Rape and Race
December 13, 2010
LAWRENCE AUSTER writes:
It has long been established that the rate of rape committed by U.S. blacks is approximately an order of magnitude higher than the rate of rape committed by other races. Below is a study showing that the racial rape differential is international, which in turn suggests that the astronomically high rate of rape by blacks is caused not by social, cultural, or economic factors, but by racial factors. And this should be no surprise. Every study has shown that blacks have much lower IQ, much shorter time horizons, much higher impulsivity and violence, much higher sociopathic indicators, much higher testosterone levels, and much higher sex drive than other races. It’s only to be expected that black men would commit rape far more than men of other races. This does not mean of course that all black men or most black men are rapists; it means that within the black population there is a rape-prone sub-population that commits rape at an extremely high rate.
Is it racist, i.e., is it morally wrong, to say this? The argument that it is morally wrong is based on the idea that such findings as high black rape rates could be used to bring back the invidious discrimination against blacks that our society outlawed in the 1960s. But to say that important truths must be silenced because they might be used in a wrongful way is unacceptable. Of course, wrongful acts against any group must not be allowed; but that is a completely different question from the question, what is truth? If all negative information about blacks must be suppressed, then even the below AP article on rape in South Africa could not have been published. [cont.]
— Comments —
Mabel LeBeau writes:
As a thinking woman, and a housewife, and the other roles I play in the lives of my family, co-workers, and patients, an argument that segues high rates of rape committed by one minority in the US to a report of rapes committed by the majority in another quite different country is quite a sleight of hand. If we’re going to look at statistics, then look at all of them, not pick and choose to fit one’s specific prejudice.
For the purpose of a discussion about rape and blacks, perhaps it’s best to throw away the stereotypical prejudices and deal with facts and rationality, and let the truth emerge on its own. Instead of asserting a prejudice and then quibbling about how it might be possible within the realm of political correctness to specify the desired conclusion barring suppressed information, consider discarding the preconceived notions and answer basic questions about rape.
Interestingly and dishearteningly, in looking up some demographic information about my home state, I was surprised to read it has the highest rates of forcible rape in the nation. And, the minority is not black. Another interesting consideration is that the information referenced is a CBS report about South African men. Yes, the reported rapes in South Africa are considerably higher than any other country, but according to the 7th UN Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems, from 1998-2000 (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Centre for International Crime Prevention), the rates of rape in Zambia is less than that of many European countries including Germany, France, Spain, and the UK. Even rates of rape reported in Zimbabwe are significantly less than 2/3 of that reported in Australia and Canada.
It might take a little digging from databases such as WHO, MMWR, and state crime statistics to find the true answers to such questions such as: what is forcible rape, are drugs or alcohol involved in rape, what is the relationship between rapist and victim, who commits rape, who reports rape and why is there such a wide disparity of reports among European countries, and a disparity between European countries and developing nations, what is the role of accessible law enforcement in deterring rape, and one question brought up in an earlier post, what is the relationship between prevalence of prostitution and marriage; what is the relationship between men who seek prostitutes and the age of the prostitute; and what is the relationship among rates of access to pornography, incidence of child pornography and prostitution.
Answers to those questions will probably elicit more truth and correct information and understanding of sex crimes than (incorrect) assertions based on opinions of race and ethnic heritage.
Laura writes:
When blacks consistently commit a vastly higher rate of rape than whites and other races in one of the world’s most populous nations and also have an astronomically high rate of rape in a major African country, it is not a “sleight of hand” to conclude that blacks are prone to commit rape more than other groups. It is you who suffer from stereotypical prejudice on this issue if you decline to accept crime statistics accumulated by the federal government for decades. I recommend Mr. Auster’s 2007 FrontPage Magazine article, “The Truth of Interracial Rape in the United States,” which lays out the statistical divide in this country. He writes:
In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man.
What this means is that every day in the United States, over one hundred white women are raped or sexually assaulted by a black man. [NOTE TO READER: This statistic is wrong. Please see discussion below.]
The possibility that rates of rape in Zambia are less than those of European countries tells me nothing in connection with this discussion because you gave no racial breakdown for these figures, nor did you offer a link to those figures. Mr. Auster did not say that the high South African rate was universal to African countries; lower rates in other black countries do not disprove his point that blacks commit rape much more often than other races. I’d also like to know the racial breakdown for rape in Australia and Canada and see the links to the rate in Zimbabwe.
You say your state has the highest rate of rape in the country. I believe you live in Texas and I assume Hispanics commit the highest percentage of rape there. This fact does not refute Mr. Auster’s point. The Hispanic population of Texas is 36 percent while the black population is 12 percent so while Hispanics may commit more rapes than blacks because of their disproportionate numbers, do they have a higher rate of rape in Texas? I suspect the rates of rape there are consistent with those in the rest of the nation, but in any event you have not proved that they are not.
There are clear standards as to what constitutes rape in our laws. Are you suggesting that these standards are unjust and large numbers of men are wrongly convicted of rape, thereby nullifying these statistics?
