA men are raped more often than women, due to the prison rape culture.
  • Male sex offenders have a history of being sexually abused as children specifically by women in 60% to 80% of cases

Finally, a video by Alison Tieman on why feminists cannot be allowed any longer to control the discourse on rape. She is commenting here on US cases of women prison warders having sex with under-age boys in juvenile detention centres - for money. Feminists often wax lyrical on the importance of power imbalance as an indicator of sexual abuse. Well, there can be no greater power imbalance than a juvenile who is literally the prisoner of the abusive adult.