While I believe violence against women is totally despicable. I believe the media propagetd myth of the wife-beater is out of control. What about husband-beaters? Why aren't they on the news? Why is there no help for them? This always has bugged me so I put these together for fellow men that have and/or will most likey meet and date/marry and abusive women.

Many men do noto recognize common signs of abuse for many reasons like culture, or ego. Some just don't realize women abuse men. The one defining characteristic of most abused men is that they are extremely embarrassed by their predicament. Most men who have reached out for help have been laughed at or scorned. They are often portrayed as weak and cowardly. This is simply not true.

All types of men are subject to the same types of abuse as women, including physical abuse. These abuses range from a slap in the face to a kitchen knife being plunged into a husband's stomach while sleeping to being run down by his wife who was driving the family vehicle. Men also report emotional and sexual abuse, including threats and insults, withholding money, controlling personal activities, attempts to change him, unwanted sexual touching, forced sexual activity and sexual degradation.

Some things that are worth thinking about when you're wondering "Am I being abused?" include:


Did she embarass or humiliate you in front of other people, including your friends or family?
Did she insist that anything you wanted for yourself was selfish and/or wrong?
Did she withhold affection to "punish" you for any violations of her rules?
Did she intimidate you in any way?
Did she threaten you, or threaten to harm herself or anyone else, if/when you left?
Did she force you to ask her for money, or take your money away from you? Did she have control of the family finances, so you didn't even know what or when money was being spent?
Did she prevent you from taking a job you wanted, or going to school? Did she force you, either directly or through manipulation, to quit a job you had?
Did she make jokes about her treatment of you, insist that she never did anything to hurt you, or blame you for her behavior?
Did she treat you as if you were her servant?
Did she ever make you do things you felt were wrong or illegal?
Did she ever belittle your beliefs, or tell you that your faith is wrong?
Did she make you leave social gatherings, or restrict your contact with your friends or family?
Did she make you feel afraid, or like you needed to be "careful" around her?
Did she make you feel guilty or ashamed about yourself, your feelings, your beliefs, or anything else that makes you a unique individual?
Any one of these is a sign of abuse. Only you can decide how many it takes to add up to proof that you were abused.

She seems irritated or angry with you several times a week or more although you hadn't meant to upset her. You are surprised each time. (She says she's not mad when you ask her what she's mad about, or she tells you in some way that it's your fault.)
When you feel hurt or try to discuss your upset feelings with her, you don't feel as if the issue has been fully resolved, so you don't feel happy and relieved, nor do you have a feeling that you've "kissed and made up". (She says, "You're just trying to start an argument!" or in some other way expresses her refusal to discuss the situation.)
You frequently feel perplexed and frustrated by her responses because you can't get her to understand your intentions.
You are upset not so much about concrete issues -- how much time to spend with each other, where to go on vactaion, etc. -- as about the communication in the relationship: what she thinks you said and what you heard her say.
You sometimes wonder, "What's wrong with me? I shouldn't feel so bad."
She rarely, if ever, seems to want to share her thoughts or plans with you.
She seems to take the opposite view from you on almost everything you mention, and her view is not qualified by "I think" or "I believe" or "I feel" -- as if your view were wrong and hers were right.
You sometimes wonder if she perceives you as a separate person.
You can't recall saying to her, "Cut it out!" or, "Stop it!"
She is either angry or has "no idea of what you're talking about" when you try to discuss an issue with her.
If these signs seem familiar to you, it's a good bet you're being verbally abused. And that can be difficult to convince anyone else of, because some identifying traits of verbal abuse include:



Mostly, it's done in secret. Your abuser usually doesn't do it where anyone else can witness it.
It usually starts off with little stuff, then gets worse over time, so you get accustomed to it...and other people get accustomed to seeing you suffer it.
It comes in many disguises.
It consistently discounts your perceptions. No matter how cruel your partner is, she will deny that anything is wrong.
Finally, physical abuse is always preceded by verbal abuse.
Verbal abuse is hurtful. Especially when it's denied.

Verbal abuse attacks your nature and abilities, usually so thoroughly that you begin to believe that there's something inherently wrong with you, or that your abilities are actually failings.

Verbal abuse may be overt (angry outbursts and namecalling) or covert (subtle stuff, like brainwashing).

Verbal abuse may be voiced in an extremely sincere and concerned way (like when she expresses her concern that you just aren't capable of understanding finances well enough to balance your checkbook).

Verbal abuse is manipulative and controlling.

Verbal abuse is insidious -- it destroys your self-esteem, it steals your self-confidence, it brainwashes you to try to change yourself to please your abuser, so she won't hurt you anymore.

Verbal abuse is unpredictable. No matter how intelligent, careful, or perceptive you are, she'll always find a way to hit a blind spot you didn't even know you had.

Verbal abuse is the issue in the relationship. In normal relationships, arguments are over concrete things that can be resolved. In a verbally abusive one, there is no specific conflict - the whole point of any argument is to make you suffer.

Verbal abuse expresses a double message. For example, she'll say something like "I love you", and then spend 4 hours raving about how love is worthless and all that matters is power; or she'll scream "I'm not mad!" in a rage-filled voice; or she'll suggest going out to dinner, and then treat you like a servant.

Verbal abuse usually escalates, increasing in intensity, frequency, and variety. For example, early in the relationship she may make jokes about you, and as time goes on she'll start "punishing" you by withholding affection, namecalling, accusing and blaming, undermining, maybe even escalating into face-slapping, kicking, biting, scratching, or even use of weapons.

S.A.F.E. concentrates on domestic violence against straight men, gay men, and lesbian women, because few services exist for these groups. Personal stories, a comprehensive listing of Web resources and books, info on local shelters and groups that help battered men or offer services for abusive women, suggestions on how you can make a difference in the lives of people affected by abuse. E-mail list and Bulletin Board.


The Gay Men's Domestic Violence Projectis a nonprofit program that provides support services for male victims of same-gender domestic violence. In addition to assisting victims of same-gender domestic violence, they provide outreach and education to law enforcement and communities. The GMDVP now features a toll free crisis line at 1-800-832-1901.


These are just two, however S.A.F.E. has a lot of resources and can help you locate a regional organization and the GMDV Project provides many same-sex abuse support and resources.

While this plan is obviously aimed at women. It is a good tool for men also. Everyone needs a plan and a little help in these situations, even if you think you can handle or deal with it.





SAFETY AT HOME

Develop a safety plan and discuss it with your children. Review the plan as often as possible. Change the locks and install devices to secure your windows. Make sure your children's school, day-care center, or camp know who is authorized to pick up your children. Tell your neighbors and landlord that your abuser no longer lives there and ask them to call the police if they see him or her near your home. Before you resume a potentially abusive relationship, discuss alternatives with someone you trust.

SAFETY IN PUBLIC OR AT WORK

If you have an order of protection, keep it with you at all times. Inform building security and coworkers you trust of your situation. If possible, provide a photograph of your abuser to building security. Vary your routes to and from work and arrange for someone to escort you to your car, bus, or train. Plan what to do in various situations if the abuser confronts you.

SAFETY DURING VOLATILE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INCIDENT

If an argument seems unavoidable, move to a room or area with easy access to an exit - not a bathroom, kitchen, or anywhere near weapons. Identify which door, window, stairwell or elevator offers the quickest way out of the home - and practice your route. Have a bag packed and ready. Keep it in an undisclosed but accessible place where you can retrieve it quickly. Find neighbors you can tell about the violence and ask that they call the police if they hear a disturbance. Devise a code word to use with your children, family, and friends when you need the police. Decide where you will go if you have to leave, even if you do not think it will come to that. Use your instincts and judgement. Consider giving the abuser what he or she wants to defuse a dangerous situation. You have a right to protect yourself when you are in danger. You do not deserve to be battered or threatened.

PERSONALIZED SAFETY PLAN

The following steps represent my plan for increasing my safety and preparing in advance for the possibility for further violence. Although I do not have control over my partner's violence, I do have a choice about how to respond to him/her and how to best get myself and my children to safety.

