Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Comics Alliance)   Dilbert creator Scott Adams says that rape is a "natural male instinct"   (comicsalliance.com) divider line 381
    More: Sick, parting shot, bloodbath, instincts, dong, wankers, pseudonyms  
•       •       •

11469 clicks; posted to Geek » on 17 Jun 2011 at 2:52 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



381 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-06-17 05:01:07 AM  

Confabulat: some random shiat you said


i usually like reading your posts but tonight (this thread in particular) you seem like you're off your meds. please get back on them, because you're better that way.

/i don't mean this personally
// just trying to help (got you fav'd and everything)
///really.
 
2011-06-17 05:02:44 AM  

drunk_in_chitown: Confabulat: some random shiat you said

i usually like reading your posts but tonight (this thread in particular) you seem like you're off your meds. please get back on them, because you're better that way.

/i don't mean this personally
// just trying to help (got you fav'd and everything)
///really.


hmm. noted
 
2011-06-17 05:04:16 AM  
no wait I'm fine, you people are all crazy and Dilbert sucks
 
2011-06-17 05:05:12 AM  

RoyBatty: Anyway, enjoy your sky demon fantasy beliefs, I'm not judgmental that way.


That line cracks me up.
 
2011-06-17 05:11:04 AM  

Confabulat: no wait I'm fine, you people are all crazy and Dilbert sucks


look, i'm not even saying you're wrong, its just that you seemed amped up, like its personal.

/if you lived in vancouver i'd be recommending they watch you for possibly rioting for a couple days
//internet, serious business
 
2011-06-17 05:16:36 AM  

ComicBookGuy: ITT:

Good looking/rich guys: "That's terrible!!"


/thread
 
2011-06-17 05:22:02 AM  

drunk_in_chitown: Confabulat: no wait I'm fine, you people are all crazy and Dilbert sucks

look, i'm not even saying you're wrong, its just that you seemed amped up, like its personal.

/if you lived in vancouver i'd be recommending they watch you for possibly rioting for a couple days
//internet, serious business


oh that's par. I like to think snarly drunken internet comments are what I do. Would explain a lot about the last decade.

/doesn't rape no one
 
2011-06-17 05:24:21 AM  
Well it was a nice career while it lasted, jackass.
 
2011-06-17 05:41:21 AM  

The All-Powerful Atheismo: Confabulat: Ha, he's probably lurking around this thread somewhere.

No I'm not!


... and any comment that quotes what I first said is a falsehood!

www.quotationsofwisdom.com
 
2011-06-17 05:44:01 AM  

Confabulat: /doesn't rape no one


So you do rape someone?


Anyway, there is no question that ancient man would use rape to pass on his seed, just as ancient man would use theft and murder to acquire things much easier to earn them themselves. However, we are not ancient man. Most of us have evolved ethics, morality, empathy, etc. so that we do not desire to do those acts.

That is why even if I saw someone so hot I had a thought "man I could so jump her", the thought of forcibly jumping her doesn't enter my mind. Clearly there are some who do think of forcibly jumping people, which is why as a society we have created laws for those people. E.g. I would not murder but clearly some would, and as such, we had to create laws to keep them in line.

The 10 commandments and the Koran is a good example of early laws, and they are relatively new in comparison to how long humanity has been around. So, if they had to dictate things like 'no murder' and 'no stealing', clearly a number of us hasn't evolved to be decent people and need to be kept in check.
 
2011-06-17 05:45:49 AM  
*Torah

/oops, meant Torah not Koran
 
2011-06-17 05:50:27 AM  
Is Scott Adams the new Dave Sim?
 
2011-06-17 05:50:34 AM  
It's true, human behavior and morality are largely influenced by societal norms, but that's not something we just invented, it's as much or more a part of our biology as the primal instincts are. The argument that we should be wanton to go back to acting like lions and zebras is senseless even without morality applied. We are, biologically, social creatures who create social structures. I see what Adams is getting at, but it's not well thought out. And he shot himself in the foot by including 'rape' in the mix. Yes, monkeys rape each other, and our ancestors probably did too. That doesn't explain or justify sociopathic behavior today.

