It is because women are seen as the weaker sex that rapists target them. The argument that women are the weaker sex is sexist.
Women are weaker because social conditioning of females in society has led to the fallacy that higher upper body strength is not feminine.
Yet women's fitness magazines have promoted upper body strength and increased muscle mass as sexy.
I argue that because of social conditioning, women have decided not to develop upper body strength and increased muscle mass.
Thus, women are the weaker sex due to choices they have made to protect the myth of the weaker sex.
Feminists would argue that this is a sexist rationalization. I could counter that this only looks sexist on first glance.
A close scrutiny of myths about femininity may be sabotaged by overemphasis on binary gender in society i.e. that there are differences in male and female behavior.
These differences are due to biases about what is feminine and what is masculine. By emphasizing that women are the weaker sex - a myth that has influenced women not to increase upper body strength and overall muscle mass - society has conditioned women and men to make that false assumption.
Thus the solution is to raise children to be human beings, and to encourage girls to participate in sports that were traditionally male.
This has been done in society yet the myth that women are the weaker sex still prevails.
As well, rape culture needs to be addressed in public education to prevent future assaults. I endorse increased physical training in girls and young women and martial arts training.
This has happened at UBC as a result of the rapes. It needs to be promoted in public education too.
Finally, the binary binary itself is a factor that needs to be addressed. The myth that women are the weaker sex is partially due to social conditioning. Women who believe that increased upper body strength and overall muscle mass is ugly tend to be living examples of that myth. The minority of women who have chosen to increase muscle mass are proof that the "women are the weaker" is a fallacy.
Rather than examining why women accept the myth rather than the truth that weakness is due to choices that both sexes make due to social conditioning, the social conditioning which results in the difference between the ways boys and girls are raised in society needs to be addressed.
Child-rearing differences that are based on gender respect the fact that boys and girls behave differently in social settings. Most boys are dominant in their behavior, while most girls are submissive.
However, when a girl tries to become dominant, she is given social cues to be submissive and whenever she breaks the rules, she is shamed until she is conditioned to be submissive in public but dominant in private. The same thing is done to boys: when a boy act submissive he too is shamed until he is conditioned to be dominant in public but submissive in private. These types of children tend to be the rule.
The boys and girls who reflect the myths of femininity and masculinity are not the rule in society. Rather they have taken the social cues to extreme. It leads to such fallacies that only the male ego exists in public, while in private feminine women give evidence of female ego through displays of vanity by frequently consulting their reflections to improve their beauty.
How does rape culture fit into this? Rape culture ia based on the assumption that boys and men are supposed to be dominant and girls and women are supposed to be submissive.
However, this assumption is a logical conclusion based on social conditioning which emphasizes the differences between boys and girls. It also is assumed that one trait of dominance is the use of violence. In contrast, one trait of submission is the use of nonviolent verbal communication to reduce the threat of violence.
In short, the dominant person will select a submissive person to victimize. However, the submissive person who chooses to act submissively becomes a victim.
In the cases of the rapes on UBC campus, most of the women did not submit willingly. Indeed, in most cases, the rape was stopped before intromission. Thus most of the cases of rape are actually cases of sexual assault since none of them wnded in coitus.
Thus I submit that the six sexual assaults since September 2013 are not rapes but attempted rapes. I also submit that none of the so-called victims submitted to rape but instead submitted to assault due to intoxication or fatigue but soon fought off their attacker.
This means that the rape culture argument is a political ploy by WAVAW aka the Vancouver Rape Crisis Centre to cast the six survivors of sexual assault as victims of rape.
As well, the term rape culture is itself a fallacy. If there was truly a rape culture, then the six incidents of sexual violence imply that there are up to 54 unreported incidents that were not reported because the many women did not think they were victims because they successfully fought off their attacker who was known to them or they are too ashamed to report the incident because they are afraid to be painted as the victim.