Step 1: SAFETY DURING A VIOLENT INCIDENT. Women cannot always avoid violent incidents. In order to increase safety, battered women may use a variety of strategies.

I can use some or all of the following strategies:

A. If I decide to leave, I will ___________________. (Practice how to get out safely. What doors, windows, elevators, stairwells or fire escapes would you use?)

B. I can keep my purse and car keys ready and put them ___________ _______________________ (place) in order to leave quickly.

C. I can tell _____________________________________________about the violence and request they call the police if they hear suspicious noises coming from my house.

D. I can teach my children how to use the telephone to contact the police and the fire department.

E. I will use ___________________________________________ as my code for my children or my friends so they can call for help.

F. If I have to leave my home, I will go __________________________ ___________________________________ (Decide this even if you don't think there will be a next time). If I cannot go to the location above, then I can go to __________________________________________________ _________ or __________________________________________________ ______.

G. I can also teach some of these strategies to some/all of my children.

H. When I expect we are going to have an argument, I will try to move to a space that is lowest risk, such as ________________________ ____________________________________. (Try to avoid arguments in the bathroom, garage, kitchen, near weapons or in rooms without access to an outside door).

I. I will use my judgment and intuition. If the situation is very serious, I can give my partner what he/she wants to calm him/her down. I have to protect myself until I/we are out of danger.

Step 2: SAFETY WHEN PREPARING TO LEAVE. Battered women frequently leave the residence they share with the battering partner. Leaving must be done with a careful plan in order to increase safety. Batterers often strike back when they believe that a battered woman is leaving the relationship.

I can use some or all the following safety strategies:

A. I will leave money and an extra set of keys with___________________ so that I can leave quickly.

B. I will keep copies of important papers and documents or an extra set of keys at ___________________________________________.

C. I will open a savings account by ___________________________, to increase my independence.

D. Other things I can do to increase my independence include:

E. The domestic violence program's hot line telephone number is ___________________________ and I can seek shelter by calling this hot line.

F. I can keep change for phone calls on me at all times. I understand that if I use my telephone credit card, the following month the telephone bill will tell my batterer those numbers that I called after I left. To keep my telephone communications confidential, I must either use coins or I might get a friend to permit me to use their telephone credit card for a limited time when I first leave.

G. I will check with ______________________________________________ and ______________________________ to see who would be able to let me stay with them or lend me some money in an emergency.

H. I can leave extra clothes with__________________________________.

I. I will sit down and review my safety plan every ___________________ in order to plan the safest way to leave the residence.

______________________________________________ (domestic violence advocate or friend) has agreed to help me review this plan.

J. I will rehearse my escape plan and, as appropriate, practice it with my children.

Step 3: SAFETY IN MY OWN RESIDENCE. There are many things that a woman can do to increase her safety in her own residence. It may be impossible to do everything at once, but safety measures can be added step by step.

Safety measures I can use include:

A. I can change the locks on my doors and windows as soon as possible.

B. I can replace wooden doors with steel/metal doors.

C. I can install security systems including additional locks, window bars, poles to wedge against doors, an electronic system, etc.

D. I can purchase rope ladders to be used for escape from second floor windows.

E. I can install smoke detectors and purchase fire extinguishers for each floor in my house/apartment.

F. I can install an outside lighting system that lights up when a person is coming close to my house.

G. I will teach my children how to use the telephone to make a collect call to me and to _________________________ (friend/minister/other) in the event that my partner takes the children.

H. I will tell people who take care of my children which people have permission to pick up my children and that my partner is not permitted to do so. The people I will inform about pick-up permission include:

__________________________________________ (school),

________________________________________ (day care staff),

________________________________________ (babysitter),

_______________________________ (Sunday School teacher),

________________________________________ (teacher),

________________________________________ (and),

__________________________________________ (others),

I. I can inform ___________________________________________, and _____________________________ (neighbors), _______________________ (pastor), and,___________________________ (friend) that my partner no longer resides with me and they should call the police if he is observed near my residence.

I can find out my risks with Rate Your Risk Tests.

Step 4: SAFETY WITH AN ORDER OF PROTECTION. Many battered women obey protection orders, but one can never be sure which violent partner will obey and which will violate protection orders. I recognize that I may need to ask the police and the court to enforce my protection order.

The following are some steps that I can take to help the enforcement of my protection order:

A. I will keep my protection order____________________________________ (location) (Always keep it on or near your person. If you change purses, that's the first thing that should go in).

B. I will give my protection order to police departments in the communities where I usually visit family or friends, and in the community where I live.

C. The Clark County Sheriff is the county registry of protection orders that all police departments can call to confirm a protection order. I can check to make sure that my order is in registry. The telephone number for the county registry of protection order is _________________________________.

D. For further safety, if I often visit other counties in Indiana, I might file my protection order with the court in those counties.

E. I can call the local domestic violence program if I have questions or if I have some problem with my protection order.

F. I will inform my employer, my minister, my closest friend, my relatives, and __________________________________________________ _____________and ___________________________________________that I have a protection order in effect. G. If my partner destroys my protection order, I can get another copy from the Clark County Courthouse by going to the Circuit Court Clerk's Office, or by contacting the Domestic Violence Unit of the Clark County Prosecuting Attorney.

H. If my partner violates the protection order, I can call the police and report a violation, contact my attorney, call my advocate, and/or advise the court of the violation.

I. If the police do no help, I can contact my advocate or attorney and will file a complaint with the chief of the police department.

J. I can also file a private criminal compliant with the Prosecuting Attorney in the jurisdiction where the violation occurred. I can request that charges be filed against my battering partner for violation of the Protective Order and all the crimes that he commits in violating the order. I can call the domestic violence advocate for help.

Step 5: SAFETY ON THE JOB AND IN PUBLIC. Each battered woman must decide if and when she will tell others that her partner has battered her and that she may be at continued risk. Friends, family and co-workers can help to protect women. Each woman should consider carefully which people to invite to help secure her safety.

I might do any or all of the following:

A. I can inform my boss, the security supervisor and____________________ at work of my situation.

B. I can ask ________________ to help screen my telephone calls at work.

C. When leaving work, I can ______________________________________.

D. When driving home if problems occur, I can ________________________.

E. If I use public transit, I can ______________________________________.

F. I will go to different grocery stores and shopping malls to conduct my business and shop at hours that are different than those when residing with my battered partner.

G. I can use a different bank and take care of my banking at hours different from those I used when residing with my battered partner.

H. I can also______________________________________________ ____.

Step 6: SAFETY AND DRUG OR ALCOHOL USE. Most people in this culture use alcohol. Many use mood-altering drugs. Much of this use is legal and some is not. The legal outcomes of using illegal drugs can be very hard on a battered woman, may hurt her relationship with her children and put her at a disadvantage in other legal actions with her battering partner. Therefore, women should carefully consider the potential cost of the use of illegal drugs. But beyond this, the use of any alcohol or other drug can reduce a woman's awareness and ability to act quickly to protect herself from her battering partner. Furthermore, the use of alcohol or other drugs by the batterer may give him/her an excuse to use violence. Therefore, in the context of drug or alcohol use, a woman needs to make specific safety plans.

If drug or alcohol use has occurred in my relationship with the battering partner, I can enhance my safety by some or all of the following:

A. If I am going to use, I can do so in a safe place and with people who understand the risk of violence and are committed to my safety.

B. I can also___________________________________________.

C. If my partner is using, I can_____________________________.

D. I might also_________________________________________.

E. To safeguard my children, I might ________________________________

and ______________________________________________.

Step 7: SAFETY AND MY EMOTIONAL HEALTH. The experience of being battered and verbally degraded by partners is usually exhausting and emotionally draining. The process of building a new life for myself takes much courage and incredible energy.

To conserve my emotional energy and resources and to avoid hard emotional times, I can do some of the following:

A. If I feel down and ready to return to a potentially abusive situation, I can _____________________________________________.