On the personal side, I'll just say this: As a male, I definitely feel like there are elements of society that work against me. I also feel there are elements of society that work for me. After all, despite efforts to equalize, men do still dominate our society to some extent, so I can only complain so much about getting the short end of the stick.

All one has to do is a colourful google image search to see that male/female behavior doesn't always readily conform to idealistic notions of equality we set forth in our laws. Where we should best draw the line is a question I don't have the answer to, but I think understanding that the problem is more complex than just one or the other is required. Would I like a society where I was free to smack a girl on the ass as she walked by, and not have to fear getting in trouble for it? Yeah, I would. But it's also unfair to women, so I don't think it's unreasonable for society to restrain me in that regard.
 
2011-06-17 05:50:45 AM  

BackAssward: Most of us have evolved ethics, morality, empathy, etc. so that we do not desire to do those acts.


With so much of the world still practicing ritual stonings and female circumcision and, as Adams said, wanton rape, can you really claim that? Hell, look at Amnesty International. Read up on all the sh*t they fight on a daily basis. For better or worse, Adams has a point. Around the world, men still act on their base impulses, raping, maiming, killing, and so much more.

While we in the first world like to say we're more advanced than that, clearly there is a disturbingly high percentage of men who give in to their animal lusts.

I can't be sure, but I think that's what Adams was trying to say.
 
2011-06-17 05:54:53 AM  
Being a white male, everything I say is wrong and I am the cause of all the worlds problems, personally. I kill babies and enslave whole nations. I am a potential rapist, endangering every single woman on the planet. I dominate every sex, creed or colour of person. I take all the resources from every other person on the planet and leave them thirsty and starving. Every time a non-white person is passed over for promotion, employment or any social position it is my fault. I have no soul or rhythm and cannot jump or run well.
 
2011-06-17 06:00:39 AM  

Confabulat: /doesn't rape no one


Sometimes words can hurt too.

/sniffles
 
2011-06-17 06:01:08 AM  

BackAssward: Most of us have evolved ethics, morality, empathy, etc. so that we do not desire to do those acts.

That is why even if I saw someone so hot I had a thought "man I could so jump her", the thought of forcibly jumping her doesn't enter my mind.



Evolved? Or taught?
 
2011-06-17 06:05:35 AM  

SJKebab: BackAssward: Most of us have evolved ethics, morality, empathy, etc. so that we do not desire to do those acts.

That is why even if I saw someone so hot I had a thought "man I could so jump her", the thought of forcibly jumping her doesn't enter my mind.


Evolved? Or taught?


Regardless if it's biological or taught, social evolution is still evolution. That word incompatibles more more than just genetic evolution.

Also, I don't see why it has to be "or", nature vs. nurture is a stupid concept, clearly we are based on both nature and nurture.

Some are clearly not advanced in either respect so they need the fear of punishment, whether by society or some deity, to keep them in line.
 
2011-06-17 06:06:39 AM  
Whatever an individual wants, an individual should be allowed to have. The concept of social conscience or individual responsibility are necessary for civilized societies that have evolved beyond stone-age thinking, but we are now moving into a new phase of human/social development that are evolving beyond morality, ethics, and the need for caring for other people. If other people do not exist for a person's own pleasure then those people should not exist in a person's mind. Our so called social responsibility is selfish in itself because it only inflates the ego of the individual, allowing him/her to feel morally or ethically superior. Societies have levels of controlling people externally and internally through religion, government, and finally their own mind. We are moving beyond these motivations in order to complete the final goal of humanity, complete loss of conscience.
 
2011-06-17 06:08:05 AM  
Well Scott that was a stupid thing to say. So we should just ignore it when powerful me rape assault and tweet their junk unsolicited?
Is it sometimes difficult to be man in today's society? Yes Is it ever OK to force yourself on a woman? Absolutely NEVER!.
 
2011-06-17 06:08:26 AM  

RoyBatty: starsrift: Hey guys, know what seperates man from animals?

My guess is that you believe it's god.


