Study Reveals Female Rape Victims Enjoyed the Experience

A university study, Romeo, Felicia F. “Acquaintance Rape on College and University Campuses,” AAETS. Web. 22 Nov. 2010.”  The study of female rape victims concluded that the majority – 57% – of women who were raped on college campuses, reported feelings that were described as “positive” and “satisfied,” about the experience.

The study reflected survey results of 1,700 victims of rape that was perpetrated by a male acquaintance in a social environment, also known as “date” rape.

A meta analytic review of related studies pointed to the validity of the Romeo study. Hoskins and Fisk, 2010.

Perhaps surprising in the survey results was the fact that nearly 38% of the respondents reported a desire to repeat the experience, some obsessively so.

This would also be quite consistent with findings outlined in an article from Psychology Today, regarding the prevalence and incidence of rape fantasies in women, much of which are quite extreme and violent.

From the article:

From 1973 through 2008, nine surveys of women’s rape fantasies have been published. They show that about four in 10 women admit having them (31 to 57 percent) with a median frequency of about once a month. Actual prevalence of rape fantasies is probably higher because women may not feel comfortable admitting them.

For the latest report (Bivona, J. and J. Critelli. “The Nature of Women’s Rape Fantasies: An Analysis of Prevalence, Frequency, and Contents,”Journal of Sex Research (2009) 46:33), psychologists at North Texas University asked 355 college women: How often have you fantasized being overpowered/forced/raped by a man/woman to have oral/vaginal/anal sex against your will?

Sixty-two percent said they’d had at least one such fantasy. But responses varied depending on the terminology used. When asked about being “overpowered by a man,” 52 percent said they’d had that fantasy, the situation most typically depicted in women’s romance fiction. But when the term was “rape,” only 32 percent said they’d had the fantasy. These findings are in the same ballpark as previous reports.

Clearly, there is much yet to be understood about women and their predilection for being physically overpowered and forced to engage in sexual activity in a violent way.

And it calls into question whether prevailing attitudes about rape may be convoluted due to a social taboo against the practice.

It may be time in modern culture where we need to start evaluating the possibility that women, through the cultural expression of patriarchy, may be unfairly restricted from articulating their desire to be raped, and as such cut off from the full actualization of their sexual freedom.

In another Psychology Today article on dealing with the sexual liberation of women, some aspects of repression were addressed.

From the article:

What caused the sexual revolution?

Many factors may have been implicated, such as improved contraception (the pill which gave women more control), but effective condoms had been widely used for a century. Marriage prospects and careers were the key. Women’s marriage prospects worsened steadily throughout the sixties and there were only 80 men of marriageable age for every 100 women (2) thanks to an echo effect of the baby boom a generation earlier. Women also postponed marriage as they developed careers.

The net result was a large and increasing population of women who were sexually active outside marriage. Facing stiffer competition for men, women upped the ante by offering increased levels of sexual intimacy outside marriage.

In addition to complying with the masculine desire for sex without strings, women today adopt a more masculine sensibility regarding issues of number of sexual partners, sexual variety, and sexual satisfaction.

And, in a related study by Kale and Weiser, 1998, it was suggested that the full actualization of that liberation would include the idea of women’s pervasive rape fantasies being fulfilled spontaneously by men in their immediate environment.

On a more subjective note, this could be an explanation for the recurrent theme in feminist literature of “rape culture.” It may well be that the outward obsession with this notion, in a culture that clearly condemns and punishes rape, may be a matter of projective denial reflecting a desire for an actual rape culture to emerge in order to fulfill women’s unfulfilled sexual desires.

It also calls into question whether the concept of “consent,” where it relates to sexual activity, is antiquated. Indeed it calls into question whether the concept of “rape,” in the literal definition, is just a cultural misconception for a male tendency to fulfill women’s desire for sexual excitement and thrills and women’s collective desire to see this accomplished.

That would at least partly explain why there is currently far reaching efforts to broaden the definition of rape, given we interpret those efforts as an attempt to fulfill as many rape fantasies as possible.

All this should be considered, however, with the caveat that the Romeo study found no results whatsoever as presented in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article, and the fact that the Kale & Weiser and Fisk studies are not extant.

These items, indeed this entire article, are illustrative examples of what Murray Straus identified as “Evidence by Citation” and other forms of academic fraud in widespread and unchallenged use by feminist ideologues. They were presented here as an example of their destructive use.


About Paul Elam

Paul Elam is the founder and publisher of A Voice for Men, the founder of A Voice for Men Radio, and appears weekly on AVFM Intelligence Report, Going Mental with Dr. Tara Palmatier and monthly on MANstream Media with Warren Farrell and Tom Golden.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • ben

    Did the author of this blog entry do even the most preliminary research on it? First of all, the AAETS article was published in 2004, not 2010:

    And is not a peer-reviewed journal article but rather a white paper. The words “positive” and “satisfied” do not even APPEAR in the original article.