Therefore rape culture is a feminist term used to frame sexual assault in terms of aggressor and victim. As well, the dominance and submission dichotomy is a false one since there are people who are dominant in both public and private, people who are submissive in public and in private, people who are dominant in public and submissive in private and people who are submissive in public and dominant in private. Additionally there may be people who exhibit all four types of behavior depending on the circumstances.
Sexual violence is actually a rare occurrence, and incidents of it have been reported less over the years because of increased reporting. Its reporting on UBC campus has not stopped the sexual assaults because women on campus still believe they are safe and engage in behaviors that result in being assaulted by the attacker i.e. walking alone to their dormitories and walking in areas of UBC where it is safe for the attack to strike.
That there was a sixth sexual assault on UBC campus is proof that the rise in martial arts training by female students has done nothing to stop attempted rape. It also indicates that the message from UBC to walk in a group is not being heeded by some of the students.
Thus the women who was assaulted chose to behave in a vulnerable manner. I deny that I am blaming the victim since there is no rape victim. There is only another sexual assault survivor who is also a survivor of attempted rape. In all cases, the survivors successfully fought off their attacker.
It is because UBC has refused to allow the sexual assault centre from helping prevent sexual assault on campus in a more pro-active manner that these assaults continue.
It is also because UBC President Toope has yet to associate the assaults to the frosh rape chants and the incidents of racism on campus that the assaults will continue.
Additionally the refusal by a few female students to use the strategies available to reduce potential assaults shows either that they feel invulnerable due to their youth or refuse to behave in a manner that reduce the chance of sexual assault.
Nothing UBC campus does regarding assault prevention will help such women. They choose to remain vulnerable in the hope that the police or a security guard catches the attacker. However, because they choose to walk in areas which are unsafe, they also choose to accept the risk.
Regarding the attacker, the descriptions of him are consistent with a man not originally from Western society, possibly Middle Eastern, Persian or South Asian. It is not racist to assume that the man is born into a culture in which the traditional role of men is to be dominant and women, submissive. This is a cultural absolute in which any deviation from the norm almost always unfairly punishes the women. To such men, it is the norm for rape culture to arise.
Feminist would argue that this is racial profiling and that generally men create rape culture because they are dominant due to their gender. I counter-argue that the roles of dominance and submission is not exclusively "men are dominant" and "women are submissive" because it depends on the situation.
However, in traditional cultures, the roles of dominance and submission are rigid with men being dominant and women, submissive.
My guess is that the attacker is assuming that his potential victims would submit willingly. None of the six women who survived their sexual assaults submitted willingly and this prevented being raped. I also argue that these women are survivors of sexual assault, and that the attacker is inept at being a rapist because whenever a woman resisted, he fled.
In conclusion, I submit that rape culture in Western society is not the cause of the six incidents of sexual assault on UBC campus. Instead, rape culture in the Middle Eaqst and South Asia may more likely be the cause. The feminists' argument regarding rape culture has been unfairly generalized so as to avoid any hint of racism.
However, it is not racist to racially profile the attacker since he is not white. Indeed, the perpetration of sexual assault by white males has decreased over the past 20 years. Yet there is a higher incidence of sexual assault by men of Western and South Asia over the same period, most recently reported in India.
Perhaps then the attacker has assumed that white women - most of the six victim are white - are easy targets. However, they are not submissive like women in his cultural group. This is why I call him an inept rapist since he has consistently failed in dominating white women.
I would then conclude that the attacker is racially profiling his potential victims, and will continue to fail to succeed at raping them. Yet he will succeed at sexual assault, and thus continue to terrorize women on campus.
Thus this is a racially-motivated hate crime against women. He is familiar with UBC and will continue to attempt rape of white females. His motivation in assault white females is due to the false assumption that white females easily submit to sexual assault.
Any survivor of such sexual assaults should report such incidents immediately. Any women who thwarted the man by hyper-vigilant activity should report a description of this man.
This man will continue to strike because there are no withnesses after dark in the early morning.
Thus the prevention is simple: NEVER WALK ALONE AT NIGHT.