Stephanie Murgas writes:
It has long been historically established that the white man has committed economic rape towards any culture he has come into contact with, and that his exploitation of profit is magnitudes higher than the rate of economic turmoil caused by other races. Wherever white men have tread, they have brought exploitation, justification and judgment, which in turn suggests that the astronomically high rate of inflation and currency devaluation is caused not by social, cultural, or economic factors, but by racial factors. This is probably a surprise. In their history, white men have consistently sought excuses or reasons to leave their wives and families, whether it is for profit, warfare, exploration, or any other “noble” enterprise. This leads me to two conclusions: either 1) white women are excruciating creatures to be around and their men jump at any opportunity to get away from them or 2) white women are more highly sexed than any other race or gender combination which means they require more than average protection and economic power in order to be forced to remain faithful to their (absent) husbands. It only makes sense that nature would compensate in other ways to equal the racial playing field, if that is indeed the card that Mr. Auster is playing.
Laura writes:
This is an astounding statement. Wherever whites have profited from their own labor and enterprise while employing or utilizing the labor of other races, they have engaged in “economic rape.” Women deserve to be raped by blacks because of the economic activities of whites. This is essentially what you are saying.
This post is about black rape statistics. Are you denying that they are true? The idea that rapes by black men are caused by whites or justified because of white economic activity is an expression of a mind so committed to the idea that whites are inherently guilty and morally inferior that it cannot conceive of anything worth considering on the matter.
Given the sheer magnitude of their enterprising activities around the world in comparison to blacks, whites are much more likely to have created both good and caused harm in the course of creating wealth and developing resources. The idea that they have only caused harm in their colonial or international businesses and have decimated the world’s economies, rather than often kept them afloat, is a hateful, malevolent, small-minded generalization that cannot be supported by even a cursory look at the historical facts. Other races have profited from the initiative of whites. At the height of the British Empire, Britain’s imports significantly exceeded its exports and the labor of those in the colonies was remunerated. The colonies were also the recipients of civilizing public works, laws and culture. That is not to say the Empire was inherently good for other races or for whites; it was a mixed experience, good in some ways and harmful in others. Other races did not grow rich off this imperial activity because they were most often involved in the lower-skilled end of industry and trade.
The idea that white men colonized the world because white women were excruciating to be around, rather than because white men are by nature enterprising – well, this too is preposterous and cannot be taken seriously.
You say, “It only makes sense that nature would compensate in other ways to equal the racial playing field, if that is indeed the card that Mr. Auster is playing.”
The races do have different natures and their own weaknesses, but that does not make immoral acts “natural” or excusable. You appear to be saying that having endowed whites with evil inclinations, “nature” endowed blacks with some failures too in order to level the playing field. Again, black rapes counterbalances the sins of whites and thus blacks are not culpable.
Mr. Auster is not playing a card. He is examining facts, which you have grossly distorted.
Hurricane Betsy writes:
I have read Mabel’s post, which she obviously put a lot of research and effort into. She states, “…the rates of rape in Zambia is less than that of many European countries including Germany, France, Spain, and the UK. Even rates of rape reported in Zimbabwe are significantly less than 2/3 of that reported in Australia and Canada.”
Black Africans make up more than 98% of Zambia’s population, and European whites a little more than 1%. To understand the comparison Mabel is making, we would have to acknowledge the high numbers of nonwhites living in the European countries she lists, and then to find out if rape is overrepresented among these nonwhites, and to what degree. Otherwise, she is just blowing smoke.
The European countries, as well as Australia and Canada, are not like the USA. I very much doubt that the numbers of rape are broken down by race; this is considered racial profiling and is against the law. The USA is a unique country in this regard; however, I am willing to be corrected. Thank you.
By the way, I was raped by a black (pure black, from another country) man when I was 22, more than 30 years ago. [We worked in the same place and he would tease me.]
He rang my doorbell for 45 minutes nonstop, so I called the cops. By the time they arrived, Mr. Testosterone had gone from in front of my door. The cops marched in, questioned me as if I were the Whore of Babylon, suggested I had done something to merit such “attention”, and then left. The man returned, he pushed his way in, and the rest is (my) history. The “event” lasted more than half a day. Strangely, I have no hatred for blacks. I have simply come to understand that this is not one world and not all people are the same. I am also grateful for small mercies, namely, that I did not get pregnant. God can be good, sometimes.
Laura writes:
That is a sad story.
You say it is strange that you don’t hate blacks because of this incident. I think it would be strange if you did. It is abnormal to hate an entire race for the evils of the few. Would it be strange if you hated whites if a white man raped you? Yes.
Hurricane Betsy replies:
You wrote, “That is a sad story.”
Not any more. Thanks anyway!
Whenever feminists talk about rape they make it sound as if the raped woman is ruined, utterly, for life. It is not true. There are worse things and I have believed so for a long time. I was relieved when I read – I think it was in a book by Camille Paglia, it was so long ago I am not sure – a woman saying the same thing. That it is definitely awful, but unless you are 4 years old or a 90-year old virgin (you get the picture), it is something that can be transcended through the passage of time and/or appeal to an almighty divine ruler, just like all bad experiences. Kneeling at the foot of an ill child’s bed in the hospital for hours and begging God to throw you a bone is a thousand times worse. And so on. I am sure you can think of other experiences that will grey your hair overnight.