Oh look, a strawman argument. I'm glad you made it up for me - you did such an inept job of knocking it apart that I'm actually tempted to push that one to see what wharrrgarbl you descend to. At least click a profile before you arbitrarily make shiat up about people.

No, my reference was that man has the capacity for reason and to act on the moral plane. More or less, what Baryogenesis said a few posts after mine, "...humans are not purely instinctual creatures so affixing blame to some vaguely understood concept of instinct is a pathetic scapegoat to absolve people of responsibility. We have reasoning, forethought and empathy. We understand right, wrong and how to act accordingly."
 
2011-06-17 06:10:21 AM  

itwasabright: We are moving beyond these motivations in order to complete the final goal of humanity, complete loss of conscience.


I'm not sure you know what conscience means.
 
2011-06-17 06:10:56 AM  
I was just listening to this, seemed fitting:

Your love is beautiful.
Your love is sensual.
My love will puncture your skin.
My love goes all the way in.

Your love is poetry.
My love is sodomy.
Your love is everything.
My love is anything.

We believe it's personality,
But it's really sexuality.
We put faith in love and honesty,
But the stuff that makes our history
and sets us free is
Curiosity.

My love is physical.
A shameless animal.
One with all riding the wave.
A childish lust feeling it's way.

We pretend it's personality,
But it's really sexuality.
We put faith in love and honesty,
But the stuff that makes our history
and sets us free is
Curiosity.

You say love's divine.
Well baby, so is mine.
See, the only time I hear you take the name of the Lord
Is when you're tied to the bed with your face against the head board.
So, do you take it in vain?
And why would you take it again and again?

We pretend it's personality, but it's really sexuality.
We put faith in love and honesty, but the stuff that makes our history and sets us free is.
Curiosity.


Their worst album, but still better than 99% of stuff out there.
Link
 
2011-06-17 06:13:47 AM  

itwasabright: Whatever an individual wants, an individual should be allowed to have. The concept of social conscience or individual responsibility are necessary for civilized societies that have evolved beyond stone-age thinking, but we are now moving into a new phase of human/social development that are evolving beyond morality, ethics, and the need for caring for other people. If other people do not exist for a person's own pleasure then those people should not exist in a person's mind. Our so called social responsibility is selfish in itself because it only inflates the ego of the individual, allowing him/her to feel morally or ethically superior. Societies have levels of controlling people externally and internally through religion, government, and finally their own mind. We are moving beyond these motivations in order to complete the final goal of humanity, complete loss of conscience.


Hi Ayn, glad you could make it.
 
2011-06-17 06:32:12 AM  

jaylectricity: He's right, but we're a civilized species and we don't act on our natures without consent. That includes the act of defecation. We don't just whip it out and pee all over everything unless we're camping.


I love camping. It's the only time I can defecate and rape everything in sight.
 
2011-06-17 06:34:22 AM  
No. No it is not. If you feel like you want to rape someone, go get some help before you hurt someone.

Getting a woman to not only want to have sex with you but to be actually excited by the lead up and by the eventual act is the greatest feeling in the world.

And if you've done your job properly and you see the smile her face, it makes a man feel like he just won the Superbowl and walked on the Moon at the same time.
 
2011-06-17 06:39:25 AM  
Ed Finnerty:

I love camping. It's the only time I can defecate and rape everything in sight.


i29.photobucket.com
 
2011-06-17 06:39:56 AM  
Hrm, I must not be hip anymore. I still find Dilbert to be funny occasionally, more than the ranting make 90 posts on one thread fark user at least.

As for the rape stuff, most male mammals on this planet will rapey rape away if they can get away with it.

Human rape on a macro and micro level is still happening all over the world. Human on human violence is still happening for the most ridiculous reasons yes? You took my legos prepare to die!

If Scott is saying that our more violent tendencies could be caused by carry forward issues from before we were the amazingly evolved beings we are now, seems pretty logical to me.

Take what he is saying about human male instincts and strip out the rape part, I can think of several traits society frowns upon that human males have depended upon in the past to survive. We are forced to cooperate much more now than compete yes?

