Rape fantasies in men and women

[ChiTownHoney]

Do you think that rape fantasies are more predominant in men or women?

I think they are most predominant in women than men, because I believe that most women like to be manhandled to a certain degree.

Men on the other hand I dont think so, because wouldnt you want to be wanted? If the girl does not want it, does it turn you off?

In rape fantasy for women at least they feel wanted.

(this is under the assumption that men fantasize about being the rapist and women fantasize about being the victim)

opinions?

[ynyn]

I used to think it was almost only men,but after seeing how many female members there are here and in other rape fantasy forums,Ive been surprised (and intrigued) by how many women have similar fantasy.

[gaggirl]

whether male or female I'm thinking theyre few and far between... in "all my years" (sound like an old woman!) of pursuing my being chased, being a very open book (to my detriment) I am yet to stumble acrosss a person who fantasises about being raped or raping! it was only when I found the net that I found others..

unless of course half the people I met were lying!!

I ll never forget my horror when asa new girl at school, with a certain mystique and an important rep to maintain, some stupid boys overheard one of my private jokes in class.. we had to answer the question "whatsy our ultimate goal in life" mine of course was "to get kidnapped and raped!" the girl I said that too was quietly horrified, and the boys that overheard me decided it was worthy of spreading amongst the male population of the school. THoughat the time I was mortified and breifly considered having to move schools, I hung onto my hat and waiting to see if anyone came forward with any kind of... "hey me too!"

lol

I think one boy said "ill rape her!" but thats about it!

sorry off topic there. I think females are more into the emotion of sex in general, and so will fantasies more in general, and because womens roles have changed there might be a little part of us feminazis that secretly yearn to be thrown down by a REAL man!

I guess men might have the same kind of desire pointed in the opposite direction... but they tend to be more visual.. and wil more than likely take out the porn and have a spank.

[Gentle]

ya and anything sexual is more obvious in men or pointed out more

it sucks they spread that around the school gag, kids man
but yeah, your answer would have freaked me to man or I'd have liked it lol dunno too far back
peace dude

[Sternenlied]

Since this is a big part of my dissertation I could write quite a long post now, but I'll keep it short.

First of all:
I wouldn't judge anything by information aquired by people I met on the internet (exclusively that is, if we met in person afterwards that's a different story). Without attacking anyone on this board: Most people turn to phoney liars on the internet. For whatever their reason is they talk a lot of crap.

What I noticed is this (in short):
Having actual rape fantasies is mostly a male thing. Not only for ancient reasons (to conquer for example) but quite often for modern reasons: Society has changed, men have changed. They're expected to be more sensitive, caring, cultivated, well-build ... more "gay" as many have told me. Although men can behave like that, that's not the nature of most men. So rape fantasy very often is a way to break with their "clean" and "politically correct" lives. Men need to have a chance to live out the primal side of them more than women do.
On the other hand when acting out rape fantasy men are usually more concerned they might hurt their girlfriend/wife/partner then women are. Men tend to be afraid they might actually do something bad to their women. So when turning those fantasies into a real rapeplay men usually have more trouble to completely get into it.
No devaluation or accusation here ... so please don't get me wrong.

Women however like the change in male society (on one hand) but still want a "real man" - at least in bed. So this is a paradox of the mind as well. We want both worlds to co-exist in one man. Thus the fantasy to be "taken be a real man". That's something most women fantasise about. The effective rape fantasy is rather unual in women.
When acting out a fantasy in a rapeplay women don't concern themselves with being hurt. They trust the man not to do it so they can let themselves fall into the spirit of it more easily.

This was speaking very, very generally now and just a few thoughts. This subject is way to vast to put into a simple post.

Men of every walk get rejected by women almost all the time. Our society is such that men approach women and "offer" their services and the women choose to be with the male or not.

That's is true by the way. Not only might harsh rejection - maybe multiple times - trigger aggression, possibly leading to violent fantasies, it also triggers the male instinct to conquer and take the spoils.