    I cannot find any online references to the hoskins and fisk meta analysis – it doesn’t help that there’s no proper citation for it – first names, journal name, etc

    Finally, the Psychology today study is talking about FANTASIES. Almost everyone has had a fantasy about suicide, does that mean we all would enjoy attempts to kill ourselves? A fantasy is NOT a desire to have something occur to you in real life.

    • Dean Esmay

      Didn’t even bother reading the whole thing did you? Here this may help you:

    • Typhonblue (Asha James)

      Wow, such diligence.

      Now if people would only do this for things feminists assert we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in, dealing with something far larger and more pervasive and far more destructive because it never gives you any indication that it’s bullshit and it rubs your feelies the right way.

      • Bewildered

        Now if people would only do this for things feminists assert we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in, dealing with something far larger and more pervasive and far more destructive because it never gives you any indication that it’s bullshit and it rubs your feelies the right way.

        ABSOLUTELY ! This is what the article was driving at. But then if feelings are the only things are matter it’s natural to be oblivious of one’s own bullshit no matter how much it stinks!

    • Kimski

      Last paragraph of the article which you apparently didn’t bother to read, before posting:

      “These items, indeed this entire article, are illustrative examples of what Murray Straus identified as “Evidence by Citation” and other forms of academic fraud in widespread and unchallenged use by feminist ideologues. They were presented here as an example of their destructive use.”

      Hope you at least learned to fact check, next time you hear the feminist claim about 1 in 4 women being raped.

    • Robert St. Estephe

      You have expressed a burning desire to see rape fantasies discussed in more explicit terms – as imaginary activities that have significance specifically because they are not descriptions of things that actually occurred in real life, but are instead just made-up stories. This desire, I hope, will be fully satisfied by the article linked below which was published on AVfM almost two and a half years following “Study Reveals Female Rape Victims Enjoyed the Experience.”

      Welcome to my rape fantasy (AVfM, Nov. 5, 2013)

  • Margaret Fisher

    The problem is, for every feminazi who skims the title or top part of the article and starts a ranting speech on how the author/magazine/ect is a woman-hating monster….you have an equal number of knuckle-dragging men who do the same thing and puff up and feel all vindicated and think the article is real and women actually DO enjoy being raped (proof, a few of the morons who seem amazed and `never knew’ this was true). There are plenty of emotionally and mentally unstable people out in the world, and although it might be a tiny minority, by posting a fake article like this up you *could* be giving some sicko permission to go out and assault someone..thinking she’ll `like’ it.

    • Typhonblue (Asha James)

      Men are not rape machines. They are not going to rape because an article ostensibly said “women enjoy rape”.

      Peddle your hatespeech elsewhere.

    • yinyangbalance

      I dont think rapists look for permission anywhere, which is exactly why they are rapists to begin with.

    • Ben James

      agree with everything except the last sentance. Overall, your comment doesnt deserve so many dislikes.. its a fair perspective in a open discussion.

      • Near Earth Object

        If I watch a television show, or a movie, or read a book, does the content give me “permission” to do anything?

        No. Absolutely not.

        Margaret Fisher is being manipulative in that she is being intellectually dishonest.
        And she knows it!

        She earned my down-vote on the basis of her last sentence alone.

    • ErnestoGuevara

      “you *could* be giving some sicko permission”

      This reminds me of some people wanting to forbid Marilyn Manson after Columbine just because the murderers liked his songs.

      Following this path you can end up censoring Shakespeare, because who grants that some sicko will not take Macbeth as a role model?

      Sick people need no writings to carry out sick acts.

  • OneHundredPercentCotton

    Oh. My. God. This would be fucking hilarious if it weren’t so fucking tragic.

    So, Paul. Your demonstration of the complete “dumbing down” by the New World Order illuminati lizards was a success.

    We’re all fucked.

    • Near Earth Object

      It is difficult to know with any great degree of certainty, but my sense is that a great number of these drones were not even born prior to the whistle blowing of Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt.

      You are not fucked, 100%. I am not fucked either. Fucked are these drones; sad is that they have little, if any insight into just how fucked they are and will become, in that they will hardly know what you and I have enjoyed in this one-shot-ride called Life. And what of their children, and the children of their children, if feminism is not checked on this gender-battlefield now.

      According to Paul, better than ten thousand people tuned into this article. We only heard from the ones who largely felt the need to display their utter ignorance.

