Why does widespread rape happen during (certain) wars?
Is it a libido thing?
A dominance thing like prison?
Or is it to humiliate the loser?
We all know about the Fall of Berlin and Rwanda. Why is rape used as a instrument of war? Seems excessively cruel if you ask me.
>>1294269
I have no evidence to back up this claim but it probably has to do with the fact that the enemy is often dehumanized and that's when the atrocities of war start to occur since if they're not viewed as human, you can do pretty much anything to them, and when they're trying to kill your friends and you blame them for having put you in your shitty situation, it makes all the more sense to want to treat them badly.
Cong soldiers explain why they rape:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbZIK9Ce0yM
This is the sauce behind the "wherever I go I must also rape" pic you see somewhere in this imageboard.
>>1294663
yeah, that's exactly it imo
>>1294679
From A History of God:
Western scholars often translate muruwah as 'manliness' but it had a far wider range of significance: it meant courage in
battle, patience and endurance in suffering and absolute dedication to the tribe. The virtues of muruwah required an Arab to
obey his sayyid or chief at a second's notice, regardless of his personal safety; he had to dedicate himself to the chivalrous
duties of avenging any wrong committed against the tribe and protecting its more vulnerable members.
To ensure the survival of the tribe, the sayyid shared its wealth and possessions equally and avenged the death of a single
one of his people by killing a member of the murderer's tribe. It is here that we see the communal ethic most clearly: there
was no duty to punish the killer himself because an individual could vanish without trace in a society like pre-Islamic Arabia.
Instead one member of the enemy tribe was equivalent to another for such purposes. The vendetta or blood-feud was the
only way of ensuring a modicum of social security in a region where there was no central authority, where every tribal group
was a law unto itself and where there was nothing comparable to a modern police force. If a chief failed to retaliate, nobody
would respect his tribe and would feel free to kill its members with impunity. The vendetta was thus a rough and ready form
of justice which meant that no one tribe could easily gain ascendancy over any of the others. It also meant that the various
tribes could easily become involved in an unstoppable cycle of violence, in which one vendetta would lead to another if
people felt that the revenge taken was disproportionate to the original offence.
>>1294269
In extremely brutal wars, such as the ones in Africa or the Eastern front in WW2, many normal people will become desensitised to violence, cruelty and suffering, but their hate for the enemy will grow evermore. So by raping their enemy's women they feel as though they are getting revenge for their dead friends as well as the women at home that the enemy soldiers might have done the same thing to.
>>1294685
Brutal as it undoubtedly was, however, muruwah had many strengths. It encouraged a deep and strong egalitarianism and
encouraged an indifference to material goods which, again, was probably essential in a region where there were not enough
of the essentials to go round: the cult of largesse and generosity were important virtues and taught the Arabs to take no heed
for the morrow. These qualities would become very important in Islam, as we shall see.
tl;dr - your ability to protect the weakest members of your tribe from being murdered (and raped) is the measure of your worth as a tribal leader.
I murder (and rape) whoever I want in your tribe, fuck your tribe in particular, I dare you to stop me if you can.
Why does homosexual rape (male-on-male) and sexual assault also occur at higher rates during war, too?
The study of it was largely limited until the present, but enough can be gathered to point to its presence in many wars (French Empire troops sodomizing male peasants in the Peninsular War; Soviet troops sodomizing Germans at the end of WWII; various African warlords raping male captives and turning boys into sex slaves, etc.)
You surrounded by men for months and sometimes years at a time with no intimacy but your hands.
You're in a situation in which testosterone and adrenaline are spiking to keep your brain functioning through immense stress.
As said here >>1294663 the opponent is dehumanized to reconcile the slaughter that is happening and thus doing whatever you want to them is justified.
And for a great deal of time it was seen as a reward for service. You fight and risk your life, after the battle you get your spoils which included fucking women.
But I think the first two points are large factors in it when keeping in mind the large amount of rapes that occur in the modern US military, even among it's own service members.
testosterone and adrenaline
>>1294269
>Seems excessively cruel if you ask me.