[BoredMom]

Actually, after getting brave enough to talk with other people I know, I've found that my fantasies are not all that unusual among the female population. I'm sure there is a large percentage of the female population that would think such fantasies are totally mad and we should all be commited for thinking of such things. But -- maybe deep down they are just trying to deny what others gave into. With the fantasies, I'm not talking about the type where the woman is beaten up. Only where she is forced to submit. What woman wouldn't want to be wanted that badly? Would she actually want it to happen in real life? Probably not. But our dreams and fantasies are part of what get us through the day.

This is the same for men it would seem. What man wouldn't love to be able to just take any woman who struck his fancy? Anyone who has watched the older westerns has seen woman being grabbed and gropped and other men watching and laughing at the womans destiny. I'm sure this really happened in life, and many of the women were probably forced regardless of their feelings.

It can all be a very fine line. As long as we keep the fantasies just that -- fantasies -- what harm does it do? And if we set up a roleplay and actually experience it, no harm there either, right?

Following gags comment about being thrown down by a real man, I have to agree. The intimate nature of lovemaking is wonderful and exciting. So gentle, so desired. But sometimes you just want someone to really take charge and do what they want, forcing you as they go. Rough sex as you please.

To get back on topic, I feel that women run this fantasy more than men, we just don't discuss it in real life. Maybe because it's such a forbidden topic in our society. We're not supposed to want such things, but we do. This board shows that clearly. Men are probably more apt to actually say what they want to their buddies, but do it in a joking way so as not to seem real.

[bruisedelbows]

It seems to me that basically everyone is going to just impose their own idea of what's a "rape fantasy" is, which is going to inevitably color their idea of who does it more. It's like that study where 90% of drivers think they are above average drivers, and when asked what being a good driver is, they all describe how they drive: "A good driver can drive fast without crashing" or "a good driver is slow and cautious" or "a good driver can park in Manhattan" or whatever. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of people who have "cut off her boobs and fuck her with a knife" rape fantasies are men, for example. On the other hand if my criteria for "rape fantasy" is "hot guy won't take no for an answer, even though I'm almost certain I really don't want it!", then I will say women have them more.

I must say it freaks me out that a "REAL man" means someone who throws women down and fucks them whether they like it or not, and that actually giving a shit about women means you are "more gay"...but I'm happy to be considered an unreal, gay man if that's the case. More than happy.

[BoredMom]

I must say it freaks me out that a "REAL man" means someone who throws women down and fucks them whether they like it or not, and that actually giving a shit about women means you are "more gay"...but I'm happy to be considered an unreal, gay man if that's the case. More than happy.

Women also dream of the guy that is gentle and loving -- the one who takes more than ample time to make them feel as if they are on top of the world. But getting that all the time becomes boring. We need variety to stay interested day after day. Always knowing what you will get just loses something along the way.

I've never considered being gentle as 'gay'. It's wonderful. Just remember that on occasion we need a little rough play to get the blood pumping again.

[Generic]

I really haven't a clue - however, I remember looking up some studies that showed a very high percentage of men would actually rape a women if they knew they could get away with it (no one would know, basically).

It was something line 65-75% of them.

My guess would actually be that it would be men who fantasize more... And I would guess more are likely to actually commit the crime if they could than they let on (people who admit to fantasy, that is).

[sindyloo]

So then BoredMom variety is the "Spice of Life" it seems Most of the subject is fantasy which usually exists in the minds of men and women. But there are the few where fantasy becomes mixed with reality and that is the biggest problem today!

Stern?? would all of this come from the very early days of mankind where men where the hunter/gatherers and woman supplied the services of cooking taking care of children and of course providing the man that took them with his children! It seems to me to be almost ingrained from early times into our regressive memories both female and male!

