|
On
this page:
Sequential
Context
Table of
Contents
|
Differentiating "Misperception"
and "Miscommunication"
-
I define misperception as
misinterpretation by the receiver
(i.e., perpetrator) of a
physical sensation, and miscommunication as an error by the sender (i.e.,
female victim) of a
message in considering how that message might be interpreted.
-
Still, at times in my coding of information within categories, it
became difficult to separate various verbal or nonverbal communications
into the categories of miscommunication by female victims or misperception
by their date rapists.
Misperceiving Nonverbal
Messages
Misperceiving Verbal Messages
“I had the
idea, growing up as a teenager, that when a girl would say she liked you,
that’s supposed to mean ‘She wants you.’
It may not mean that at all--I mean, ‘wants you sexually.’”
Interviewee 4 recalled:
She
said, "I'll sleep with you and stuff, but I don't want to have sex
yet. No, no sex," and
stuff, you know. "No, I
just don't want it. I just
don't want to do it yet."
I
think she said, "I just met you."
Her main point was "It's too soon.”
Her tone was pleasant, but...not very firm.
It was like...I would say she meant it, but...how should I put it?
She wasn't being overly strict about it.
She wasn't being very strict.
It was like, you know, it was like "No...it's too soon....I
don't know yet...or anything....no, we'd better not....I don't want to
yet.”
A similar scenario is described by Interviewee 5, who stated:
And
I laid her down on the bed and everything and I get on top of her and I
start kissing her and everything else, and I pull her panties off and
I’m sitting there naked, because I don’t wear underwear that much.
And I’m sitting there naked and everything and I instantly, when
I get on top of her, I go inside of her with my penis. And that’s when she says, “No, not yet. Just wait.” And
I’m sitting there with an erection and I’m penetrating her, and
everything, and she tells me, “No, not yet.”
And I’m sitting there saying, to myself:
“Okay,
this has got to stop.” And
then, next thing I know, I tell her--I can’t remember exactly what I
tell her, but I say something like: “Well, this is bullshit.
You’re just leading me on, and everything, and you’re thinkin’
well, if I do this here, or if I do that, you’re gonna just tell me
‘No.’” I’m thinking
this whole thing in my head as I’m tellin’ her this.
And, finally, she don’t say nothin’ and she just gives me a
kiss, and I just–“Okay, fine.”
So she gave into it.
And
then we have sex.
-
In this transcript excerpt, as in the previous one, the woman used
the qualifying term “yet” as well as the words “just wait,” which
suggest an indication of the length of time the decision concerning her
rejection of sexual relations will be enforced.
-
This ambiguous language could facilitate a misperception by
perpetrators that the female victim, as the previous informant phrased it,
“wasn’t being overly strict.” She seemed instead rather tentative
about the decision,
as opposed to a declarative statement lacking the qualifier terms
“yet” and “just wait.”
She
got to the point to where she was being a little more aggressive toward me
and that triggered me into thinkin’, “Well she says she’s ready,
then I think she’s ready. I’ve
done all this, why waste the chance now?
She might change her mind later.”
-
The
female victim merely showed signs of affection and verbally acknowledged
that she was “ready.”
-
The
male perpetrator misperceived her compliance with his sexual intent as a
genuine desire of her own.
When
she said she thought she was ready, or she thinks she’s ready, right
then the man should realize that she’s not ready.
Because if she has to think about it or whatever, she needs more
time. Because if she was
actually ready, she’d say, “Yeah, I’m ready; I’m willing.” There would be more aggressiveness on her part than just all
yours.
-
This
was a highly thought-provoking reflection, because a perpetrator’s
unilateral decision to have sexual relations with female victims without a
genuine concern about whether the women have similar intensive desires is
precisely the flaw in the thinking process throughout these various
illustrations of date rapists’ misperceptions.
Receiver's
Misperceived Reality
-
For instance, when one female victim kissed Interviewee 7 on the
cheek, he thought, “Maybe this is it,” referring to an opportunity to
have sex with the woman.