      I’m hopeful. This article woke some of the readers right the fuck up. I believe in exponentiality. This, for me, is what hard fought for success looks like. And then there is tomorrow :)

  • the whovian

    but still to the question . is it rape if you shout surprise first ?? but very interesting article indeed

  • malcolm

    Keep the comments coming folks. I’m enjoying the outrage.
    Where’s Loy Finley when you need him?

    • Kimski

      They’re ALL Loy Finleys, each on his or her own.

  • nictusempra

    Your thought experiment’s a little irresponsible, sorry.

    • Dean Esmay

      Not a tenth as irresponsible as decades of misinformation about men (and women) that ideologues who use these techniques use on a daily basis, in thousands upon thousands of articles, news stories, papers, etc.

    • Suzanne McCarley

      Kind of unsettling when the shoe’s on the other foot, isn’t it?

      Around here, “unsettling” is good.

    • Ben

      nictusempra: This is known as: fighting back

    • Paul Elam

      It is not an experiment. It is completely responsible.

  • Suzanne McCarley

    Wow. Dozens of commenters discussed (or screamed about) the contents of this article, and one single person had both the intelligence and the grace to return and said, “Never mind.” One.

  • Ben James

    ha ha this is an instant classic! perfectly executed for maximum outrage; the perfect venus fly trap!

  • kali

    Can someone direct me to the original article. I can’t seem to find it.

    • Near Earth Object

      Did you read the article at the top of this page?

      • Typhonblue (Asha James)

        Is it just me or are they getting stupider?

        It’s like the Outrage main line just loaded back up to go to town and now we’re left with the Outrage short bus brigade.

        And all the pods are milling about on our front lawn, some trying to get in but pulling on a door that is clearly marked “push.”

        • Near Earth Object

          “Is it just me or are they getting stupider?”

          [The way you phrased your comment brought a much needed laugh. Thanks Asha.]

          Definitely, we were getting 2nd and 3rd stringers near the end of it there.
          My sense is that they had to be coming out of some common staging area.
          By and large, their goal was to talk at AVfM and register their communal discontent.
          I think I may have detected at least two cases of mid-stride name-changing yesterday.
          There will definitely be more of this in the future. Mr. Elam and Company will see to it. :)

      • Matthew

        Fake Article.All claims false. On purpose to prove a point.

  • Michelle

    Im confused… This is a joke article? The second to last paragraph reads “All this should be considered, however, with the caveat that the Romeo study found no results whatsoever as presented in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article, and the fact that the Kale & Weiser and Fisk studies are not extant.”

    • Near Earth Object

      Confusion can be a natural reaction after having read this article, unless of course, you open the “academic fraud” link in the last paragraph.
      Did you do that?

  • Max Riethmuller

    Some of the comments in this thread are extremely ignorant.

    1. The vast majority of rapes are not of the “I changed my mind halfway through” variety
    2. The right to say “no” at any stage of the proceedings is sacrosanct. If you keep fucking someone after they ask you to stop (unless there is a prearranged safe word other than “stop”), then you are raping the person. The fact that occasionally there may be a woman who says no even though she means yes does not justify “accidently” raping someone because YOU thought they really meant yes.
    3. Deprivation of liberty, restraint against one’s will, and forced sex, are SHOWN BEYOND ANY DOUBT to be traumatic experiences with lasting psychological impacts. Rape is NOT just unwanted sex.

    • Near Earth Object

      “Some of the comments in this thread are extremely ignorant.”

      Very much like yours, which has no relevance to the article.

      Did you read it, Max?

      Can you read, Max?

    • Near Earth Object

      Very much like yours, which has no relevance to the article.

      Did you read it, Max?

      Can you read, Max?

      • Max Riethmuller

        I was replying to the ignorant comments in the thread, not the article itself. If you paid any attention to my comment, you would have understood that. Or is it you who can’t read?

        All three points I raised were brought up in the comments section.

        • Near Earth Object

          “Or is it you who can’t read?”

          I did not read the word ‘example’.

          No harm, no foul, Max.

          So, did you read the article?


          • Max Riethmuller

            Yes I did read the article. I also read the ‘academic fraud’ linked at the end. I correctly interpreted the article as an example of why to be careful relying on “Evidence by Citation” and not as an article proving that women enjoy being raped. I happen to agree with this conclusion. I seem to incessantly battle internet conspiracy theorists using this technique to prove anything from Chemtrails to Moon Landing Hoaxes. But it doesn’t change the fact that many of the comments in response to the article show a high degree of ignorance.

            Btw, the article in the link is about domestic violence, NOT about rape, and it’s references to symmetry in domestic violence do not in any way speak to the argument that most rape is not as bad as it is made out to be.