B. When I have to communicate with my partner in person or by telephone, I can _____________________________________________.

C. I can try to use "I can . . . " statements with myself and to be assertive with others.

D. I can tell myself -"_____________________________________________ __________________" whenever I feel others are trying to control or abuse me.

E. I can read ____________________________to help me feel stronger.

F. I can call ___________________, ___________________and _________________as other resources to be of support of me.

G. Other things I can do to help me feel stronger are____________ ______________, and_______________________________.

H. I can attend workshops and support groups at the domestic violence program or _________________________________________________, or _________________________to gain support and strengthen my relationships with other people.

Step 8: Items to take when leaving. When women leave partners, it is important to take certain items with them. Beyond this, women sometimes give an extra copy of papers and an extra set of clothing to a friend just in case they have to leave quickly.

Money : Even if I have never worked, I may be entitled to the funds in the checking and savings accounts. If I don't take any money from the accounts, he can legally take all money and/or close the account and I may not get my share until the court rules on it if ever.

Items with asterisks on the following list are the most important to take. If there is time, the other items might be taken, or stored outside the home. These items might be placed in one location, so that if we have to leave in a hurry, I can grab them quickly.

When I leave, I should have:

* Identification for myself
*Children's birth certificate
*My birth certificate
*Social security cards
*School and vaccination records
*Money
*Checkbook, ATM (Automatic Tellers Machine) card, Credit cards
*Keys - house/car/office
*Driver's license and registration
*Medication
Welfare identification, work permits, Green Card, Passport, divorce papers
Medical records - for all family members
Lease/rental agreement, house deed, mortgage payment book
Bank books, Insurance papers
Small saleable objects
Address book, pictures, jewelry
Children's favorite toys and/or blankets
Items of special sentimental value




Work number________________________________________
Supervisor's home number_____________________________
Minister__________________________________________ __
Other_____________________________________________ _


I will keep this document in a safe place and out of the reach of my potential attacker.

Review date:______________________________________

IF YOU NEED HELP IN FILLING OUT THIS PLAN YOU MAY ASK POLICE DETECTIVES, COUNSELORS, SHELTER WORKERS, THE CENTER FOR WOMEN AND FAMILIES, THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE UNIT OF THE COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, OR A CLOSE AND TRUSTED FRIEND.

Thank you Stanley for all this information. :D

It is very important to have a plan in case of emergency. Even more so with kids in the house.

I would like to add that many people may not be aware that they have the right to actually change their Social Security Number to prevent being traced if the risk to themselves or their children necessitates going "underground."

Stanley.
Nice work! We are glad to have this information and the links. The guidelines here suggest that written permission is needed to link to sites that provide similar forum style communities and I am happy to grant that permission here and now.

I am not the end of the line on this point necessarily but I'm very supportive.
Thank-you very much. It's a pleasure to have you contributing.
Ian.

…but please remember this:

The reason that the emphasis is usually on women is because they have been given the dirty end of the stick when it comes to the primitive mating strategy.

The remarkable characteristic of the primitive strategy is this: while the male goal is obvious, the female goal is primarily to survive.

The behaviors associated with the female primitive instinct are exceedingly complex. They have evolved to allow the continued success of a strategy developed when females truly had no choice, being driven by their own cycle of estrus, in a rising context of apparent free will and self determination.

As a result, most of the primitive behaviors in modern humans can only be described as a form of rape. Regardless of how the woman involved thinks or feels about it, that is the only proper way to express it.

A woman's impression of what took place is programmed, a safety mechanism for the male involved. All he needs to do is successfully bring it into play.

There is a reason for the bias in favor of women, and fixing that should be one of our primary goals.

Most of us are nice guys, and wouldn't intentionally put the primitive strategy into play for anything.

But it's still there, and until we all learn to recognize it and can immediately understand why stuff like abuse prevention efforts are necessarily skewed in favor if women, the battle for equality isn't over.

Just a little somethin' to think about...

I turned StanleyW's post into a PDF document.

Is there somewhere I can post this for anyone who wants to print out the Safety at Home form and use it?

Thank you, Stanley! For years I've helplessly watched my brothers be mentally, emotionally, and (I suspect) physically abused. Now I've really got something to bring to the argument.

Thanks again for bringing up this socially distasteful subject, and spreading some information about it.

Hi
I'm a woman but I also feel that the female to male abuse is not talked about enough and I feel men need to be encouraged to stand up for themselves and I think this is a good thread for ADD/ADHD men in particular....keep up the good work boys!While I believe violence against women is totally despicable. I believe the media propagetd myth of the wife-beater is out of control. What about husband-beaters? Why aren't they on the news? Why is there no help for them? This always has bugged me so I put these together for fellow men that have and/or will most likey meet and date/marry and abusive women.

Many men do noto recognize common signs of abuse for many reasons like culture, or ego. Some just don't realize women abuse men. The one defining characteristic of most abused men is that they are extremely embarrassed by their predicament. Most men who have reached out for help have been laughed at or scorned. They are often portrayed as weak and cowardly. This is simply not true.

All types of men are subject to the same types of abuse as women, including physical abuse. These abuses range from a slap in the face to a kitchen knife being plunged into a husband's stomach while sleeping to being run down by his wife who was driving the family vehicle. Men also report emotional and sexual abuse, including threats and insults, withholding money, controlling personal activities, attempts to change him, unwanted sexual touching, forced sexual activity and sexual degradation.

Some things that are worth thinking about when you're wondering "Am I being abused?" include:


Did she embarass or humiliate you in front of other people, including your friends or family?
Did she insist that anything you wanted for yourself was selfish and/or wrong?
Did she withhold affection to "punish" you for any violations of her rules?
Did she intimidate you in any way?
Did she threaten you, or threaten to harm herself or anyone else, if/when you left?
Did she force you to ask her for money, or take your money away from you? Did she have control of the family finances, so you didn't even know what or when money was being spent?
Did she prevent you from taking a job you wanted, or going to school? Did she force you, either directly or through manipulation, to quit a job you had?
Did she make jokes about her treatment of you, insist that she never did anything to hurt you, or blame you for her behavior?
Did she treat you as if you were her servant?
Did she ever make you do things you felt were wrong or illegal?
Did she ever belittle your beliefs, or tell you that your faith is wrong?
Did she make you leave social gatherings, or restrict your contact with your friends or family?
Did she make you feel afraid, or like you needed to be "careful" around her?
Did she make you feel guilty or ashamed about yourself, your feelings, your beliefs, or anything else that makes you a unique individual?
Any one of these is a sign of abuse. Only you can decide how many it takes to add up to proof that you were abused.

yes. men simply tolerate abuse from females, that is why.

Me :D

you are so very right. thinking about it right now my twin sister is an abusier.

did you go through this yourself? if you did how long?

I am so glad to see what I just read. Thank you very much Stanley! I am actually a lesbian women and not a man but many lesbians do not report abuse as well. Also, I am a client advocate for a womens domestic violence shelter and the information you have provided is much of what we teach as I am sure you well know. I have always wanted to start a shelter for men and then another just for homosexual men and women with staff that really can relate. Maybe I will one day but I think it is great that you are doing your part and getting the word out. Once again, Thank You

…but please remember this:

The reason that the emphasis is usually on women is because they have been given the dirty end of the stick when it comes to the primitive mating strategy.

The remarkable characteristic of the primitive strategy is this: while the male goal is obvious, the female goal is primarily to survive.

The behaviors associated with the female primitive instinct are exceedingly complex. They have evolved to allow the continued success of a strategy developed when females truly had no choice, being driven by their own cycle of estrus, in a rising context of apparent free will and self determination.

As a result, most of the primitive behaviors in modern humans can only be described as a form of rape. Regardless of how the woman involved thinks or feels about it, that is the only proper way to express it.

A woman's impression of what took place is programmed, a safety mechanism for the male involved. All he needs to do is successfully bring it into play.

There is a reason for the bias in favor of women, and fixing that should be one of our primary goals.

