Science and Rape Culture
Introduction
In 1975 Susan Brownmiller brought the significance of rape to the public’s attention by emphasizing the fact that sexual aggression was defined by more than just sexuality. She suggested that power and status also played a role in rape’s significance. Additionally, the upper hand in the power dynamic of a relationship is typically associated with men. Prior to this, public conception held that rape was rare and was only committed by mentally weak sociopaths upon careless victims. These new inquires brought the fact that rape could affect anyone, including ordinary men and women, into new focus. This sparked debate over what the causation of rape was; many looked to scientists to determine the cause. Thornhill and Palmer described their interpretation of this in A Natural History of Rape, a work of scientific literature that contributes to rape culture. Cheryl Brown Travis refuted their work with her own book, Evolution, Gender, and Rape. In these two books, it is easy to see how scientific literature may contribute to rape culture.(1)
Authors
A Natural History of Rape
Randy Thornhill, Professor of Zoology at The University of New Mexico
Craig T. Palmer, Professor of Anthropology at The University of Missouri
Evolution, Gender, and Rape
Cheryl Brown Travis (main editor of book), Professor of Psychology at The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
In 1975 Susan Brownmiller brought the significance of rape to the public’s attention by emphasizing the fact that sexual aggression was defined by more than just sexuality. She suggested that power and status also played a role in rape’s significance. Additionally, the upper hand in the power dynamic of a relationship is typically associated with men. Prior to this, public conception held that rape was rare and was only committed by mentally weak sociopaths upon careless victims. These new inquires brought the fact that rape could affect anyone, including ordinary men and women, into new focus. This sparked debate over what the causation of rape was; many looked to scientists to determine the cause. Thornhill and Palmer described their interpretation of this in A Natural History of Rape, a work of scientific literature that contributes to rape culture. Cheryl Brown Travis refuted their work with her own book, Evolution, Gender, and Rape. In these two books, it is easy to see how scientific literature may contribute to rape culture.(1)
Authors
A Natural History of Rape
Randy Thornhill, Professor of Zoology at The University of New Mexico
Craig T. Palmer, Professor of Anthropology at The University of Missouri
Evolution, Gender, and Rape
Cheryl Brown Travis (main editor of book), Professor of Psychology at The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
A Natural History of Rape and rape culture
In A Natural History of Rape, the authors suggest that evolution is the causation of rape. Thornhill and Palmer elaborate on the evolutionary “success” of rape in a reproductive sense. They claim that rape is a surviving trait because it allows reproduction for an individual that may otherwise be unable to find a partner. Rape is also referred to as an adaptation in their work. Thornhill and Palmer attempt to use every aspect of evolution to explain the presence of rape today. Also, the authors use the term “sexual coercion” instead of the word ‘rape’ throughout the book; it is also a part of their full title. This phrasing implies that rape is an act of persuasion rather than an act of violence. The term “sexual coercion” conveys a much more “relaxed” tone than rape, suggesting that it is acceptable and an act of persuasion. Travis refutes many of their claims with scientific data and evidence in her book Evolution, Gender, and Rape. It is a collection of essays refuting the position evolutionary take on the continuation of rape. |
Scientific discussion
In A Natural History of Rape it is stated, “We evolutionists use the term reproductive success to refer to these reproductive interests, by which we mean not the mere production of offspring but the production of offspring that survive to produce [their own] offspring (Palmer and Steadman 1997). A trait that increases this ability is "good" in terms of natural selection even though one might consider it undesirable in moral terms.”(2)
In A Natural History of Rape it is stated, “We evolutionists use the term reproductive success to refer to these reproductive interests, by which we mean not the mere production of offspring but the production of offspring that survive to produce [their own] offspring (Palmer and Steadman 1997). A trait that increases this ability is "good" in terms of natural selection even though one might consider it undesirable in moral terms.”(2)
Drea and Wallen explain in Evolution, Gender, and Rape, how many rapes do not actually result in successful reproduction in cases involving “males, prepubescent girls, pregnant and postmenopausal women.”(3) Reproductive success cannot be used as an explanation in these and many other cases because rapists that target the above listed demographic commit the act knowing they will not in any way be able to reproduce from their actions. Furthermore, the structural and functional traits of ‘sexual coercion’ in primates can be used to refute the idea of evolutionary rape. Female “primitive” primate species have, “a vaginal aperture [which] appears for as little as 1 to 3 days per cycle before completely disappearing again, and sexual receptivity can last for as little as four hours (Foerg 1982; Petter-Rousseaux 1964).”(4) This particular mating time is applicable in a sense, because only the female will know when her own reproductive period is while a potential mate or rapist will not. Thus, the female will is unlikely to reproduce from sexual actions unless she initiates the actions. Many females of different species have evolved similar traits such as the spotted hyena, Asiatic elephant, rodents, and certain prosimians. Although differing slightly, they all show that adaptations have developed to give the female a degree of control in sexual encounters. Larger size is often associated with power; as such, males are the larger size and carry control. In some organisms, the opposite is true such as “many species of invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, and birds.”(5) Generally, in these species, the females are larger or equal to males in size. This situation leaves the power with the females. Although females are larger or the same size in these species, there are exceptions. Thus, they propose that, “rape has minimal reproductive benefits because human females (1) conceal ovulation and (2) are notoriously infertile (Short 1976).”(6) If evolution has any role at all, it is that females have evolved to avoid cases of rape as opposed to the idea that males have evolved to commit rape.