          • Near Earth Object

            @ Max

            Excellent Max!

            I needed to read a comment like yours.


  • Kimski

    Hi, Joe Schmo..

    Bye, Joe Schmo.

    • Suzanne McCarley

      You too, eh? Ah well, lots of new folks; bound to be a couple of useless fucktards…

      • Andy Bob


  • faybarrettoFay


    • robertcrayle

      The level of childish stupidity this article has attracted…it’s starting to enter the level of Swift, Wilde, or Voltaire in terms of outrage-bait.
      Impressive. Most impressive

      • Suzanne McCarley

        My goodness! One might think Fay didn’t read the article or follow the links!

        • poester99

          She must have spilled something on her keyboard cause the caps key is stuck down.

  • Don

    It has being said that most men at some stage fantasize about being forced into some form of sexual abuse/raped by other men. So, using the warped logic used in the article, any ’guy’ fancying a piece of man-arse can simple pick any man in the crowd, lure him off on a fake 4×4 adventure, pound his bottom and make a grateful pal for life. Yeah right. BULLSHIT! What’s good for the goose is good for the gander!

    • Peter Wright (Tawil)

      @Don: “It has been said that most men at some stage fantasize about being forced into some form of sexual abuse/raped by other men”.

      It has been said… by whom, your alterego? Remind me to never go on a camping trip with you.

      PS. “pound his bottom” has a very female-narrated sound to it. Just saying. We primitive males simply call our rear-ends “asses” or “arses”.

      (Oh, and Don, I recommend you read the last two paragraphs of the article.)

      • Near Earth Object

        “Remind me to never go on a camping trip with you.”


    • Near Earth Object

      “It has being said that most men…”

      By who?

      Did you read the article, Don?
      If you did, I do think that you missed the overall point.

  • Near Earth Object




  • Paul Elam

    OK, so far you get my vote for the stupidest response to this article.

    • Near Earth Object

      I’ll see your “stupidest response to this article”…

      And raise you ‘stupidest everything’ in terms of entering this site with that handle.

    • Ben James

      just goes to show Paul, when you lay the right bait, some times you catch more than you expected!

      • scatmaster

        Yup, and in my country the bottom feeders are called Suckers.

  • Technology

    I can’t believe this true, but in my country, it isn’t a fact

  • Sue

    Not at the article although it could have been better presented not to allude to justifying rape but at some of the idiotic and uneducated comments from some of the people who post on here.

    ROSO – RIDE ON SPEAK OUT! United Nations Initiative

  • Andy

    There is no “North Texas University.”

    Look for it.

  • Bel

    You have to read to the bottom to realize this whole article is basically FAKE ” indeed this entire article, are illustrative examples… of academic fraud in widespread and unchallenged use by feminist ideologues. They were presented here as an example of their destructive use.” Weird. I prefer the ONION. At least you know what you’re getting from the start. As a friend of mine said “People must realize that most of the internet is “bullshit”. trumped up to gain traffic in order to profit off it.”

    • Paul Elam

      I prefer knowing what you are getting from the start, too. Which is why I wrote this article about feminist scholarship. At least I actually tell people they have been duped.

      Wail all you want. Not of concern to me at all.

  • حبيب الامين

    I’m really disappointed in the people that didn’t read the full article getting upvoted. However, after those comments, you can’t deny the destructive effects of the academically dishonest tactics.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      Isn’t that the whole point of the article? To “reverse gender” those tactics on the ones who so freely use them for dominance and destruction?

      It’s called “getting a taste of one’s own medicine”.

      • حبيب الامين

        Yep. I’d really like to see feminists’ response to this one:

        Jezebel: Look, Paul Elam condones men forcefully taking women.

        MRA: Um, did you read the full article? You’re exposing your journalistic standards for all to see.

        Jezebel: HA, look he admits it. First he makes up experimental results to justify rape, then admits he lied.

