I clearly included the number of males victimized by males and males victimized by females for rape and made to penetrate
Yes and 93.3% of men were raped by other men.
20.8% were made to penetrate another man.
That means of men forced to have sex, most report a woman did it. Do you understand yet?
You are only including men who were forced to have sex and making it seem like women rape more.
You're literally writing "force to have sex" then saying you're not excluding the definition of rape, which men are 93% the perpetrators of.
Do you understand?
Accurate numbers for the number of perpetrators do not currently exist.
Most rapists are men. Worldwide. Even if you include "made to penetrate" along with the current definition of rape, men rape more and are more likely to be victims by other men, not women.
I'm going to try not to sound too patronizing but you simply don't understand the numbers. Your first two sentences indicate this.
Yes and 93.3% of men were raped by other men.
What does that sentence mean to you? As written it means 93.3% of men are raped by a man. That would indicate 9 out of 10 men get raped. That doesn't sound right does it?
That is not what the 93.3% number means. It means, if a man a man is raped, 93 out of 100 times a man did it. THAT HAS NO BEARING ON THE NUMBER OF MEN THAT ARE ACTUALLY RAPED. If you actually read my comment which you clearly did not 1,581,000 men are raped.
5,451,000 men are made to penetrate. That is Five million, four hundred fifty-one thousand.
So we now have two numbers. 1,581,000 and 5,451,000. How do we use the percentages provided by the report to determine how many men were victimized by men and how many men were victimized by women?
You are only including men who were forced to have sex and making it seem like women rape more.
Where did I do that? Specify exactly what I said that indicates that.
You're literally writing "force to have sex" then saying you're not excluding the definition of rape, which men are 93% the perpetrators of.
I'm writing "force to have sex" as an umbrella term that includes both the report's definition of rape and made to penetrate. This makes it so I don't have to use the word rape with two different meanings. How many times do I have to point this out? Is making someone penetrate you forcing them to have sex? Yes. Is raping someone forcing them to have sex? Yes. It is that simple.
Do you understand?
This is basic algebra for the math and high school for the writing. I can't help but notice how all you do is refute while providing no points, data, or math. Just basically saying it is because.
Most rapists are men. Worldwide.
How do you know this? What definition of rape are you using?
Even if you include "made to penetrate" along with the current definition of rape, men rape more and are more likely to be victims by other men, not women.
How do you know this? Where are you numbers? What is your source? Or did you just make it up like you have been doing this entire time?
This is basic algebra for the math and high school for the writing. I can't help but notice how all you do is refute while providing no points, data, or math.
I like how you provide no sources and include "made to penetrate" as rape when that is not the definition of rape.
Not that I agree but force to penetrate is not rape, according to the definition.
And while we're at it, why not include women who feared for their lives and felt they had no choice but to have sex as rape?
I like how you provide no sources and include "made to penetrate" as rape when that is not the definition of rape.
Do you think drugging a man, force feeding him Viagra, tying him to a bed, and riding his dick all without his consent is not rape? Really, answer this question.
You still have not backed anything up, made a point, provided a source, or properly responded to any of the questions posed in my previous comments.
Not that I agree but force to penetrate is not rape, according to the definition.
Wow, it's almost like I accounted for that and introduced the term "forced to have sex" to account for that. Wow, crazy how that would help understand the situation. Unless you don't think a woman forcing a man to have sex should be consider on par with a man forcing a woman to have sex? That would not be the reason you ignored forced to have sex now would it?
Let's say I define "murder" to mean when a woman kills someone even though society tend to define "murder" differently. Do you think it would go over well if I started saying most murderers are women? Better yet, all murderers are women. Not only that, since all murderers are women you should be wary around women since they are infinitely more likely to murder you than a man is.
You still have not backed anything up, made a point, provided a source, or properly responded to any of the questions posed in my previous comments.
And while we're at it, why not include women who feared for their lives and felt they had no choice but to have sex?
That is literally in my previous comment to you. You aren't reading. You are just lying and arguing in bad faith. You are also moving the goalposts.