An illustration of misperception has been cited under several
categories because various nuances can be gleaned from the incident.
When discussing his rationalization for what ultimately developed
into a date rape of his female victim in the back seat of her friend’s
car, the perpetrator (Interviewee 8) stated a false generalization (i.e., that any man would have drawn the same conclusion)
based on his misperceptions of the circumstances.
He stated: “You’re
gonna be thinkin’—you’re a guy—that she was wantin’ to get in
this back seat for one reason.”
He
further explained, “As far as I knew—shit! why else would you get in
the back seat of a car?”
Another male sex offender (Interviewee 18) had a misperception
about his female victim based on his first impression of her sitting on
his lap at a floor party for his army unit.
He believed “That she was lookin’ for someone to have sex
with,” because he could not perceive any other reason for the woman’s
behavior. The date rapist
could not envision this action as merely a spontaneous, vivacious, and
unexpected performance by a woman to get the man’s attention.
Instead, Interviewee 18 concluded:
“Well, the way I was thinkin’, she came on to me by sittin’
on my lap. And I figured sex
was due course.”
-
It is this
narrow vision of perceiving a nonverbal behavior as having only one
possible meaning, as well as the consistency of this message with the
perpetrator’s sexual intent and positive expectations, that is at the
heart of misperception in a date rape situation.
Interviewee 10 recollected the slow dancing he did with his female victim:
This
type of dancing is not stiff, but rather softer [than other types of
dancing]. It was during the
slow dancing that she’s kind of letting that guard down...that’s
where it starts getting intense right there.
When she starts dropping that posture down.
And, that was my sign right there — "Hey, I’m doing something
right.”
-
This
informant did not perceive the dancing as a form of casual entertainment
between a dating couple; on her part, the woman was merely indicating
through her “[hand] on the shoulder, arms around the waist, just really
getting into the dancing,” that she enjoyed the courtship activity.
It did not necessarily connote an opportunity to exploit
the female victim’s “letting [her] guard down.”
The final example of a perpetrator’s nonverbal misperception
dealt with Interviewee 11, who took the woman he had been dating for six
months to the town where the gravesite of her deceased husband was
located. She still mourned
his death. While at the
hotel, the female victim needed consoling, but instead, Interviewee 11
initiated sexual advances. He
reflected:
I
felt, at one point, that she wanted to be close.
That was my thing.
You
know, I was confusing closeness with a sexual contact.
And, so, she begged off.
And
I let her kind of chill out. And
I went back to her and began to console her again.
Basically, at that point, she sort of gave in. I think she was frustrated, and I think she felt like I
didn’t understand, and I wasn’t going to understand.
The
female victim’s assessment was correct.
She verbally reacted with various accusatory--as well as
derogatory--responses to the perpetrator’s sexual advancements, as
related by Interviewee 11:
She
said, “How could you possibly want to be intimate when I’m going
through what I’m going through?...you’re inconsiderate.
That’s all you men think about!...You’re motivated by your sex
glands, or your hard-ons....Your penis is thinking for you.”
In
spite of all these verbal rebuffs from the female victim, the sex offender
would not be denied his sexual pleasures.
His pursuit was relentless.
Interviewee
11 never understood that the woman desired consoling for the tragic death
of her husband, who died thirty days after their wedding. His misperception was that sexual intercourse served some
role in this relational communication.
-
In dealing with perpetrators’
misperceptions or the inadvertent miscommunications by
female victims in the previous section, the underlying culprit that
threads throughout the discussion is the date rapist’s
self-centeredness, an attribute described at the outset of this treatise.
-
As explained in the ancient Greek story about Achilles’ heel, the
date rapist has a vulnerable point that causes him to dismiss his female
victim’s concerns, fears, desires, and essence in order to achieve his
primary intent. This driving
expectation negates any objections.
-
Furthermore,
it dulls the sex offender’s mental and emotional capability toward the
female victim to the point that she no longer has value except to assist
him in attaining this ultimate sexual intent.
Return to
Research Findings |