        MRA: *facepalm*

  • Bani

    okay.. I’ve been noticing this “rape culture” thing.. and I don’t know if people are looking at all sides here..I believe “rape culture” exists for the simple fact that I was a victim of rape and I know kids at my school always laugh about it and I see a lotta stuff about this in facebook from people everywhere–that “she asked for it,” or even things said, “it’s inevitable–so just enjoy it.” I am seventeen years old and it’s about twelve years since my rape. I don’t understand why in cases where they blame the victim–it’s the victims fault because of their actions? It makes me feel so ashamed of myself when I look back at those traumatic moments–of when someone so much bigger is on you and you can’t do anything because you’re too small and because everything that comes your way is what you deserve–and I don’t know why I’m thinking about the way I acted back then because I cannot think of anything or even at the time understand what did I do that was so wrong if I didn’t even know what those sexual things were–I had no idea things so horrible could be real–such pain and a feeling filthiness and sorrow. I feel that people need to open their eyes a little–no I didn’t read the article yet, but I will hah..because It’s for my AP homework–I just wanted to point out that children get raped too.. People don’t like me because I’m a slut, but I never had sex other than the force that was put upon me–I’m only a slut because I let it happen because I did everything wrong because I was too weak to stop it because it took a year for my voice to be heard because it took a year to believe something like that could happen between a six year old and a disordered father. I don’t know how many times I said “no” and “stop” the pain never ended–and I still feel the pain today that people–NOT ONLY WOMEN because men are victims too, did you know? It hurts to know people can get away with something like that because it’s “unavoidable” No means No, but people would never listen to some slutty girl because she asked for something that she never knew about–it’s like when a person find a wallet on the floor and it has a person’s ID and everything they need and more–another takes the money, never giving it the right owner. Just because something is “giving themselves out” in any way doesn’t mean it’s out for grabs because No means No unless that person doesn’t have a voice it would still mean that yes was NEVER said–so in any case it would be so wrong, but people still do it–people still take something that isn’t theirs because of “a misunderstanding–” I feel that it is an excuse to get away with something so horrible. Now that I know about this sexual stuff I don’t ever want to be in a relationship because I’ll do everything wrong. Some women see it in a different way they just decide they don’t care about themselves and that they don’t respect themselves because no one will truly respect they because they were used–I was used then thrown like the piece of crap I am. I hope none of those sick minded people who think the victim asked for it have daughters because this world is already as corrupted as it is and I don’t understand why everyone is playing gender roles because it happens to both genders..I used men as an example because it was the best way I could say it.. I wish I knew people who would stand up for children and think about children too because children are the future.. Sorry.. I could go on and on about this and this probably has nothing to do with the article.. I was just very curious if people ever consider children as a victim because I’m learning so much about the ways people view “rape culture..” Sorry for my bad grammar and stuff umm yeah okie.. You have a good day person..

    • Suzanne McCarley

      Read the article, EVERY word, and follow the links to read those too.

  • problem.

    Actually I wanted to hear what Paul thought about my complaints, but I’m pretty much done here. This just comes off as bitter and immature, especially with the murky exposition at the end of the article. But more than that, it’s socially irresponsible, because it relates to serious crimes with victims. It would be like a teacher’s rights group writing a hoax article supporting child abuse and then finishing with a mumbled revelation of the hoax. Look at the comments, half of them took this seriously. I wouldn’t support Elam after this, any more than I’d support radical feminists who enact fraud. It pains me to say this, because I care about this cause, and men SERIOUSLY need a voice. But this isn’t it. This isn’t the voice for us.

    • AlexB

      You mean not the voice for you.I for one love this site.

    • Paul Elam

      “But more than that, it’s socially irresponsible, because it relates to serious crimes with victims.”

      FUCK YOU. The feminist “scholarship” I am pointing to here should be of concern to you, if you are interested in social responsibility, which you are clearly not. That feminist scholarship is responsible for immeasurable disinformation, corrupt governance and harmed lives than can be adequately summarized here. Most all of it relates to serious crimes and it is pawned off as fact by people that know better.

      And you are concerned with what, that you think I am bitter and immature?

      I repeat. FUCK YOU.

      • winstrom

        Fuck you too, then.

        I AM concerned about academic fraud, and I agree with your desire to address that stuff, which is serious. That doesn’t mean you addressed it right. As I don’t have a direct line to the scholars you were talking about, I addressed some SERIOUS issues I have with your article.

        I guarantee there are now young men out there who’s current take on rape is “rape is good, studies say women secretly like it” solely because you chose to word the exposition cryptically to confound and annoy feminists.

        The carpet bombing of Dresden sure pissed off a lot of Nazis, but that doesn’t make it right. If you cared more about protecting men’s rights and less about pissing off feminists, this article would have been done better.

        As it stands, you’re a stupid piece of shit with a bitter stick up your ass.

        • Typhonblue (Asha James)

          There are absolutely no “DANGEROUS YOUNG MEN OMG!!!!!21111?” who are reading this article and thinking “wow, before I read this article I thought rape is bad, now I know better.”

          Do you know why? Because that’s not how rapists are made.

          • winstrom

            That’s a definite straw man fallacy. All I mean is what I said. If he wants to speak his mind, he should speak it clearly. People will definitely come away with the wrong idea, and an idea that is (unarguably) pretty fucked up.

            And I’m not sure where I saw this in the comments section, but Paul pointed out that he was unclear specifically to bait feminists.

            That is pretty fucking immature.