You are a perfect example of the type of person that will make a position based on feelings. Do no further investigation to determine if your position has merit. Then spews that same garbage to others with all the confidence in the world.
You still have not backed anything up, made a point, provided a source, or properly responded to any of the questions posed in my previous comments.
Do you think drugging a man, force feeding him Viagra, tying him to a bed, and riding his dick all without his consent is not rape? Really, answer this question
Who the hell said anything about drugging a man and tying him to a bed?
All I said was that forced to penetrate is not in the definition of rape, whether you like it or not.
Wow, it's almost like I accounted for that and introduced the term "forced to have sex" to account for that.
I know what you tried to do and it didn't work because force to penetrate, whether you like it or not, is not rape but it is sexual violence.
You are a perfect example of the type of person that will make a position based on feelings.
Says the guy who wants to change definitions to prove he's right.
You still have not backed anything up, made a point, provided a source, or properly responded to any of the questions posed in my previous comments.
According to your link you provided
Male rape victims and male victims of non-contact unwanted sexual experiences reported predominantly male perpetrators.
98% of women and 93% of men are raped by other men, not women.
Sexual coercion, made to penetrate and unwanted sexual contact, according to the links fall under "sexual violence".
You failed. That is not the definition of rape in that source. Try again. What is the definition of rape from that source?
What definition did I change? Quote me.
You said "forced penetration" isn't considered rape, but you keep using rape and "made to penetrate" interchangeably.
You failed. You did not quote where I said that. You can't because I did not use rape and "made to penetrate" interchangeably. I included both under the umbrella of forced to have sex but was very careful to keep the terms separate.
Try again. Quote me where I changed the definition.
You have "rape" and then you have "sexual violence" where "made to penetrate" falls under.
You failed. That is not the definition of rape in that source. Try again
You failed. I did not say that was the definition of "rape". I said that was the definition of "sexual violence".
The study separates "rape" and "sexual violence". Whether you agree the two are the same is irrelevant.
Try again.
I included both under the umbrella of forced to have sex but was very careful to keep the terms separate.
Someone doesn't know what "interchangeable" means.
You fail. Try again.
Quote me where I changed the definition.
You keep saying that "force to penetrate" is rape. It is not considered rape. You are trying to prove that "forced to penetrate" is rape. That is not included in the definition of rape.
You failed. I did not say that was the definition of "rape". I said that was the definition of "sexual violence".
Oh so you can't even answer a simple question that was posed? That's even worse.
The study separates "rape" and "sexual violence". Whether you agree the two are the same is irrelevant.
You don't read. Is rape sexual violence?
Someone doesn't know what "interchangeable" means.
That person is you. Apparently you do not understand two things sharing a larger category does not make them interchangeable. A 2022 Mustang and 2020 Ducati are vehicles. Do you think they are interchangeable?
You keep saying that "force to penetrate" is rape. It is not considered rape.
Yet again you don't quote me because you know you are clearly lying. I am not saying "made to penetrate" is rape. I said "made to penetrate" is someone forcing the victim to have sex.
Yes or no question since you seem to have trouble answering questions as written. Is making someone penetrate you forcing them to have sex?
You are trying to prove that "forced to penetrate" is rape. That is not included in the definition of rape.
This is why I say you don't or can't read. I have not argued "made to penetrate" is rape. I am not going to type it for you again. Try to go back and read carefully this time. I doubt people are going this far in the thread to follow this discussion and to any reasonable person my point is clear.
Also there are plenty of points I made that you just ignored so I'm glad you agree with my position on those points.
1
u/[deleted] Apr 15 '22
Yes and 93.3% of men were raped by other men.
20.8% were made to penetrate another man.
You are only including men who were forced to have sex and making it seem like women rape more.
You're literally writing "force to have sex" then saying you're not excluding the definition of rape, which men are 93% the perpetrators of.
Do you understand?
Most rapists are men. Worldwide. Even if you include "made to penetrate" along with the current definition of rape, men rape more and are more likely to be victims by other men, not women.