[gaggirl]

Originally Posted by BoredMom

But getting that all the time becomes boring. We need variety to stay interested day after day.

thats for damn sure. Id go nuts if I had to have vanilla sex for the rest of my life! My man for instance, is a "real man", but hes a real man in the sense that he would do anything for anyone, is caring, supportive, the absolute best cheerleader, and he loves his kids his pets his family and his freinds like nothing else. Hes not an insecure coward who has to dominate women to pump up his flagging ego. (but we will ignore that I thought he was gay when I met him cause he was such a gentleman!)

So... when I say "REAL man" on a FANTASY board, dont take it out of context, Im referring to the archetypical caveman, the old mills and boon bodice ripper style of testosterone driven masculinity, that obviously many women harbour at least one fantasy about. But would I want a Real Man in a Fantasy context every day? HELL NO!!!

and naturally we will "impose" our own ideas of what a rape fantasy is and respond accordingly... its such an intensely personal thing!!

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by BoredMom

This is the same for men it would seem. What man wouldn't love to be able to just take any woman who struck his fancy? Anyone who has watched the older westerns has seen woman being grabbed and gropped and other men watching and laughing at the womans destiny. I'm sure this really happened in life, and many of the women were probably forced regardless of their feelings.

You know, I never believed in gangrape. I always believed that a male who would rape is a sick, sadistic individual (nevermind that it turns me on...but whatever...), and that most men WOULDNT rape. But learning about gangrapes that happen in warzones. Indigineous women being gangraped by soldiers, and not just 2, but 5 at a time. Now, what are the chances that the 5 men that just ransacked your hut are all sick, sadistic, psychos. All of them. Never mind that they are soldiers in an army. What is with that? Why do they do that? Why?

In old days, this happened all the time. The spoils of war. The raping of women. I start to think...maybe its man's nature....now I know ALL of you will say no, its not or whatever....but I believe it to be true. Maybe they raped because they could. No consequences. Somebody wrote here that almost 70% of men would rape if there were no consequences. Its primal.

I know that we are all given a will and so, and a conscience, so no I am not saying that rape is justified. I could say the same thing about murder. Do only sadistic people murder? How about war? Are you sick and sadistic if you point a gun in the face of another human being and blow his head off? What about in a warzone? When does human nature and conscience interact? When do they not?

Evil things are here in this world because humans have it within themselves. We are the most evil animals on the earth and it will be the end of us.

Sex and agression.

Just some thoughts.

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by squidley

I think that rape fantasies, no matter how fleeting, are more common among men than women. At least in western society.

Men of every walk get rejected by women almost all the time. Our society is such that men approach women and "offer" their services and the women choose to be with the male or not.

Guys hit on the girls all the time and sometimes the rejections are harsh. So guys think "damn, I'd like to rape her". Perhaps just a passing thought only, but sometimes more. For the most part, nothing ever happens and life goes on. But for a fleeting instant, there's a rape fantasy that many men have.

Do you think most men have fantasized about raping a woman?

I know why I fantasize about rape.

I was raised a catholic girl and my Moms and Pops always told us girls to stay virgins till we were married and just the look on my moms face if I ever disappointed would scar me. So I didnt have sex untill I was 22. I have only had sex with one person. I could NEVER sleep with random guys. I just couldnt live with myself, because of the way I was raised.

That is why I fantasize. I could have a man force himself on me and rape me and it wouldnt be my fault. No guilt.

Plus, my weakness is men. Strong, firm, powerful, take charge men.

Now, as to why my rape fatasies are VIOLENT are another story......I havent figured that out yet!!

[Error Nomad]

ChiTownHoney; Intelligent question. I don't think it's one of the things you mentioned, I think it's a combination of all of them plus some others.

Gangrape in war is extremely common, and has been in every conflict where combatant men were around women and had the opportunity, with -very- few exceptions. Even in most of the exceptions, there were reported cases of rape between soldiers and supposedly friendly (as in; their side) women if left long enough.