Most of us are nice guys, and wouldn't intentionally put the primitive strategy into play for anything.

But it's still there, and until we all learn to recognize it and can immediately understand why stuff like abuse prevention efforts are necessarily skewed in favor if women, the battle for equality isn't over.

Just a little somethin' to think about...
I'm shocked at just how wrong, and damaging these statements are. This one for example:
The remarkable characteristic of the primitive strategy is this: while the male goal is obvious, the female goal is primarily to survive.If this were true, any male could stand up in court and claim he had no free will in raping a woman. That his "primitive mating strategy" dictated the rape. I know that is wrong because I must have had thousands of oportunities to rape women in my life, and have never done it.
And why, if women are primarily concerned with survival, do they spend so much money on making themselves presentable, socialising and playing the dating game? Why do they care for the welfare of their children? They need none of that to merely 'survive'.
As a result, most of the primitive behaviors in modern humans can only be described as a form of rape. Regardless of how the woman involved thinks or feels about it, that is the only proper way to express it.Again, the average woman in western society will spend 2 or 3 times as much money and time on her appearance in order to attract people than men do. They willingly go to clubs with the intention of finding a partner, flirt with people, and often take a leading role in initiating sex.
If all sex is rape, all rape is sex and is pointless debating, let alone prosecuting.

I'm shocked at just how wrong, and damaging these statements are…
Shocking it is, but wrong it isn’t. The subject is extremely complex, and the post wasn’t intended to present more than a reference to it.

We’ve posted much more detailed discussions in appropriate threads, although they may no longer be in the database. If you’re interested, we could summarize some of it for you in a pm.

These statements are a direct result of our work on gender differences in human communication. In the last few years the same pair of mating strategies have been observed in higher primates, including direct evidence of overt physiological effects. Work at the University of Manchester also documents the existence of the two strategies in human subjects.


If this were true, any male could stand up in court and claim he had no free will in raping a woman. That his "primitive mating strategy" dictated the rape...
It’s not clear to us that follows from what we said. Why do you assume we abandon the idea of free will?

One of the complicating factors is the existence of mechanisms in the human mind by which free will and self-determinism are reconciled with the requirements of predetermined instinctive behavior.


…why, if women are primarily concerned with survival, do they spend so much money on making themselves presentable, socialising and playing the dating game? Why do they care for the welfare of their children? They need none of that to merely 'survive'…
You misunderstand what we mean by ‘survival’, I guess. We mean it in the classical sense. The personal experience doesn’t necessarily directly reflect the underlying goals of the deeper mechanisms at work driving the behavior.

The two strategies are largely mutually exclusive; they even have independent metrics for pleasure. But regardless of which one a person is pursuing, it ‘feels’ perfectly natural in many ways at that moment.

It’s the memories of the experience that bring about the appearance of conflict. Unfortunately, the appearance is accurate.


…the average woman in western society will spend 2 or 3 times as much money and time on her appearance in order to attract people than men do. They willingly go to clubs with the intention of finding a partner, flirt with people, and often take a leading role in initiating sex…
Nah. You’re just a little torqued, dude. There are no such statistics.

It’s OK. We all do this from time to time.


If all sex is rape, all rape is sex and is pointless debating, let alone prosecuting.
Well, we didn’t mean to imply THAT… (grins)

The fact is some sex is based in the primitive strategy, which is inherently rapacious. Whether it constitutes rape in a legal sense is a whole other question.

You can’t even say the behavior is unintentional in the conventional sense, because much of the mechanism involved in making the choice of strategy sits below the level of the mind at which that kind of conscious intent arises.

What we can say absolutely is that all sex based in the primitive strategy is inherently rapacious, and all the associated behavior also has that element. How any particular individual tempers that behavior has no effect on its underlying nature.

* * * * *

Our original statements were intended to point out that there is an inherent difference between the hard-wired male and female behavior patterns associated with the primitive strategy.

What’s fair in dealing with them is going to be different as well, and it’s incorrect to look for parity. For this stuff there is no equality by definition, and women still get the short end of the stick.

--Tom and Kay

I assume you reject the idea of free-will by your use of the adjective 'apparent' before referring to free-will, as if free-will is nothing more than a concept. Combined with your talk on predetermined instinctive behaviour, it could be argued that, if correct, people are mindless zombies unable to restrain themselves and subsequently couldn't be held liable for their actions; therefore rape would be ok, and the Nazis were only following orders.

I understood what you meant by 'survival' as meaning a broader 'survival of the species'. My point is that women require intercourse with men in order to 'survive', and to obtain their objective of motherhood (which I reject is a universal, predetermined behaviour, btw) they often openly invite sexual intercourse with men, and are certainly not always raped. Humans are social beings and, where sexuality dictates, I'm sure women would prefer a sexual relationship with a man when confronted with the possibility of conceiving through the services of a sperm bank.
<O:p
I didn't refer to any statistics, you called them that. It's funny that you didn't refute my comments though.
<O:p
Lastly, I'm not an ape. What species of higher primate did you study, and can the females of that species experience orgasm? Very few can, and it would make a huge difference between rape in primates and sex in humans. If all you're referring to is a college thesis you're doing, try finding a less insulting term to attach to your theory. One that doesn't suggest that I, and all heterosexual men, regularly abuse sexual partners.

* * * * *

If there is no equality, and womens' 'short end of the stick' in strategical behaviour patterns is 'hard wired', then why 'battle for equality'? Your beliefs and your equality-war-cry are at conflict.

I assume you reject the idea of free-will by your use of the adjective 'apparent' before referring to free-will, as if free-will is nothing more than a concept. Combined with your talk on predetermined instinctive behaviour, it could be argued that, if correct, people are mindless zombies unable to restrain themselves and subsequently couldn't be held liable for their actions; therefore rape would be ok, and the Nazis were only following orders.
Yikes!

We said ‘apparent’ because free will and self-determinism don’t operate in the way we perceive them. ‘Free will’ is indeed a concept, but it deserves better than to have ‘nothing more than a’ put in front of it. Conceptual entities of the same class include your sense of conscious awareness and the reality in which you experience it.

We know free will exists. We also know how it works. We never implied people are mindless zombies; that is entirely your own contribution.


I understood what you meant by 'survival' as meaning a broader 'survival of the species'…
Nope, that’s not exactly it either. We meant individual survival as defined on a low level: survival of the organism. It’s related to the species wide goal, but directly implicated in behavior. The species goal is an illusory reflection of this, in a sense, but it arises as a consequence of more than just the individual instinct to survive.


…My point is that women require intercourse with men in order to 'survive', and to obtain their objective of motherhood (which I reject is a universal, predetermined behaviour, btw) they often openly invite sexual intercourse with men, and are certainly not always raped…
I’m not sure what you reject as ‘universal predetermined behavior’ here. Perhaps you could elaborate?

The abstract goals you’re describing are somewhat of an illusion, similar to the perception that the species itself displays goal-oriented behavior.

On the level that our mating strategies define (not determine) behavior, it’s incorrect to characterize any drive as ‘requiring intercourse’. We don’t seek partners and engage in intercourse with that as the specific, direct goal except in extremely unusual circumstances outside the scope of the behaviors we’re discussing.

On the levels that the two human mating strategies are defined, the immediate goal of sexual activity is usually assumed to be pleasure. The actual drivers are far more complicated, but except for the primitive female strategy you can generally think of them as representing an impulse to seek gratification in one form or another.

The goal for both males and females in the modern strategy is primarily pleasure, with successful activity defined by a complex combination of contributors dominated by nurturing activity reinforced by prolonged physical pleasure.

Note that having a goal and reaching it is not the same thing, but activity on this level isn’t like running for political office (for example). The basic drive doesn’t know how to get discouraged and quit.

The primary goal in the male primitive strategy is a temporary increase of self-esteem and perceived status, reinforced by a relatively brief form of physical pleasure that carries its own, different metric of satisfaction.

