Xref: utzoo sci.bio:805 soc.men:2434 soc.women:8911 sci.misc:732
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!joe
From: joe@athena.mit.edu (Joseph C Wang)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,soc.men,soc.women,sci.misc
Subject: Re: Rape a reproductive advantage?
Message-ID: <2201@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 9 Jan 88 18:48:47 GMT
References: <517@gtx.com> <5129@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: joe@athena.mit.edu (Joseph C Wang)
Distribution: na
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 29

In article <5129@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> palmer@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (David Palmer) writes:
>In article <517@gtx.com> scm@gtx.UUCP (Sue Miller) writes:
>>  As it is, I am not sure that rape as we humans know it
>>even exists in any other species - although the example of cricket sexual
>>behavior comes close I guess....
>[Prurient description of the sex life of crickets ommitted at the
> request of Ed Meese]
>
>Any statement which says "Humans (or Western Europeans etc.) are the only
>species (people etc.) which do [some evil thing]" are usually wrong.
>Rape among ducks is well documented.  (The female duck does NOT want to
>be raped, the male duck uses force.)  When this happens, the husband of the
>raped duck immediately rapes his wife, to reduce the chances of being
>genetically cuckolded.

I have a very big problem with the use of the word "rape" (or "monogamy" and
"polygamy" for that matter) in describing behavior in animals regardless of
how close that behavior *appears* to resemble human behavior.  Using "rape" 
to describe the behavior of crickets, ducks, and humans suggests that its
cause is the same in each species.  Humans DO NOT engage in forced copulation 
for the same reason ducks do.  Forced copulation in humans and ducks are 
completely different phenomenon.



--------------------------------
Joseph Wang (joe@athena.mit.edu) 
450 Memorial Drive C-111
Cambridge, MA 02139