          • Typhonblue (Asha James)

            @ winstrom

            In order to bolster your point, you are asserting that men will read this and think “I once thought rape was bad and now I know it’s okay!”


            Feminists are the ones who originally committed the academic fraud so baiting them into exposing their hypocrisy seems cunning, not immature, to me.

        • Robert Crayle

          “I AM concerned about academic fraud, and I agree with your desire to address that stuff, which is serious. That doesn’t mean you addressed it right.”

          Could you possibly tell us _how_ to address such a grievous issue as academic fraud in the RIGHT AND PROPER(tm) manner? Or better yet, write an article about what can be done. I guarantee that we take it seriously enough that the editors would feature it.

          • winstrom

            Maybe write an article pointing out the crimes and decrying them, like a normal fucking person.

          • Typhonblue (Asha James)

            But then you wouldn’t have a clear demonstration of feminist hypocrisy.

          • Robert Crayle

            @ winstrom

            I invited you to do just that. Get to it.

            On another note, I an continuously stunned by this kind of critic: the kind the demands others “act mature” and “grow up” by throwing an enormous incoherent toddler-style tantrum. You and your brethren’s dissonance is a little breath-taking, to be honest.

            If you were as mature as you demand others be you might stop to realise 1) criminals don’t look for justifications beforehand, they look for excuses ex post facto 2) The vast majority of humanity aren’t criminals, and don’t become them because an article tells them to, and 3) the only people who are going to respond viscerally to this article are people who are _determined_ to be offended – it’s bait for those retards to come here and display it. It’s just enough rope for them to hang themselves.

            Speaking of which…you seem pretty steam-headed. Something offend you?

          • winstrom

            Yeah, Paul Elam said “fuck you” to me. It’s like the classic way to personally offend someone.

            No matter what bar you observe for maturity, this article is below it. I did not have to be determined to be offended by a hoax article called “Study Reveals Femal Rape Victims Enjoyed the Experience.”

            People’s perspectives are interactional and socially constituted. That includes people (me) who take offense at articles, and people (visible commenters here) who mistake something for fact and then vocally incorporate it into their worldview. The article won’t incite them to commit crimes, but it has a small social effect, the genesis of which is literally observable in the comments section.

            And this because he didn’t write the exposition clearly because he wants to bait feminists.

            It’s like a fucking gender war with you people, and you totally deserve each other (MRAs and feminazis.)

          • Robert Crayle


            Concepts lead words, they are not defined by them. People who “incorporate it into their worldview” (no commenters here that I know of) already conceptually believe that. You, on the other hand, already have the concept of “agree to disagree, all get along, nobody panic, anything that rocks the boat is disgraceful” which is put into words by your histrionic caterwauling. Ordinary people are not offended by a headline; only moral-outrage drug addicts are, because it feeds their druggy need. And Paul has plenty of experience of druggies. The first lesson: Don’t. Enable. Them. Which is why we are not interested in your emotional wellbeing, much less in your sneering contempt for the maturity and mental health of other readers.

            Have a nice rage-filled day.

          • winstrom

            Reinforcement of existing values is a strong social force, and it’s important to be responsible about it. For younger people, this type of article could easily go beyond reinforcement and take a small part in shaping their sociopolitical perspective.

            My standards don’t require that everyone get along. They DO require that social movements remain social movements and don’t degenerate on an existential level into psychopathic, circular, self-justificatory mud-slinging. This is the precise narrative path that Paul Elam’s work has followed, exemplified beautifully by this article.

          • Robert Crayle


            “Reinforcement of existing values is a strong social force, and it’s important to be responsible about it. For younger people, this type of article could easily go beyond reinforcement and take a small part in shaping their sociopolitical perspective.”

            One can only hope. The idea is to change peoples minds. We just don’t fear and loathe people, they are intelligent, can read, and just need some coherent language to unite their conceptual framework against ideology. I’m hoping it’s more than just small.

            “My standards don’t require that everyone get along. They DO require that social movements remain social movements and don’t degenerate on an existential level into psychopathic, circular, self-justificatory mud-slinging. This is the precise narrative path that Paul Elam’s work has followed, exemplified beautifully by this article.”

            So they should change peoples minds by not saying anything to OFFEND anyone? Social movements can be both social movements as well as psychopathic, circular, self-justificatory, and nothing but mud-slinging.
            If the angering article has a point, to break through an emotional wall of denial, it has succeeded in being a productive force.

            Yet again, you are invited to write something concrete in article form to show otherwise.

          • winstrom

            Also, if you read my original comment, you’d know that I’m not remotely “outraged.” I started swearing because Elam (the little bitch) started swearing at me.