In a way it‘s fundamentally incorrect to describe the primary goals of the female version of the primitive strategy, which derives from behavior in which free will plays no part, having not yet been invented.

But there is a well-defined set of goals related to navigating the experience and integrating it with the rest of the experiential gestalt.

Although the impulse to seek physical pleasure is not a part of these goals, creating the appearance that physical pleasure is desired is a minor part of the greater picture. Actual physical pleasure is not usually a factor.


Humans are social beings and, where sexuality dictates, I'm sure women would prefer a sexual relationship with a man when confronted with the possibility of conceiving through the services of a sperm bank.
It’s not really correct to think in terms of ‘sexuality dictating’ in this way. Except for extremely unusual circumstances, we seek mates or seek to form relationships for entirely different direct goals, much more defined by various feelings of gratification than by relatively esoteric goals like conceiving a child.

It might be helpful to understand how the two strategies define the behavior of seeking a mate. In the modern strategy, both the male and the female are seeking to form a long-term pair bond with a partner that enjoys the highest status possible. In this context, status is not defined in the common way, but rather as a complex evaluation of factors related directly or by co-selection to reproductive success.

For practical reasons, the appropriate partner is usually one that has approximately the same status. In the most stable long-term pairs both partners feel they have gotten a little better than they deserve. We humans have a well-documented slight negative bias in assessing our own status that helps ensure stability.

The male primitive strategy is also status driven, but in humans it is currently based on the temporary increase in perceived status that arises when associating with persons of higher status. Such an increase is accompanied by a temporary increase in self-esteem, both of which are appropriate to the short-term nature of the interaction.

The modern strategy is superior in many ways for the purpose of propagating the species through succeeding generations, so one might wonder why the primitive strategies have stayed around, particularly given the necessity of a complex mechanism to keep the two from conflicting with each other.

One reason is the blind nature of selection; once something selects, it tends to stay around unless it’s displaced by direct competition. But the most significant reason is that it can serve to correct a weakness in the way that the modern strategy works.

A purely status driven mechanism will ultimately concentrate the gene pool near the top of the status hierarchy. The intermittent acts of the primitive strategy help maximize diversity in the gene pool, and (presumably) ensure it’s continuing robustness.

It’s logically reasonable to assume that there could be a female version of the male high-status seeking short-term behaviors, but we’ve seen no evidence of it. It’s not clear that it’s necessary, given the goal of ensuring genetic diversity.

Males are uniquely effective, bearing both X and Y chromosomes, and the behavior described has been in place for at least several hundred thousand years, and millions of years in other species. A new female strategy similar to the male primitive strategy wouldn’t provide any differential that could select.


I didn't refer to any statistics, you called them that. It's funny that you didn't refute my comments though.


…the average woman in western society will spend 2 or 3 times as much money and time on her appearance in order to attract people than men do. They willingly go to clubs with the intention of finding a partner, flirt with people, and often take a leading role in initiating sex…
These are statistically derived data.

To characterize something as ‘average’ or “2 or 3 times” more than a comparable thing, you have to sample the relevant populations and gather data quantifying the attribute you want to compare, and then crunch the numbers to determine what the average is, or how much larger one sample is than another.

I don’t believe you have such data, but in any case, your statement implies it exists. And beyond all else, it is statistics.


Lastly, I'm not an ape. What species of higher primate did you study, and can the females of that species experience orgasm? Very few can, and it would make a huge difference between rape in primates and sex in humans.
Actually, the primate we study is Homo Sapiens, for the last thirty-five years or so. The answer to your question is sometimes. (grin…)

I don’t think you understand the definition of rape.

In Orangutans, for example, rape is distinguished by the use of deception, isolation of the victim and the use of force to commit an act that violates the ordinary rules governing social interaction, including reproductive behavior. Adult males that are fully developed sexually systematically repress the overt signs of physical maturity to pass for adolescents, thus gaining access to the females.

Rape in other species is similar, but differences of course exist. The behavior seldom has anything to with sexual gratification, though. It’s usually something closer to getting away with doing something you shouldn’t, for reasons that aren’t always clear.

In any case, the result is uniquely disturbing to the female, and in all species for which examples exist there seems to be correspondingly unique coping mechanisms.


If all you're referring to is a college thesis you're doing, try finding a less insulting term to attach to your theory. One that doesn't suggest that I, and all heterosexual men, regularly abuse sexual partners.
Nope, it’s not a college thesis. We’ve spent thirty-five years or so studying gender differences in human communication. Part of the puzzle was unraveling how the two different mating strategies affected communication, and in particular, how the male and female versions of the primitive strategy were different.

I assume the term you find insulting is ‘primitive strategy’. I’m not sure why it’s a problem for you personally, but we apologize for any misunderstanding it may have caused.

It’s a purely scientific term that has no personal intent, and we don’t see any reason not to go on using it. It’s both accurate and appropriate.


If there is no equality, and womens' 'short end of the stick' in strategical behaviour patterns is 'hard wired', then why 'battle for equality'? Your beliefs and your equality-war-cry are at conflict.
I don’t see how you could conclude that, really. We didn’t say there was no equality; we said the male and female versions of the primitive strategy were inherently different.

To look at how they’re different in more detail would take some background, but the perception of inequality we presume you’re referring to is in fact related to the primitive strategy on a deep level.

It’s not simple, though, or we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Everything would have been over by the time the Eighties rolled around.

I should point out that you certainly don’t have to choose to use it; all males have that choice. And the modern strategy is far more satisfying in the long run, anyway.

--T&K

I used 'where sexuality dictates' simply to excuse lesbians from my comment that 'women would prefer a sexual relationship with a man'. Obviously lesbians wouldn't. I don't care about any nature vs. nurture debate on what dictates sexuality, it isn't important.

I'm also informed that I was wrong in saying I'm not an ape, but you knew what I meant.

The universal predetermined behaviour I reject is parenthood as a goal — primitive or otherwise.

I'm not offended by the term 'primitive strategy'; I'm offended by your use of it to justify ludicrous comments such as:

As a result, most of the primitive behaviors in modern humans can only be described as a form of rape. Regardless of how the woman involved thinks or feels about it, that is the only proper way to express it.

A woman's impression of what took place is programmed, a safety mechanism for the male involved. All he needs to do is successfully bring it into play.
It is the 'rape' that I'm offended by. Rape is not 'the only proper way to express it.' Human behaviour can not 'only be described as a form of rape.' When my girlfriend wakes me up at 3 am asking for sex, I don't need a 'safety mechanism', I don't need to 'bring [anything] into play', and nor have I brought anything into play to get into that circumstance (theories on demonic males are interesting, but worthless as they ignore social factors entirely. Not all women are attracted to a**holes!)
Indeed it is I that think you do not understand the definition of rape (don't tell me your definition, it's relevant only to you). It is a forced act of sexual intercourse or the spoiling/destruction of a geographical location (it's also a cabbage, but that's not really worth noting). Sex without the presence of violence can never be rape. Your opinions on what constitutes rape are worthless to all but you, as the word is highly defined and its meaning is about as concrete as meaning can be. So I'll suggest again, that you find a word for your theory that doesn't suggest that all men are violent abusers. You may not mean to suggest it, but suggest it you do.

Yup, that term does offend most people. It’s a shame we have to have it around, don’t you think?

This is complex stuff, and nobody can understand it by looking at what we instinctively feel and expressing that. Using your own relationship as an example is an invitation for disaster, too; we don’t recommend it. Keep your thinking on a more theoretical basis.

Regardless of how unpleasant it might seem to you, our original comments are accurate. All aspects of the primitive strategy in both males and females are based in behavior that is rape, by definition.

Our working definition of rape in Homo sapiens is “forced self-violation.” This implies a forced, unwanted change of the self, carried out by the victim: her self-definition is changed arbitrarily and against her wishes, and she is forced to do the dirty work herself.

When that’s accomplished, what’s left is a self-definition that is compliant to the wishes of the male, reflecting the male’s idea of the kind of person the female should be. This typically occurs well before any actual physical overtures. It’s accomplished by triggering instinctive behaviors associated with the female primitive strategy.