Brittany writes:
I know statistically there are more rapes caused by blacks but Lawrence Auster as a Christian should know that God made us all the same. WE are all made in God’s image. So blacks are not naturally bad people or rapists.
Laura writes:
God did not make us all the same. The idea that he did not is apparent to even a child. We are not human clones. God did, in the Christian view, make all humans in his image, including blacks, and give every human being the potential for good and evil. No one said that all blacks are rapists. Mr. Auster specifically stated that only a sub-group of blacks commits rape. No one said that blacks are “naturally bad people.” They are both good and bad by nature, as are whites, and they have general tendencies as a group, both strengths and weaknesses, that are distinct from the general tendencies of whites. It is un-Christian to believe blacks are saints by birth or that any sins they commit must be the fault of others and it is un-Christian to believe whites are morally inferior to other races.
Our children are constantly taught about the evils whites have committed against blacks. This is a commonplace lesson in our schools. And yet the horrific violence a minority of blacks have committed against whites, and against blacks and other races, is ignored.
Jesse Powell writes:
I’d like to make some comments on Lawrence Auster’s article “The Truth of Interracial Rape in the United States.” The quote taken from the article states “In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man.” Now the second part of that statement, that 0 to 10 black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man, is definitely not true. What is true is that “about 10” or fewer black women reported being raped by a white man in the Crime Victimization survey being cited. What needs to be kept in mind is that for the survey in 2005 about 67,000 people were interviewed aged 12 or older, so each person interviewed represents about 2,700 people in the general population. So, given that the estimate for the number of black women raped in the survey is 36,620 if even one black woman reported being raped by a white man the estimate for proportion of rapes against black women being committed by white men would jump from 0% to 7.5%. So basically, the crime victimization survey is a very poor source of data on the question of the number of black women raped by white men because the sample sizes are extremely small.
I want to add, looking at the table of crime victimization by race of victim and race of offender, the category of “Rape/Sexual Assault” does not show much difference from the other categories of crime in terms of proportion of white victims victimized by white offenders. In the “Rape/Sexual Assault” category looking at white victims 44.5% were victimized by a white offender (probably representing 19 or 20 cases), in the very large “Crimes of violence” category 49.0% of offenders were white (among white victims), in the “Robbery” category 33.6% of offenders were white (among white victims). Looking at the proportion of offenders being black where the victim is white the ratio of black offenders is high in the categories of “Rape/Sexual Assault” and “Robbery” and is low in the categories of “Crimes of violence”, “completed violence”, and all forms of “Assault.”
Basically, the Crime Victimization Survey of 2005 is a very poor source in trying to get information on the number of white men raping black women because small sample size surveys are very poor at quantifying the frequency of rare events. To look at the data source Lawrence Auster uses in his “The Truth of Interracial Rape in the United States” article go to page 55 of 144 (Table 42) in the “Criminal Victimization in the United States: 2005 Statistical Tables” report.
Laura writes:
That does seem to be an extremely low estimate for the number of blacks raped by whites. Jesse’s point about the weakness of that particular statistic makes sense. According to The Color of Crime, a report funded by the New Century Foundation that examines race and crime statistics, between 2001 and 2003, blacks committed, on average, 15,400 black-on-white rapes per year, while whites averaged 900 white-on-black rapes per year. The basic argument made in this post still holds true. In the original quote from Mr. Auster in this post, he decribed the black-on-white rape rate as being “approximately an order of magnitude higher” than white-on-black rape, which would conservatively align with these figures in The Color of Crime.
D. from Seattle writes:
Mabel LeBeau cited a UN Survey of Crime study in support of her claim that rates of reported rape in some African countries are lower than in many European countries. There are two problems with using such reports to prove anything conclusively. First, the study talks about reported rape; there is no basis to assume that rates at which violent crimes are reported are the same across countries and cultures, for a variety of reasons — cultural, effectiveness of police and prosecutors, social ostracism, etc. Second, there is no basis to assume that any reliable statistics can be obtained from countries that do not have functioning governments (at least not in the Western sense of the word) and that are plagued by rampant corruption and lawlessness.
There was a discussion at VFR last year about a similar topic; that time it was an article in Daily Mail, with data compiled from UN and European Commission reports, claiming, among other things, that Austria has more violent crime than South Africa. This is obviously absurd on its face to anyone who has any knowledge, from media or first hand, about the societies in question.
Hurricane Betsy writes:
I reported a personal experience of mine of being raped by a black man. After reading the slew of letters on this topic, I feel a need to add, as follows: In the middle of my being violated, the black man lifted himself up a bit, looked down to the business end of things, and said, ” Isn’t that nice, black and white like this.”
Further, it is true what they say about black men: they can “perform” for hours on end – even with a non-consenting partner.
Yes, people, [some] black men want white female flesh, whether they rape to get it, or whether they exercise this desire by going after white women in a more respectable manner, as some apparently do.