So why? And why so much more likely for a guy you'd never worry to leave your daughter alone with in the civilian world?

"Giving a man a rifle changes his sense of property rights" (don't remember the source)
It's a definite that soldiers in a war will loot. The longer and harder the war, the more likely that will be. The less professional the army, the more certain it will be. But it will happen. I think part of this is that to a human male (or female) in duress, if something will alleviate that duress, you will take it. Extreme example is a drowning person drowning another by climbing on them. It happens frequently. It's an extreme example, but an extreme (immediate death) situation. There chicken you stole from the peasant or blanket from a townsman may not be as bad, but you weren't under as much duress. But a war that goes on long enough will have plenty of that.

That they notice they can do this and it helps them sets up;

"Power flows from the barrel of a gun" (Mao I think)
When you realize that you have power over someone, you may not be tempted to use it, but you are aware you can. Once a soldier breaks his normal societal rules, he knows he can. Interestingly, this doesn't mean that especially rulesbound societies produce soldiers who are better behaved. Look at WWII Japan, Nazi Germany, or some examples in Vietnam (*). These weren't mostly what we'd have thought of as "bad men" if we'd met them at our inlaws dinner party.

And it's biochemical. There are multiple studies on the relations in the human brain to sex and violence. The two responsive centers are closely physically and structurally related. It's part of the 4 'F's; Flee, Fight, Feed, and Fuck. All primal, all shared by men and women.

When a male is engaged in violence they are sometimes much more sexually aroused. I've seen this myself, the first time playing something as non-dangerous as paintball. The Victory Fuck doesn't necessarily have to be voluntary.

Thousand Yard Stare
The more these men have seen, and the more psychological trauma they've seen, the more one of two things will happen; 1. They will snap, or 2) They will become numb. That doesn't mean they're robots, but that for one or more of many reasons they are not feeling emotion the way most people do. They may be feeling -more- of it, or less of it, or only parts of it. But their minds are protecting them from the damage until they can assimilate it.
This doesn't necessarily make them heartless or more dangerous, but to avoid option #1 they're going to have to shunt some of the emotions away that we associate with pain.

Dehumanization
This is the kicker. To kill someone you have to be able to a) hate them, b) not care about them, or c) care about yourself and your buddies more.
Usually it's a combination of 'c' and 'b'. In direct combat most soldiers aren't thinking about who that person is, or if they are they aren't firing (or fundamentally don't care and never can, which is pretty rare overall). After combat there has either be a reason, or an understanding that there isn't one. Either one of these has a very high potential of dehumanizing the enemy. If there is a reason, they are in the wrong. If there isn't, I am in the wrong and can choose to accept that (and probably break) or reject it and blame them. I may decide that "It's just a job", but that still leaves me detached.

Most soldiers don't rape, at least in modern first world armies. But if you get enough of these conditions together you will create a condition where there are significant numbers of guys who feel threatened, scared, horny, angry, and have no significant adult supervision. And then you will have rape and many other atrocities.

EN

(* These examples seem to differ, but I think the common thread is dehumanization, plus other factors. For the Japanese, the combination of xenophobia and excessive discipline led to a situation where once faced with someone further down the power structure, and inhuman to boot, the result was atrocity. For the Germans I think a combination of dehumanization (Nazi propaganda, getting shot at constantly by lots pf Russians), and excessive duress, and for the US military in Vietnam, I'd say dehumanization (who is the enemy/friend again?) and breakdown of control. Most of the events I'm aware of there happened several years into the fight)

[MarcEdeSade]

Originally Posted by ChiTownHoney

You know, I never believed in gangrape. I always believed that a male who would rape is a sick, sadistic individual (nevermind that it turns me on...but whatever...), and that most men WOULDNT rape. But learning about gangrapes that happen in warzones. Indigineous women being gangraped by soldiers, and not just 2, but 5 at a time. Now, what are the chances that the 5 men that just ransacked your hut are all sick, sadistic, psychos. All of them. Never mind that they are soldiers in an army. What is with that? Why do they do that? Why?