In effect, women have buttons built in that allow men to control them in specific ways, as long as they’re willing to force the situation in a particular way that isn’t overtly sexual.

THIS DOESN’T WORK AUTOMATICALLY, OR NECESSARILY AT ALL. Despite all the desperate books out there, no woman has automatic buttons to push that guarantee any guy can get lucky.

So please no flames to the effect we’re implying women have no control in this; we’re not. That’s no truer than it is to say all men are rapists. We have it built in, but how it’s evidenced depends on the complicated mechanisms by which we make choices about our self-definition.

What isn’t readily available is information about that process, or what the choices represent. Most people don’t like the word ‘rape’, let alone the subject. Few of us make informed decisions, and some of us get it wrong to a greater or lesser degree.

We’re not saying that anyone has to act out those behaviors, only that their existence in all of us, in one form or another, inexorably colors our perception of associated events.

It is implicitly unfair to the female, and that is explicitly inconsequential to the male. He doesn’t care because it literally doesn’t matter what she wants, and that perception is reflected in every aspect of our culture even if we might not personally subscribe to it.

You might not feel that way, but it’s in there, nonetheless. We have to actively prevent it from creeping into our attitudes when we’re not looking, and by we, I mean everybody, males and females alike.

--Tom

(I) think you do not understand the definition of rape (don't tell me your definition, it's relevant only to you). It is a forced act of sexual intercourse or the spoiling/destruction of a geographical location (it's also a cabbage, but that's not really worth noting). Sex without the presence of violence can never be rape.
That’s one dictionary definition, all right, although not a very detailed one. There are other definitions, of different types; your dictionary has no standing in court, for example, and the medical definition is entirely lacking of any mention of vegetables. (grin…)

It’s the definitions used by sociologists and anthropologists that are relevant to the discussion, and ours is only one example of many essentially similar ones. It’s entirely valid, not a matter of opinion at all in the sense you mean it.

It is fair game for formal logical debate, though, and feel free to offer your criticism of either the form or the substance. We’re reasonably comfortable with defending this particular thesis in a formal context; it isn’t really very controversial.

We notice that you’ve equated ‘force’ with ‘violence’, and that is an error. The term ‘force’ is used explicitly because it includes many kinds of behavior, including but not restricted to physical violence.

We don’t study rape that is perpetrated by physical force; it’s by far the least common example, and not of much interest in terms of high-level behavior.

Incidentally, haggling over what constitutes ‘force’ is one of the most common defense tactics in sexual assault cases. This is because the actual underlying mechanisms are so poorly understood. We expect that this will slowly disappear as more research starts to work its way into the mainstream consciousness.


Your opinions on what constitutes rape are worthless to all but you, as the word is highly defined and its meaning is about as concrete as meaning can be…
If that were so, we wouldn’t have anything to talk about, and court cases would be over before they got started.

These concepts certainly aren’t worthless to rape victims. The last we looked the statistics are that one in three women will have reported being sexually assaulted by the age of fifty. The expected ratio of reported to unreported cases of this sort would place the actual number far higher than that.

Your idea of ‘all’ doesn’t exactly fit the picture of what’s actually happening to women out there.


So I'll suggest again, that you find a word for your theory that doesn't suggest that all men are violent abusers. You may not mean to suggest it, but suggest it you do.
I can’t imagine how you get that, other than from some personal perception of something not actually expressed in the words we’ve written.

We don’t suggest all men are violent, or abusers. We state that all men have instinctive behaviors built in that are inherently rapacious. That’s pretty well established scientifically; all we bring to the table is a detailed understanding of the complex mechanisms by which instinctive behavior is instantiated.

We didn’t mean to imply you had to follow that instinct, though, and went out of our way to state that explicitly.

It’s your choice. It’s reasonable to assume from your shocked reaction that you try to make it wisely. Not everybody does, and getting information out there about why and how it happens will change that.

I think that it's a mistake to lay down definitions, and expect these to be absolutes.

For the record, I cannot think about the subject of this thread (the second time that this has happened to me recently, whilst never before), I find it too distressing, and so I'm shifting into an analogy, which will illustrate my point, whilst staying firmly away from the actual place that we are, here.

So, there's the physical and the mental pain,
the physical may recover,
but the mental - what is that?
a dream shattered - a reality without the dream of convergent realities,
everything is broken now,
A little piece of you,
A little piece of me,
will die,
and I feel the loss of the forest,
the pain,
but the loss of a single tree,
is the same pain,
yes lesser,
but is the same pain.

No definitions.

As I said, maybe I'm broken, disordered, in need of medication - but I can't think about the actual (the second time that this has happened to me recently, whilst never before) subject of this thread.
I apologise if any here believe that my analogy is too light, for this subject.
I cannot make the contribution that I need to make here, without me begging your permission for this one favour.

I need to ask, to help me purge the feelings that I am having now, and to return me into my subtly constrained reality - Is your name derived from the Eniac - backwards, a statement, as your posts seem to head, that Turing was wrong, and that all of those bits and pieces that make us human, cannot be captured?

---
SC.
---

I apologise if any here believe that my analogy is too light, for this subject…
There isn’t any weight heavy enough;
how heavy is the heart of a black hole?

If it can be, light
is right…


We don’t know of any way
to say this, but this
if you look into the pain, there’s nothing
to see,
there’s nothing like it,
it is nothing, and that really is
the pain;

not seeing it is seeing it, and by definition, being
in the right place…

TK

Thank you for sharing SB. It was not too light. No definitions.

That’s one dictionary definition, all right, although not a very detailed one. There are other definitions, of different types; your dictionary has no standing in court, for example, and the medical definition is entirely lacking of any mention of vegetables. (grin…)
I take it you are American? Because the two examples I gave (three including the cabbage) are the only two defined by the Oxford English Dictionary, which is the official record of the english language, recognised by any court in any country which has English as its official language — which the USA does not. Working definitions, other definitions of different types and personal definitions are meaningless. If you're using the term in a submission to a university press which has its own dictionary (which I doubt would use 'rape' in such a general, blanket manner), then fine. But when communicating with people who speak English, and not 'NYU department of culture', replace the word with something more descriptive and less insulting.

I need to ask, to help me purge the feelings that I am having now, and to return me into my subtly constrained reality - Is your name derived from the Eniac - backwards, a statement, as your posts seem to head, that Turing was wrong, and that all of those bits and pieces that make us human, cannot be captured?
No, my name isn't a play on the eniac. As for those bits and pieces that make us human, they're there alright, but only in a material way and are subject to the effects of evolution like the rest of us. You can believe in 'hard wired' behaviour, but acknowledge that the wiring changes over time in reaction to the material and social worlds which we inhabit — anything more than that is spirituality. Also, you can't ignore the changes in human behaviour alongside changes in social structure — the feminists burning their bras back in the day sparked a sexual revolution that means women aren't exactly likely to make excuses for the way others are treating them today. The last decade has seen the emergence of 'the ladette' who are open (sometimes brazen) about their sexuality.

To go back to the eniac, if Turing was successful and was able to create a computer that could fool the majority of people who communicated with it that it was human, the social and behavioural changes that we have gone through, in the time that would have passed, would make that computer incredibly easy to spot today.

I take it you are American? Because the two examples I gave (three including the cabbage) are the only two defined by the Oxford English Dictionary, which is the official record of the english language, recognised by any court in any country which has English as its official language — which the USA does not. Working definitions, other definitions of different types and personal definitions are meaningless. If you're using the term in a submission to a university press which has its own dictionary (which I doubt would use 'rape' in such a general, blanket manner), then fine. But when communicating with people who speak English, and not 'NYU department of culture', replace the word with something more descriptive and less insulting.
Sorry, but this isn’t the case at all. No court we know of recognizes any dictionary, even yours Down Under; legal definitions are entirely different, as are the definitions used in the formal disciplines that address these issues.