You mean more excessive than murdering a million people with AK-47s and machetes?
lol
>>1294269
Cuckolding is the ultimate display of power
There's a reason cucks historically had stag horns in depictions
A male deer defeated in battle has proven his martial and genetic inferiority
And as a result has lost his mate and soon his children (who will be violently killed by the victorious buck)
Vas victis
>>1294269
Maybe because there's chaos and anarchy during the war, there's no law and no consequences?
>>1294700
domination and the cultural notion of "emasculation".
>>1294800
But 'why'? Think about how filthy it must be down there especially during a wartime...
>>1294817
Booty is good no matter the odor.
Only supported hypothesis I've seen is that rape, particularly gang rape, is used as a bonding technique by soldiers.
https://wcfia.harvard.edu/files/wcfia/files/cohen_apsr_2013.pdf
Rape is more common in groups that use press ganging or abduction to recruit, even when controlling for discipline and organizational characteristics.
>>1296319
Obviously rape is always more common during war, but it is a lot more common is some wars than others. Particularly gang rape.
It's much less common in volunteer forces, even if they are poorly organized and engaging in ethnic or religious conflict.
>>1294269
>Why does widespread rape happen during (certain) wars?
At least 60% if not more of males are assholes with loose morales who would be more than happy to rape as soon as social order breaks down. Even today in our civilised western countries.
Don't trust humans.
>>1296335
Most wars are civil wars. Rebels and governments need civilian support, or at the very least, can be harmed by defection.
Foreign occupation driven counterinsurgency is also all about winning civilian support.
State armies and rebels have incentives to stop rape, yet some not only do little to stop it, they encourage it. "All people are shit," doesn't really explain the huge variation of rape during warfare or why certain organizations don't punish rapists or encourage rape.
>>1294679
>Power of rape magic
>>1296326
Rwanda
Bosnia
Battle of Berlin
Nanking
What other battles/wars does it stand out in?
Because men unleashed are savages
>>1296370
Darfur
Syrian and Iraqi civil wars
DRC in the 1990's
Sierra Leon
Russian occupation of West Germany and elsewhere in Eastern Europe
Nazi occupations of pretty much everywhere
It happened, but was not nearly as pronounced in other wars:
Afghanistan - USSR occupation
Afghanistan - NATO occupation
Iraq - American occupation
Vietnam - American occupation
Vietnam - French occupation
World War 1
>>1294269
Because that's how it always worked throughout history, it's a primal thing, and it makes perfect evolutionary sense. Your question should be "why aren't there more rapes during wars?"
>Why do professional killers try to make their penises feel good
Such a retarded question just to excuse your typical leftist mumbo-jumbo psuedo lost generation rhetoric
>>1294706
>But I think the first two points are large factors in it when keeping in mind the large amount of rapes that occur in the modern US military, even among it's own service members.
Very sad thing to be honest with you. I've read about it and it's utterly fucked up.
>>1296460
Normally I would agree with you.
But wherever troops are there are usually local women who are always down for some tricking. Most of the people I know who have served have paid for some pussy.
Some cases, like Rwanda, it is almost ordered.
Testosterone.
This is the beta uprisings when their balls drop
One of the many perks of conquest.
>>1294679
That first dude is wearing a marley shirt.
One love indeed.
Its purely biological
After your group has defeated another group, the logical step is to impregnate all of their women
>>1296605
Well compensated soldiers is a fairly new phenomenon, typically they get paid in loot and free sex. Though whores followed professional armies like the romans
>>1297283
How does that account for same-sex rape in war scenarios, though?
>>1294269
Why not tho?
If you're going to seal your fate as a psychopath killer that fights against other humans just for the philosophy of some bigger psychopath in charge - you're going to enjoy it all the way down.
Do you think you can do so much evil, then suddenly act like an angel?
Most rape accusations are athrocity war propaganda.
>>1299028
Can you prove it?
>>1294269
Because
a) Men enjoy fucking
b) It's a potent psychological weapon
c) It's a potent physical weapon in a long-term war where your enemies are forced to raise your spawn
d) Men on campaign need to fuck and civilians are cheaper than prostitutes
Why not?
>>1299142
Yes