            Again, I am a little saddened that men’s issues have such pityful representation. I assume it’s just a matter of conflict escalation and the gravitation of large numbers of unilateral mysogynists and misoandrists to gender-rights movements, but having stepped back from this movement, it’s kind of an interesting social experiment.

            A good cause has turned slowly into a cesspool of intellectually bankrupt, confrontational, self-gratifying, purposeless bullshit.

          • Robert Crayle

            “Also, if you read my original comment, you’d know that I’m not remotely “outraged.””

            You’ve devoted how many comments to telling everyone how not bothered you are?

            Also, it’s pitiful. There’s no y.

            You remind me of people who love the words “droll” and “pathetic” to describe things they don’t approve of. It doesn’t make you sound like a Bond villain, you just look like a permanent tantrum that there is no coherent criticism beyond “don’t disagree! Everyone hold hands!”. You say you’re not against argument or criticism but have an endless tanty at the thought of the destruction wrought when one happens. You really must think the rest of the world are simpletons or monsters. Very strange.

          • winstrom

            Mounting a reductive straw-man of your opponent’s ideas doesn’t make effective debate easier, it just makes it obvious that you lack the ability to assemble a cogent argument.

            I don’t really care the article is offensive, I care that the last paragraph is purposefully vague for very stupid reasons, and that because of this, several commenters expressed a kind of “eureka, I knew it!” moment, about how women tend to enjoy rape.

            Effective communication is the key to almost everything with this species, and that means considering how people could reasonably interpret your communication. It also, usually, means frank discussion and not confounding the point as this article did.

            And no, denying the drive to make society work coherently doesn’t excuse shitty attitudes. That drive was the entire reason this article was written (albeit with a shitty attitude.)

            The moment conflict takes precedence over meaningful dialogue, you’re back to primitive American “political” tribalism, and you’re not helping anybody.

            No, I don’t think you’re evil or stupid, or I would have never talked to you. As I said, though, I think elements of the gender rights discussion are caught up in an escalation of small-minded conflict, when there are much better things to put our time towards. And that is, in itself, unfortunate.

            I had strong feelings about the article because it’s original (good) purpose became confounded with a stupid desire to bait feminists into sounding stupid for two minutes, and resulted in this sociopolitical abortion.

            And I include our current debate in that category, because it’s very circular.

  • funnyfaceking

    “victims of rape” and those who have rape fantasies are mutually exclusive terms

  • Tim J Benham

    The article you first reference,, does not appear to make any of the statements you attribute to it.

    What gives.

    • Paul Elam

      Read the entire article. More carefully.

  • Paul

    Dude, you are sick. Just ’cause it says that 52% of women had fantasies about being tied up means they wanna be TIED UP! That’s different from rape. The woman wants to be tied up for pleasure and that way she’s still in control. It’s people like you that disgrace the male gender. You can’t just take facts that have not much real meaning behind them and turn them into an excuse for guys to go out there raping women! Sick muthafucker!

    • robertcrayle

      “It’s people like you that disgrace the male gender.”

      Well, Captain Onegoodman, it’s up to you to redeem the entire male gender for Paul in his role as Dr Evilsickmuthafucka. Your first task is to actually read the whole article to the end, you rage-fuelled cloth-eared nonce.

  • Pingback: Poucas Palavras

  • Bluedrgn

    Well played.

    Was reading the whole thinking “this can’t be right… I cant believe Paul Elam would actually put this on this site…” The I read the end.

    Well played.

  • Bluedrgn

    Well played.

    I was read this thinking “this cant be right… I cant believe Paul Elam would put something like this on his site” Then I read the end.

    Well played.

  • lula69

    Also to be recommended the book by Daniel Bergner, “What do women want”. This issue could use some agitation. I think the strongest possible argument that the feminists (especially those of the purity variety) would have is to say that it’s because of patriarchy (eyeroll). They will say that women’s sexuality is still so repressed that the way to fulfill the natural desire must find some fantasy where women’s will (= re/op-pression) is forcefully overcome. There is some anecdotal evidence that this is the case, as I and other men ten to have encountered these preferences in women from more traditional backgrounds. One man says that “staunch catholic girls are most like that, they need to be tied up to really enjoy the experience” (or some such.) So, seriously, most feminists would probably argue that this is something going wrong, because of oppression. Michelle Langley, a very very important and good author on the subject of female interpretation of their sexuality, may give support to that idea. I think we could actually .support studies that really try to find out if that feminist interpretation can be proven. For example, by treating rape fantasies as a “disorder” and try to use some treatment of sexual liberation or whatever to “overcome” it and find other more dominant assertive expressions for women’s sexuality. Then find out what women who have experienced this option would tend to prefer afterwards.