Is rape a natural instinct for humans? I don't think so, but is that because society has taught me that? If we removed a human male from what is a normal up bringing, dropped him somewhere like Afghanistan but no people is he more likely to rape the first solo female he comes across?
 
2011-06-17 06:43:18 AM  
Count me in the group that thinks the article was about power abuse and not intended to reference the horny tubes.

That said, sex is a natural desire but acting as if it's boys being boys to do that is bullshiat. All us non-powerful are expected to quash our desires to throttle the rich and their extravagances. They certainly should be held similarly. What happened to personal responsibility? (Did I do that last part right? Was it ironic?)
 
2011-06-17 06:56:11 AM  

jeffdo1: We are forced to cooperate much more now than compete yes?


Did you perhaps forget that we live in a capitalist society which is hellbent on making sure everyone is competing with everyone else? I don't know how you could really forget such a thing when you can flip on your TV right now, go on Google, hell look outside your window and see the million different ways we're competing with each other. Most cooperation you see can be boiled down to one group working together to compete against another group.
 
2011-06-17 06:58:41 AM  
Lot of knee jerking in this thread. It's not just a biological instinct in men, but in males of most species. The true measure of sapience is the ability to over-come natural instinct.
 
2011-06-17 07:02:00 AM  
The more I know about Scott Adams, the less I want to know.
 
2011-06-17 07:03:44 AM  
The unfortunate fact is that mother nature is a cold biatch.
She really doesn't care how reproduction happens so long as it does.

To that end, if a Male can't have his way by wooing the females then his instinct probably would drive him to force.
Which is why we have to have laws against such behavior, just as we have laws against peeing on the street just because nature calls.
 
2011-06-17 07:04:58 AM  

jaylectricity: Confabulat: God this guy is such a prick. No, actually, Scott, I like women to enjoy my advances. It's sort of a turn-off otherwise, you psycho pervert.

I think you're misunderstanding the circumstances of this "rape" thing. We're not talking about forcing a girl to have sex with you even though she doesn't want to because you have cottage cheese thighs.

We're talking about how the male species would normally just have sex with the girl without having to play games with her, she'd just let you because that's what sluts do, and we'd all move on with our lives. Have you ever seen a squirrel with daddy issues? Of course not.


That's not how it works. Females of all species practice judgement in choosing their mates. Rape is a strategy devised by some male far back in evolutionary history to breed even when no female finds you appealing. Plus, Adams' comment included at the link only mentions females in passing.

Considering that the human mind naturally works by applying logic to practically anything it encounters, arguing that any behavior is "instinctual" for our species sort of misses the point. It is the natural disposition of humans to practice restraint and to think about things, so even if males felt a strong compulsion to force themselves on others sexually (which they don't), the natural human response would be to think about that desire, see that it causes harm to the woman in question, endangers one's position in society, and creates the threat of retribution from her family, and abandon the action.

Beyond that I think that, as implied in the last paragraph, Mr. Adams is putting his cart before the horse. It is not "instinctual" for human males to rape. Our mechanism for breathing, and walking, is instinctual, as is our emotional bonding to any available adult during infancy, and probably language, which most human babies start emulating practically at birth. What is "instinctual" in the human male is violence and sex. Rape is a secondary outcome of these "instinctual" urges, but it must be said that the 20th century, with its rapid fall in crime and violence rates in the developed world, has shown how easy it is for society to largely suppress the urge for violence when it so desires. Rape will, unfortunately, always occur because egotists impressed with violence will always exist, but where rape still predominates in Europe, Japan, and the Americas, it does so because the society of that place still valorizes forceful masculinity, demonizes female sexuality, minimizes personal responsibility, and dismisses female agency.
 
2011-06-17 07:06:18 AM  
Absolutely farking retarded.
 
2011-06-17 07:06:52 AM  

SJKebab: BackAssward: Most of us have evolved ethics, morality, empathy, etc. so that we do not desire to do those acts.

That is why even if I saw someone so hot I had a thought "man I could so jump her", the thought of forcibly jumping her doesn't enter my mind.


Evolved? Or taught?