|
To further their argument on the evolutionary approach Thornhill and Palmer claim, “The crucial legitimate scientific debate about the evolutionary cause of human rape is concerned with whether rape is a result of a rape-specific adaptation or a by-product of other adaptations… We also agree that enough is now known about the ultimate evolutionary causes of human rape [such] that an evolutionary approach can contribute significantly to prevention of the act.”(7)
In their portion of Evolution, Gender, and Rape, Tobach and Reed use the concepts of evolution by natural selection to explore and rebut Thornhill's and Palmer’s reasoning regarding an evolutionary success within human rape. They discuss how natural selection is dependent on an “individual’s behavior being central to survival for reproduction of viable young that would themselves reproduce successfully.”(8) If this selection is dependent on individuals it is very unlikely that the selection of a trait or gene associated with rape could be present in a significant number of a population. They explain that Thornhill and Palmer’s ideas are not consistent with natural selection, since “these concepts suggest that behavior of an individual is the product of developmental experiences on many levels, including the internalization of externally generated experiences.”(9) Further, Thornhill and Palmer misuse the term ‘adaptation,’ since it is strictly defined as, “the structural and functional variations that take place to bring about the diversity in species.”(10) Tobach and Reed believe adaptive variations that result in evolutionary change more closely fits exaptation than adaptation and therefore, Thornhill and Palmer’s claims contain inaccuracy. “If, in fact, it does not improve reproductive success, it is maladaptive. Until the data are in, the issue is unresolved.”(11) Although a clear answer is not available, pressing points that need further analysis are introduced. As such, no link can be confirmed decisively between evolutionary success and rape.
Conclusion
Overall, there are many different scientific opinions that are accessible to the general public, enabling people to believe what they want. These works are scientific literature, suggesting that they are all true, but as shown by Evolution, Gender, and Rape and A Natural History of Rape, they contradict one another and contain inaccuracy, in some cases. Some selectively use data that only supports their point. Additionally, the data pertaining to rape and sexual assaults is very uncertain to begin with, considering many cases go unreported. Society and science need to take a step forward in the prevention and portrayal of the data that is available, using it towards a rape free society. Evolution, Gender, and Rape provides a push back at A Natural History of Rape, contributing to rape culture by the portrayals they make, such as A Natural History of Rape’s use of the term sexual coersion interchangeably with rape. Small factors such as this throughout both books alter the way people perceive the content that is presented.
Overall, there are many different scientific opinions that are accessible to the general public, enabling people to believe what they want. These works are scientific literature, suggesting that they are all true, but as shown by Evolution, Gender, and Rape and A Natural History of Rape, they contradict one another and contain inaccuracy, in some cases. Some selectively use data that only supports their point. Additionally, the data pertaining to rape and sexual assaults is very uncertain to begin with, considering many cases go unreported. Society and science need to take a step forward in the prevention and portrayal of the data that is available, using it towards a rape free society. Evolution, Gender, and Rape provides a push back at A Natural History of Rape, contributing to rape culture by the portrayals they make, such as A Natural History of Rape’s use of the term sexual coersion interchangeably with rape. Small factors such as this throughout both books alter the way people perceive the content that is presented.