In old days, this happened all the time. The spoils of war. The raping of women. I start to think...maybe its man's nature....now I know ALL of you will say no, its not or whatever....but I believe it to be true. Maybe they raped because they could. No consequences. Somebody wrote here that almost 70% of men would rape if there were no consequences. Its primal.

I know that we are all given a will and so, and a conscience, so no I am not saying that rape is justified. I could say the same thing about murder. Do only sadistic people murder? How about war? Are you sick and sadistic if you point a gun in the face of another human being and blow his head off? What about in a warzone? When does human nature and conscience interact? When do they not?

Evil things are here in this world because humans have it within themselves. We are the most evil animals on the earth and it will be the end of us.

Sex and agression.

Just some thoughts.

How many people will murder if they could get away with it.

The deflowered truth is that war is murder. Preferably serial murder or mass murder, committed repeatedly. The state of mind required to overcome the inherent wrong felt towards murdering makes rape, a far more natural act, nothing to be concerned about.

Ahhh, genocide. I love the smell of zyklon in the morning.

Such interesting animals we all are.

So infinite in capacity for cruelty,

Such interesting animals indeed.

[Sternenlied]

Oh, this is so exciting. One of the few occasions many people talk about something in a way quite worthwhile ...

One:
Very true, we have to differ between the many opinions on what rape fantasies are. I noticed a man's fantasy is often more focused on the sex itself, a woman's more on the submission, the power the man has over her. But in general there is no definition what a rape fantasy actually is. Women tend to fantasise about a rape in a rather romantic way, most women I talked to had very naive fantasies about being raped. I didn't add them, since we're talking about "hard" fantasies - no handsome George Clooney coming and taking them, they love it and although forced it's the best sex they ever had. I wouldn't consider that fantasising about being raped.
So in essence it's hard to judge what's rape fantasy and what's not.

Two:
I didn't intend to degrade any man to "gay", not a "real man", that's just the expression I heard quite a lot when talking to women. That's what I meant by paradox: All of them are real men, but women want so many things sometimes that they don't realise some things can't co-exist and some already do, they just have to talk to their man to find out.

Three:
The state of war is an exceptional condition that changes the rules. As already stated a man at war can't stay however he used to be. He has to kill, has to survive, most probably for a cause he doesn't even believe him. Take WW2 for example. The Russians had not much of a choice. It was being overrun by the Germans, being shot by their own government if they didn't want to fight or go and kill other humans.
You're at war for years, you loose family, home, friends ... years of insanity. How can one possibly expect soldiers to stay completely sane? Then there's a pause (or possibly victory) ... all your feelings - hate, despair, grief - everything has to unload ... how? Most of the time it's directed at the civil population. And in a war like this noone's left except women and children, the men are gone. So I can imagine why so many rapes occur in wars.
The other side is immoralising the enemy. In wars, especially in genocidal wars like africa organised mass rapes are an instrument to strike at the enemy when you can't simply kill him.

Four:
Committing actual rape when you can be sure you won't get caught: Yes, I think there are much more men who would do it than women would like to be raped for real.

Five:
Our Marquis is right. Humans are capable of such cruelty, noone wants to think about it. When we ask ourselves how some people can be that cruel we usually don't get to any conclusion, we only think "I could never do that". The truth is it's power! Give someone power over other people and it will change this person! Especially if it's the power to do everything without the fear of ever being held responsible, it it's "legal". Granted, a disturbed state of mind (i.e. inferiority complex, suppressed anger, ...) can add to it, but being in a position to do anything you please corrupts people. I wouldn't say mankind is evil in general, just too easily corrupted.