There are many different types of dictionaries, and the Oxford (one of many language dictionaries, as I said) is only one type. That particular type isn’t directly relevant to the discussion.

I’d love to own a copy of the Oxford, but can’t afford it. I don’t believe it only has the limited definition you’re indicating, though. In my experience, it’s seldom that terse, and rape is (obviously) a subject that attracts broad interest.

We’re using the term in the sense meant in the mainstream of research into the subject. Our work is primarily focused on gender differences in communication, which the subject clearly influences directly.

Try finding a copy of Ann Cahill’s Rethinking Rape for a slightly dated review of current thinking about this. I believe your personal ideas about these issues are just a little out of touch with the scientific mainstream, and a little background would help you understand what we’ve been going on about here.

Definitions are by definition not meaningless. (grins…)

Which one applies is really only a question of context. This one isn’t based in language, but rather sociology and cultural anthropology, with little medicine and cognitive neuroscience added in for good measure.

…the feminists burning their bras back in the day sparked a sexual revolution that means women aren't exactly likely to make excuses for the way others are treating them today…
Actually, the feminist movement fragmented and lost focus because of difficulty understanding exactly the details we’ve been describing. Few who were involved feel that the movement achieved its objectives along these lines, and it only enjoyed limited success in other areas.

Pay disparity is still almost as much a problem as it was in the early Seventies, for example.


…the last decade has seen the emergence of 'the ladette' who are open (sometimes brazen) about their sexuality.
Currently there are a lot of roles like this being pandered out there through various means, and it isn’t unusual that some females adopt them. Almost all are tailored to some of the underlying triggers associated with the female version of the primitive strategy. As such, they don’t hold as much significance for the female as they do for the males that (usually) define them.

In terms of the raw sociology of the situation, there are two classes of male predatory behavior. One group known as ‘primary predators’ have a complex profile, and are primarily risk-takers with obsessive tendencies. They usually exhibit a relatively long-term focus on perfecting and practicing their ’technique’.

A larger group of males known as ‘secondary predators’ learn to look for females that have had recent contact with a primary predator and are in the process of assimilating the experience. The advantage to the secondary predator is that there isn’t nearly the same level of risk involved, and the self-model of the female is in an extremely plastic state. These roles offer an obvious (although incorrect) definition for her self-model that conveniently explains her recent experiences.

The disadvantage is that the direct benefits (a temporary boost of status and self-esteem) aren’t as apparent, and if he tries to convert the interaction into a long-term relationship (fairly common), the effort often fails. There are also common long term problems that are directly related to getting the two different metrics for sexual satisfaction mixed up, but that often isn’t addressed until many years later, if at all.

These roles play prominently in the plot of much of the porn currently being produced, but they don’t support long-term pair bonding and the modern strategy very well.


…if Turing was successful and was able to create a computer that could fool the majority of people who communicated with it that it was human, the social and behavioural changes that we have gone through, in the time that would have passed, would make that computer incredibly easy to spot today.
…as a human that matured and lived at that time, but not necessarily as a machine. A machine that passed the test in the Fifties should be able to pass it today, too. All that you would expect to differ is the impressions of the interviewers, who would all recognize and expect an old timer to sound like an old timer.

The Turing test isn’t really that specific, though, or maybe not that general; it depends on how you look at it. The best way is probably the way Turing saw it, as a logical proposition in the theoretical study of conscious awareness. The guy was primarily a logician…

…who chained his coffee cup to the radiator by his office chair. Any guesses as to why?

(Most of the speculation is that he was paranoid, which feeds nicely into the speculation about his death. But that’s not it at all; any ADDer should be able to figure it out.)

Sorry, but this isn’t the case at all. No court we know of recognizes any dictionary, even yours Down Under; legal definitions are entirely different, as are the definitions used in the formal disciplines that address these issues.
While it isn't written in law that the OED is the officail record of the language, a country which has English as its official language will have, written in law, a decree that all matters of the state are to be recorded in English. If what you are saying is true, that no one record of the English language is official and recognised as such, then those matters which are recorded — even laws themselves — are open to personal interpretation. The very courts which you claim don't recognise any dictionary would have nothing to refer to in order to settle disputes or even interpret the law. They need one source to refer to, they don't go to scientists, sociologists or anyone else you mentioned. They go to the Oxford English Dictionary, every time. If a word isn't listed in the OED, then it isn't an English word and only then will the courts refer to another dictionary.

I don’t believe it only has the limited definition you’re indicating, though.http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/rape_1?view=uk
That's the concise online version which doesn't include any past uses, the full volume would include any salient historical use, but that wouldn't be relevant either.

And here is the cabbage: http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/rape_2?view=uk

Actually, the feminist movement fragmented and lost focus because of difficulty understanding exactly the details we’ve been describing. Few who were involved feel that the movement achieved its objectives along these lines, and it only enjoyed limited success in other areas.

Pay disparity is still almost as much a problem as it was in the early Seventies, for example.
What is the relevance of that comment? Are you saying that because they didn't achieve their objective that they failed to make any impact on society? For someone who writes so eloquently, you sure don't read very well. I said an event occurred (the formation of the feminist movement), society changed (more education & employment for women, lower marriage rates, higher divorce rates), and behaviour has changed as a result of that. The fact that the movement collapsed means nothing to this debate. Pay disparity there may be, but they're not chained to the kitchen sink, resigned to raise children and clean the home. At least now they can get a job.

Currently there are a lot of roles like this being pandered out there through various means, and it isn’t unusual that some females adopt them.
My point exactly. Currently there are roles like this; there haven't always been, and not because of any 'primal strategy' but because of changes in the social structure.

All that you would expect to differ is the impressions of the interviewers, who would all recognize and expect an old timer to sound like an old timer.
Not at all. Society itself will differ. And if you were to expect an old timer, you certainly wouldn't get one, computer programs don't age. What you would get is a young person talking as if he lived 50 years ago. Also the 'old timer' would be talking about events 50 years ago — anxieties about the cold war and, seeing as Turing is the one I hypothesised as its creator, maybe it would advocate the decriminalisation of homosexuality. You would spot it easily, as it would still be living in the 50's. Times have changed, situations have changed, society has changed, and behaviour has changed — the computer hasn't changed.

For you to stereotype so boldly about genders and behaviours is beyond belief. You be 'a rapist' if you want, but I'm in control of my behaviour, within social constraints of course, and I certainly don't rape anyone. The other thing I can't believe is that I'm debating with a scientist studying sociology, who refers to philosophers' books when debating on scientific issues. You're confused. Scientists studying advanced communication? It's plain stupid.

I’m not certain what your goals are, but if your intent is to incite, it won’t happen. We work with this stuff, and explaining what we know about it isn’t a matter of engaging in debate.

It’s more like explanation, and if you understand, fine; if you don’t, well, we’re willing to go further to a point, but it’s not really our job. The facts we’re trying to explain aren’t affected in any way by your grasp of them.

Neither is our understanding of them; if you want to contribute, that would be fine, but everyone else involved in working with these concepts is already on pretty much the same wavelength, and you at least need to come to terms with that before you can argue for a change.

If you want to play the game we’re involved in, you have to get on board the same boat as everyone else, where the game is played. Once you do that you’re welcome to suggest we should steer in a different direction. We can always use new ideas, but they have to actually address the mechanisms we know are at work in H. sapiens.

Unfortunately, denial or rejection of the fact these mechanisms exist are a part of the picture of the mechanism. We are programmed to resist addressing these issues, and that is one of the problems that researchers face every day, the root of the difficulty that the liberation movement experienced.

* * * * *

The subject of the thread isn’t rape; it’s advice to males to help them spot abusive situations. We merely pointed out that the potential for abuse will always be far greater for women, at least in our lifetimes, precisely because of the fact that the female version of the primitive strategy implicitly deals with the expectation of behavior that, in our modern social context, is abuse or worse.

There are no comparable built in behaviors in males; accordingly, the potential for abuse is much less. Our warning was basically not to expect that advice for males should mirror advice for females.