    Another related study one could do is to test the correlation of this hailed idea of “enthusiastic consent” with sexual satisfaction.

    I can clearly see ways to run the feminist argument from a rational side. I am also pretty sure those hypotheses would be disproven by real data, I believe in the best surprises coming out of well designed studies.

  • siege13

    Two words, “Stockholm Syndrome”!! My Mom taught me that rape is a normal part of life and I should love the man because God chose him for me, which is why the man could not control himself. My uncle first raped me when I was 3 and I still remember my Aunt’s, Mom an Grandma teasing me and saying I liked it. I bled for weeks after and the pain was excruciating. Nothing about that was good.
    The afore mentioned syndrome is exactly what the victim feels, a “so-called”, “positive feeling” about something negative that happened. Give the same people several years to recover and the percentage will naturally go down for how many actually liked what happened. Promoting rape is wrong!

  • Yazra

    I was raped and I find this absolutely appalling and disgusting. I stopped reading after the 3rd sentence. If you want to go all biological ya a dick in your vag feems good even when you DON’T want it. Just like if a fat chick blind folded you and sucked your dick.

    However I find it very hard to believe that someone raped comes away with good feelings about it. Most women report having PTSD, suffer horrible repercussions in the future with relationships. Most women tend to even put on weight, dye their hair, or do other crazy things to just try and hide.

    I couldn’t go in public for 8 months without an escort, I dyed my hair black, stopped doing everything and gained weight. I got a breast reduction and literally tried to make myself ugly. I still to this day wont go outside with a tank top and if its cool enough I wear a sweater. I was in El Paso Tx and wore a full sleeved pull over hoody in the summer when it was 110 just because I didn’t want to feel vulnerable.

    If that study is correct the wording used when asking these women is either misleading, or the content of this article is.

    ” Perhaps surprising in the survey results was the fact that nearly 38% of the respondents reported a desire to repeat the experience, some obsessively so. ”

    The only thing I desire to do repeatedly related to that experience is kill him, obsessively so.

    • VictoryMonk

      I don’t think there are people on this forum that would trivialize experience of rape victims or not wish the perpetrators to be trialed and jailed. I’m not Paul but my guess is that the reason he quoted the first study was to make a point that “acquaintance rape” is a murky-er area than “dark alley rape”. And in any case 57% women reported positive feelings but the remaining 43% reported negative. Neither is a trivial number and, admittedly, the former one is surprising.

      But that’s too irrelevantly abstract given your personal experience, really. I wish bad things would happen to a person who did it to you.

    • Tlaloc

      You read only ’till the third sentence, then I read your comment ’till the third line. Read between the lines; better yet, at the end of the big line, it’s not all what it seems.

      ps: I like fat chicks. Don’t diss ‘em next time.

  • Brian Becker

    Bodice ripper fantasies are different from rape. Anyone with a brain can see the difference.

  • Reason

    Great, now some feminists are citing this article as if it’s real.

    Oh, the irony!

  • Reason

    Um, do you have some kind of… problem? I was able to figure out something was wrong before I finished reading the first sentence. Why? Because I don’t automatically believe what I read, no matter the source. I immediately searched the reference, found no mention of the material cited, then went on to scrutinize the paper and its source as well to get a grasp of how such an inaccurate interpretation of the work was possible. I got nothing, and proceeded to browse the remaining article, surprised and disappointed in Elam’s apparently shoddy work. I found the other bogus citations and gave up, finally beginning to entertain the negative rumors about Paul. I then skipped to the comments section, which functions somewhat as a peer review, where I learned the truth.

    Generally, if an article is off-base in any way, it is a rational critic that will show the way and save you time. The internet is littered with half-truths and mis-truths, and science itself is all but dead. I find here a healthy difference of opinion that challenges the facts as provided. No matter the source, without objectivity the facts and statements are of little worth. Your comment is much like this, since you claim Elam is “socially irresponsible” because half the readers fell for the hoax. So Elam is being “socially irresponsible” for leading half the readers from empty-headed sheeple into critical thinking adults. It’s not bad work, in my opinion.

    If reason is to win the day, first we must learn to be reasoned. But we’ve had four decades of conditioning against this, your post representing the why we need change.

  • Reason

    I’ve read many articles that do. What is proven HERE is that such articles have been ineffective of making critical thinkers out of sheeple. I’m not here to follow. Nor am I here to lead others. I am here to think for myself. If you made it past the first sentence of this article without knowing it was bunk, you’re part of the problem: People who believe everything they read. Legislators, adjudicators, teachers and students alike have been doing this with feminist literature for decades and our current legislated discrimination is the result.

    Personally, I got a good laugh out of two things with this article: The hoax and the reaction.