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by Sternenlied

The state of war is an exceptional condition that changes the rules. As already stated a man at war can't stay however he used to be. He has to kill, has to survive, most probably for a cause he doesn't even believe him. Take WW2 for example. The Russians had not much of a choice. It was being overrun by the Germans, being shot by their own government if they didn't want to fight or go and kill other humans.
You're at war for years, you loose family, home, friends ... years of insanity. How can one possibly expect soldiers to stay completely sane? Then there's a pause (or possibly victory) ... all your feelings - hate, despair, grief - everything has to unload ... how? Most of the time it's directed at the civil population. And in a war like this noone's left except women and children, the men are gone. So I can imagine why so many rapes occur in wars.
The other side is immoralising the enemy. In wars, especially in genocidal wars like africa organised mass rapes are an instrument to strike at the enemy when you can't simply kill him.

Do you think that rape is justified in the circumstances of war?

If a man is left with nothing but his gun and is on the look out for the enemy at all times, he sees his friends blown up and kills in order to live. Its enough for any man to feel despair, but are his actions justified?

[ChiTownHoney]

Originally Posted by Error Nomad

ChiTownHoney; Intelligent question. I don't think it's one of the things you mentioned, I think it's a combination of all of them plus some others.

Gangrape in war is extremely common, and has been in every conflict where combatant men were around women and had the opportunity, with -very- few exceptions. Even in most of the exceptions, there were reported cases of rape between soldiers and supposedly friendly (as in; their side) women if left long enough.

So why? And why so much more likely for a guy you'd never worry to leave your daughter alone with in the civilian world?

"Giving a man a rifle changes his sense of property rights" (don't remember the source)
It's a definite that soldiers in a war will loot. The longer and harder the war, the more likely that will be. The less professional the army, the more certain it will be. But it will happen. I think part of this is that to a human male (or female) in duress, if something will alleviate that duress, you will take it. Extreme example is a drowning person drowning another by climbing on them. It happens frequently. It's an extreme example, but an extreme (immediate death) situation. There chicken you stole from the peasant or blanket from a townsman may not be as bad, but you weren't under as much duress. But a war that goes on long enough will have plenty of that.

That they notice they can do this and it helps them sets up;

"Power flows from the barrel of a gun" (Mao I think)
When you realize that you have power over someone, you may not be tempted to use it, but you are aware you can. Once a soldier breaks his normal societal rules, he knows he can. Interestingly, this doesn't mean that especially rulesbound societies produce soldiers who are better behaved. Look at WWII Japan, Nazi Germany, or some examples in Vietnam (*). These weren't mostly what we'd have thought of as "bad men" if we'd met them at our inlaws dinner party.

And it's biochemical. There are multiple studies on the relations in the human brain to sex and violence. The two responsive centers are closely physically and structurally related. It's part of the 4 'F's; Flee, Fight, Feed, and Fuck. All primal, all shared by men and women.

When a male is engaged in violence they are sometimes much more sexually aroused. I've seen this myself, the first time playing something as non-dangerous as paintball. The Victory Fuck doesn't necessarily have to be voluntary.

Thousand Yard Stare
The more these men have seen, and the more psychological trauma they've seen, the more one of two things will happen; 1. They will snap, or 2) They will become numb. That doesn't mean they're robots, but that for one or more of many reasons they are not feeling emotion the way most people do. They may be feeling -more- of it, or less of it, or only parts of it. But their minds are protecting them from the damage until they can assimilate it.
This doesn't necessarily make them heartless or more dangerous, but to avoid option #1 they're going to have to shunt some of the emotions away that we associate with pain.

Dehumanization
This is the kicker. To kill someone you have to be able to a) hate them, b) not care about them, or c) care about yourself and your buddies more.
Usually it's a combination of 'c' and 'b'. In direct combat most soldiers aren't thinking about who that person is, or if they are they aren't firing (or fundamentally don't care and never can, which is pretty rare overall). After combat there has either be a reason, or an understanding that there isn't one. Either one of these has a very high potential of dehumanizing the enemy. If there is a reason, they are in the wrong. If there isn't, I am in the wrong and can choose to accept that (and probably break) or reject it and blame them. I may decide that "It's just a job", but that still leaves me detached.