A bit of both. We have an intuitive morality that comes to us without thinking, but most of us also have moments where we struggle to do (or to believe) what we know the right thing, but which nonetheless might not instinctively sit well with us.

Also, Adams is only slightly right, though perhaps not in the manner that he intended. All you have to do is look at overall statistics for rape (or even murder, as SJKebab) and you'll very quickly realize that something is a little off about males in this regard. What makes it ridiculous is the way he tries to spin it into a "Men have it so tough darn it, it's not fair!" argument. That is unquestionably a dick move.
 
2011-06-17 07:08:10 AM  

Virtuoso80: It's true, human behavior and morality are largely influenced by societal norms, but that's not something we just invented, it's as much or more a part of our biology as the primal instincts are. The argument that we should be wanton to go back to acting like lions and zebras is senseless even without morality applied. We are, biologically, social creatures who create social structures. I see what Adams is getting at, but it's not well thought out. And he shot himself in the foot by including 'rape' in the mix. Yes, monkeys rape each other, and our ancestors probably did too. That doesn't explain or justify sociopathic behavior today.

On the personal side, I'll just say this: As a male, I definitely feel like there are elements of society that work against me. I also feel there are elements of society that work for me. After all, despite efforts to equalize, men do still dominate our society to some extent, so I can only complain so much about getting the short end of the stick.

All one has to do is a colourful google image search to see that male/female behavior doesn't always readily conform to idealistic notions of equality we set forth in our laws. Where we should best draw the line is a question I don't have the answer to, but I think understanding that the problem is more complex than just one or the other is required. Would I like a society where I was free to smack a girl on the ass as she walked by, and not have to fear getting in trouble for it? Yeah, I would. But it's also unfair to women, so I don't think it's unreasonable for society to restrain me in that regard.


Some species of primates, chimpanzees particularly, see high rates of rape, but not all primate species do, and that fact right there -that rape is not the de facto approach to sex for other related primates- seriously undermines his claims as to the instinctual nature of the act for humans.
 
2011-06-17 07:12:35 AM  

stebain: Count me in the group that thinks the article was about power abuse and not intended to reference the horny tubes.


He goes on to suggest chemical castration for every man. He's pretty solidly talking about sex, unless you're suggesting that the entire post Adams made was a metaphor.
 
2011-06-17 07:12:42 AM  

way south: To that end, if a Male can't have his way by wooing the females then his instinct probably would drive him to force.


There are plenty of cases of male animals who don't mate because they can't compete with a local male or they can't attract any females with their mating dance or tiny horns or blah blah. Mother Nature doesn't urge them to force themselves on females; nature wants them to just go die in a corner because their genes aren't attractive enough to be spread.
 
2011-06-17 07:16:09 AM  

way south: The unfortunate fact is that mother nature is a cold biatch.
She really doesn't care how reproduction happens so long as it does.

To that end, if a Male can't have his way by wooing the females then his instinct probably would drive him to force.
Which is why we have to have laws against such behavior, just as we have laws against peeing on the street just because nature calls.




Even if what you're saying is true, and I don't think it is, as 'rape' is not a universal reproduction strategy anymore than any deviate behavior is a universal survival strategy -- that's not Adams' point.

Adams' takes this spurious logic a step further in implying that just because the urge is natural, it must also be 'right.' A problem with an oppressive 'society.' It's an example of the absolute worst offered by the inappropriately named 'libertarianism.'
 
2011-06-17 07:18:59 AM  
Yes, rape is natural for those with the genetic propensity for it. Though I don't think the majority of the male population carries this gene. Those who do, and act on that impulse however, should be removed from the gene pool as quickly as possible.
 
2011-06-17 07:23:00 AM  
Scott Adams likes to troll from time to time. He always has, but he's been getting more blunt about it. He likes to see what kind of reaction he'll get, just like any troll.

I see his net came up full this time ;)
 
2011-06-17 07:23:05 AM  

wyltoknow: way south: To that end, if a Male can't have his way by wooing the females then his instinct probably would drive him to force.