Men get such a chip on their shoulders about that, but there’s nothing anyone can do about it. It’s just the way it is, and it’s no more a matter of opinion or subject to debate than, say, the prospect of male pattern baldness, or menopause.

You might not like it, but your own response is the only thing you can control about it. The rest is just fact.


While it isn't written in law that the OED is the official record of the language, a country which has English as its official language will have, written in law, a decree that all matters of the state are to be recorded in English. If what you are saying is true, that no one record of the English language is official and recognised as such, then those matters which are recorded — even laws themselves — are open to personal interpretation. The very courts which you claim don't recognise any dictionary would have nothing to refer to in order to settle disputes or even interpret the law. They need one source to refer to, they don't go to scientists, sociologists or anyone else you mentioned. They go to the Oxford English Dictionary, every time. If a word isn't listed in the OED, then it isn't an English word and only then will the courts refer to another dictionary...
Look, this isn’t about language on that level, although we’ve been fascinated with the way you’ve addressed it as such. Problems discussing this subject are very much due to language on a completely different level.

Your ideas about official languages and the legal system just aren’t the way it works. There’s nothing any of us can do about that, either. That’s just the way it is, even Down Under.

We’ve described this adequately already. Please re-read what we posted, and feel free to ask questions if there’s something not clear about it.


What is the relevance of that comment?
Pretty much the relevance placed on it by us and others involved. Your opinions about this are a little out of step with that, I’m afraid.


Are you saying that because they didn't achieve their objective that they failed to make any impact on society? For someone who writes so eloquently, you sure don't read very well. I said an event occurred (the formation of the feminist movement), society changed (more education & employment for women, lower marriage rates, higher divorce rates), and behaviour has changed as a result of that. The fact that the movement collapsed means nothing to this debate. Pay disparity there may be, but they're not chained to the kitchen sink, resigned to raise children and clean the home. At least now they can get a job.
Nope, that’s not what we’re saying. Your estimation of the impact of the women’s movement is inaccurate. There’s lots of information out there about it, and most of the stats say pretty much what we suggested: things aren’t much better than when we started, except in certain specific areas.

Discrimination based on gender continues to be a vexing problem.


Currently there are roles like this; there haven't always been, and not because of any 'primal strategy' but because of changes in the social structure.
I think you missed the point. These roles aren’t desirable or supportable. Yes, things are changing, but it’s too early to know exactly how the artifact of these increasingly bizarre and inappropriate roles will be interpreted when it’s all over.

We have our own ideas, but they’re conjecture at this point. The fact that the roles we described are based in the primitive strategy isn’t subject to much debate, though, nor is that fact that they are largely contrary to the long-term goals of females. Dealing with that contradiction is a part of the picture of the behavior that provides opportunity for the secondary predator.

If you would like to argue the point, you’ll have to propose a different derivation, in detail, and be prepared to discuss the details of the currently accepted one.

I should have been more specific about the relative frequency of this sort of thing (females assuming arbitrarily defined roles of the sort you describe). It’s not nearly as common as the normal version, females defining their own role to help them account for their own view of recent behavior related to the primitive strategy.

The perception that overt primary predatory behaviors are common is incorrect. But they are actively being hyped as acceptable, as are the female roles that help support the thin social logic justifying predation. So the perception itself is increasingly common, and information is the only thing we know that can combat that trend.

There aren’t actually many successful primary predators out there, and males acting as secondary predators are most often seeking to convert the resulting relationships into long-term pair bonds.

The stats for western countries (i.e., English speaking) are still this: the most common place to meet a mate is through membership in a social organization (like a church or civic league), at school, or at work. Few of these relationships develop immediately; most begin after several months or years of casual acquaintance.

The most significant determinant of long-term success of a relationship is the reason that the contact first occurred. If the purpose of being at the place two people meet is anything other than meeting a potential mate, the average length and perceived quality of the resulting relationship are far higher than for relationships originating with social contact in a context intended for that purpose.


Not at all. Society itself will differ. And if you were to expect an old timer, you certainly wouldn't get one, computer programs don't age…
What we stated is just the definition of how the Turing test works. You won’t see the programming, by definition, and it’s widely understood that any imitative program would be easily detected.

That’s what makes Turing’s idea relevant to cognitive science, which is, as we said, the actual application.

The description we gave is pretty much the commonly accepted interpretation, but if you want to contribute your own original views of how it would work, jump right in. There are several bulletin boards out there dedicated to serious amateur speculation in cognitive science.


For you to stereotype so boldly about genders and behaviours is beyond belief…
You're confused. Scientists studying advanced communication? It's plain stupid.
Not advanced communication, advanced study of ordinary human communication, particularly how and why it fails in ways related to gender.

Most of what we’re describing aren’t stereotypes, and don’t qualify as such in any appropriate usage. The closest we came to that was describing stereotypical behavior patterns, the exact situation in which the term stereotype applies.

I’m pretty certain we’re not confused about this stuff, and that’s not really subject to your opinion anyway, is it? That would depend on us: not understanding something about it, or incorrectly gauging what we don’t yet know.

We can’t help that you don’t like it, and we certainly sympathize. But the things you’re upset about aren’t going to just go away because you don’t like them, and they aren’t really stupid, either.

The impact on society, and women in particular, is stone cold serious. Understanding these issues is the only thing that can change that. Blind rejection and denial play right to the purpose of the primitive strategy.

As we mentioned already, that reaction is built in, an important part of the bigger picture.

If you decide to look for more information, we wish you good luck. We’ll be happy to answer any questions about the details if they fall under our expertise, or point you in the right direction for stuff that doesn’t.

Try finding a copy of Anne Cahill’s book. It’s a great start.

The subject of the thread isn’t rape; it’s advice to males to help them spot abusive situations.
I don't have a problem with the thread; I have a problem with your post, which did deal with rape.

We merely pointed out that the potential for abuse will always be far greater for women, at least in our lifetimes, precisely because of the fact that the female version of the primitive strategy implicitly deals with the expectation of behavior that, in our modern social context, is abuse or worse.

There are no comparable built in behaviors in males; accordingly, the potential for abuse is much less.
You didn't call it abuse, you called it rape, but abuse is almost as bad. Also, as an obvious feminist, why do you go for this victim-blaming theory that females expect abusive behaviour? It validates what I said earlier; under such a theory any man can claim that his victim is to blame: she was asking for it.

If you want to play the game we’re involved in, you have to get on board the same boat as everyone else, where the game is played.
What boat is that? An Academic one? Is that where your 35 years of research have taken place? Well, no research goes on for that long without a publication. So far you've tried to swing me over to your "scientific fact" with a referral to a feminist philosopher (hardly scientific fact), so refer me to your book. What's the ISBN? Have you had any medical or scientific journal entries? You must have had something in all that time, no one would financially back 35 years of research for nothing in return.

Look, this isn’t about language on that level
After six posts advocating a flexible definition of the word rape, that is one mighty back-peddle. You claimed that there are scientific and medical definitions to back you up, but as yet I'm still to find a definition that doesn't include violence, and I've searched many dictionaries (including institutional ones), journals and encyclopaedias — there’s nothing. Actually wikipedia was the only one to mention sociobiological theories on rape, where it was mentioned that none of them are mainstream science.

We’ve described this adequately already. Please re-read what we posted, and feel free to ask questions if there’s something not clear about it.
That is where the real problem is, you see, I don't care about your theories. What I care about, and have only cared about throughout this entire thread, is that you called me a rapist. Now you have backed down on the definition of the word rape, now that you know you're wrong, claiming it's no longer important — but it is to me — why can't you admit that rape only covers violent & forced sex and that I am not a rapist, under any definition?

Do I take action to persuade women to sleep with me? Of course I do. Even taking a shower so my smell doesn't offend them can be described as that. But there is a difference between that and rape, and you need to acknowledge it.

I think since this started as a support thread and has turned a different direction, I believe I will close this and ask for any further discussion/debate to find its way to the Debate Section.

Thank you for your input.