Most soldiers don't rape, at least in modern first world armies. But if you get enough of these conditions together you will create a condition where there are significant numbers of guys who feel threatened, scared, horny, angry, and have no significant adult supervision. And then you will have rape and many other atrocities.

EN

(* These examples seem to differ, but I think the common thread is dehumanization, plus other factors. For the Japanese, the combination of xenophobia and excessive discipline led to a situation where once faced with someone further down the power structure, and inhuman to boot, the result was atrocity. For the Germans I think a combination of dehumanization (Nazi propaganda, getting shot at constantly by lots pf Russians), and excessive duress, and for the US military in Vietnam, I'd say dehumanization (who is the enemy/friend again?) and breakdown of control. Most of the events I'm aware of there happened several years into the fight)

This is great stuff! Thanks!

I think you are correct in the sense that when any human being has power, he will abuse it to some extent. That is the truth of humanity. We will never be satisfied with what we have, but strive for more. That is why we have advanced tremendously throughout the ages. Man always wants more.

It is true that most soldiers do not rape. But rapes are most common in third world countries. This is because the army is most often not consisting of volunteers.

The rapes of thousands indigineous women in Guatemala went unpunished during the guerilla war. It was not even just the guerillas, but the actualy Army who raped women 5 men at once. Almost all women prisoners were raped and tortured. I think this is because the men who were soldiers were in the army against there will. They did these things because they were angry themselves. Also, there were no consequences. But how can that be justified?

Maybe power changes a man. I have never had any great amount of power, but even when I had a little bit, I loved it. I could easily take advantage of it.

[bruisedelbows]

Sternenlied, I think we're on the same page. It just blows my mind when people say more women than men fantasize about rape, but I think in the sense that they are thinking about, maybe it's true. And certainly if Brad Pitt wouldn't take no for an answer, it would still be rape legally and in my opinion morally, so there's no way for me to say it's not really a rape fantasy.

I remember in some other thread, maybe deleted in the crash, people were asked what they liked in a rape movie, and a lot of posters said it just ruins it if the victim has an orgasm, or if it takes more than 10 minutes, or whatever--probably they (I'm guessing they were mostly men) might think my own fantasies/stories/comics were not really rape fantasies either, since the victim usually, eventually, finds her body responding against her will.

Ultimately I think almost everyone has some kind of rough sex/domination/non-consensual/reluctant/rape fantasies, so without a more specific definition it's kind of impossible to discuss it.

[Sternenlied]

Do you think that rape is justified in the circumstances of war?

No, not at all! The fact that the men are at war doesn't change the rape itself for the victim. Rape is rape.
All I meant is I wouldn't compare rape in war to a rape happening in just another city in a street just around the corner. I think the mental state of mind - even the reason for the rape - of the rapist is quite different in times of war, that's all. Still doesn't make it right at all!
Sorry if I wasn't clear enough on that.

I remember in some other thread, maybe deleted in the crash, people were asked what they liked in a rape movie, and a lot of posters said it just ruins it if the victim has an orgasm, or if it takes more than 10 minutes, or whatever--probably they (I'm guessing they were mostly men) might think my own fantasies/stories/comics were not really rape fantasies either, since the victim usually, eventually, finds her body responding against her will.

Well, I have to admit the victim enjoying it and/or having an orgasm as well doesn't do it for me either. But taste is something you just can't argue about.
I like things as well others don't.
I can understand though what the lure of the orgasm in a rape (for a man) can be: Being raped and still your body is betraying you by having an orgasm. It's the ultimate humiliation.

So I wouldn't divide people in those having "real rape fantasies" those who don't. Because you're right, it's just to vast a territory to discuss it without narrowing it down to a certain degree.