There are plenty of cases of male animals who don't mate because they can't compete with a local male or they can't attract any females with their mating dance or tiny horns or blah blah. Mother Nature doesn't urge them to force themselves on females; nature wants them to just go die in a corner because their genes aren't attractive enough to be spread.


Eh, nature doesn't want specific things per se, so we shouldn't try to project our own personal morality onto it. If rape was an effective way of propagating one's genes, then that would certainly count for something, irrespective of how attractive (or not) the rapists in question were.
 
2011-06-17 07:24:28 AM  

Biological Ali: If rape was an effective way of propagating one's genes


Or perhaps a byproduct of other such things, even if it itself was not directly so.
 
2011-06-17 07:24:30 AM  

wyltoknow: way south: To that end, if a Male can't have his way by wooing the females then his instinct probably would drive him to force.

There are plenty of cases of male animals who don't mate because they can't compete with a local male or they can't attract any females with their mating dance or tiny horns or blah blah. Mother Nature doesn't urge them to force themselves on females; nature wants them to just go die in a corner because their genes aren't attractive enough to be spread.


There are also many species where the males don't give a damn for courtship and will even use violence.
If a creature evolves things like barbs on its penis then you can assume the females whim's really aren't taken into account. There are also species where the females do little to reject a males advances, particularly herding animals.

Species that dance, like birds, have probably evolved courtship because mating requires the females compliance.
I'd suspect humans are closer to herding mammals in their behavior.

Violent males and easy women are a good combination for large populations.
Evolution only requires babies. How they are made is a secondary problem.
 
2011-06-17 07:29:29 AM  

Biological Ali: Eh, nature doesn't want specific things per se, so we shouldn't try to project our own personal morality onto it. If rape was an effective way of propagating one's genes, then that would certainly count for something, irrespective of how attractive (or not) the rapists in question were.


Meh of course nature doesn't really exist as a force that drives people to vague whims, it's more of a simplification. There are still plenty of cases which show that rape is not an effective means of replicating, at the very least enough to contend with people who point to the examples of rape in nature as if it makes some point that rape is a constant underlying part of our genes.
 
2011-06-17 07:29:29 AM  

SJKebab: BackAssward: Most of us have evolved ethics, morality, empathy, etc. so that we do not desire to do those acts.

That is why even if I saw someone so hot I had a thought "man I could so jump her", the thought of forcibly jumping her doesn't enter my mind.


Evolved? Or taught?




Evolved. Empathy is an expression our genes wanting to protect themselves -- we are *not* individuals struggling against nature as the old paradigm would suggest. Your genes want to survive, and they don't care if they do in you or your siblings or cousins -- your hardwired to protect those most like you with varying degrees of empathic capability beyond that due to being a highly social animal.

But we also have this big higher functioning social brain, which channels this innate instinct toward all kinds of things from inanimate objects to our pets. We genuinely 'care' about them, even if they aren't conduits for our genetic survival. And it will arise whether it's taught or not.
 
2011-06-17 07:33:33 AM  

starsrift: He goes on to suggest chemical castration for every man. He's pretty solidly talking about sex, unless you're suggesting that the entire post Adams made was a metaphor.


Then I'll stand corrected. All I have is that hard to read image from the website and can't follow through to the blog at work.
 
2011-06-17 07:34:51 AM  

Gish21: At least in humans it's not so common that females have developed genital fortifications against it, like ducks with their corkscrew vaginas (new window) and fake cavities to trap rape sperm.


That's an excellent band name.
 
2011-06-17 07:40:33 AM  

wyltoknow: Meh of course nature doesn't really exist as a force that drives people to vague whims, it's more of a simplification. There are still plenty of cases which show that rape is not an effective means of replicating, at the very least enough to contend with people who point to the examples of rape in nature as if it makes some point that rape is a constant underlying part of our genes.


It has nonetheless been consistently observed in enough species that it can't be dismissed as merely individual failings on the part of the animals that do it. Also, you can't really make a point about one species by referring to a completely different species, since we know that not every species will have evolved an identical set of traits. I mean, unless the argument is the species may have turned out differently if it had evolved under different circumstances, but that's a somewhat separate angle.
 
Displayed 50 of 381 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report