Why they raped her ?

Rohit Kapoor
The gang rape of a 23-year-old paramedical student on a bus has sparked huge protests across the Country. The incident was so severe that the victim’s intestines had to be surgically removed. She was with a male friend who was severely beaten with an iron rod during the incident.
Why they raped ? This may require to be understood as the society needs to be cautious from these men who can act with savage brutality. Harshest punishment is important, but how to prevent the crime should be the priority. But un-fortunately with the passage of time, the tempers go cold and the protests deplete to vanish. What remains is the irreparable agony that has been caused to the victim can never be fully restored by any means available with the mankind. And then some day it happens once again.
Keppel and Walter (2006) conducted empirical inquiries and expanded on the rape typology presented by Holmes and Holmes (2002). That typology includes four types of rapists based on motivation: (i). The Power Reassurance Rapist, (ii) the Anger Retaliation Rapist, (ii). the Power Assertive Rapist, and (iv).the Sadistic Rapist. The Power Assertive Rapist perceives women as subservient to men, and deserving of domination, to include rape, as this is interpreted to be the natural order.
The Power Reassurance Rapist commits rape in order to reinforce their perceptions of their adequacy and to boost their self-esteem. The Power Reassurance Rapist may believe that the victim is a willing participant and enjoys the rape. The Anger Retaliation Rapist targets women because of a real or imagined perception of the perpetration of some injustice by women. The Sadistic Rapist is the most dangerous type because their intent is to inflict pain and humiliation to fulfill psychological needs. Sexual satisfaction is derived from inflicting pain on the victim. The offender finds the intentional maltreatment of his victim intensely gratifying and takes pleasure in the victim’s torment, anguish, distress, helplessness, and suffering; the offender finds the victim’s struggling an erotic experience. This appears to be the most probable incitement in Delhi gang rape.
Theodore Robert “Ted” was an American serial killer, rapist, kidnapper, and necrophile who assaulted and murdered numerous young women and girls during the 1970s. After more than a decade of denials, he confessed shortly before his execution to 30 homicides committed in seven states between 1974 and 1978; the true total remains unknown, and could be much higher. He typically approached them in public places, feigning an injury or disability, or impersonating an authority figure, before overpowering and assaulting them at a more secluded location. He sometimes revisited his secondary crime scenes for hours at a time, grooming and performing sexual acts with the decomposing corpses until putrefaction and destruction by wild animals made further interaction impossible.
He decapitated at least 12 victims and kept some of the severed heads in his apartment for a period of time as mementos. His Biographer described him as “a sadistic sociopath who took pleasure from another human’s pain and the control he had over his victims, to the point of death, and even after.
Why do human beings aggress against others? What makes them turn, with savage brutality, on their fellow human beings? Thoughtful people have pondered these questions for centuries and have proposed many contrasting explanations.
The oldest and probably most famous explanation for human aggression suggests that human beings are somehow “programmed” for violence by their basic nature. Such theories attribute human violence to built-in (i.e. inherited ) urges to aggress against others. The most famous supporter of this theory was Sigmund Freud, who held that aggression stems mainly from a powerful death wish ( Thanatos ) possessed by all people.
According to Freud, this instinct is initially aimed at self-destruction but is soon redirected outward toward others. However, the fact that a given form of behavior is influenced by genetic factors does not mean that such behavior must occur or is an essential part of human nature. It simply means that a potential for engaging in such behavior exists, and is generated, at least in part, by biological factors.
One study showed that offenders and victims in gang rape incidents were younger with a higher possibility of being unemployed. The majority of individuals who commit gang rape are reported to be young adults with the mean age of 23. Gang rapes involved more alcohol and other drug use, night attacks and severe sexual assault outcomes and less victim resistance and fewer weapons than individual rapes.
Another study found that group sexual assaults were more violent and had greater resistance from the victim than individual sexual assaults and that victims of group sexual assaults were more likely to seek crisis and police services, contemplate suicide, and seek therapy than those involved in individual assaults. The two groups were about the same in the amount of drinking and other drug use during the assault.
Studies in Social Psychology have also revealed growing availability of pornography-and especially pornography that includes themes of sexual violence-appears to be a dangerous trend. No, not all people who are exposed to such materials become more willing to engage in such behavior themselves. But growing evidence suggests that the mixture of sex and violence contained in such pornography can be a dangerous and volatile one indeed. (What it Tells Us About…on pages 350-351).
Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India in a recent judgment delivered on 30-11-2012 observed” More and more girl students, women etc. go to educational institutions, work places etc. and their protection is of extreme importance to a civilized and cultured society. The experiences of women and girl children in over-crowded buses, metros, train etc. are horrendous and a painful ordeal.”
One of the directions issued by Apex Court to all States and Union Territories is to install CCTV’s in strategic positions which itself would be a deterrent and if detected, the offender could be caught.
If aggressive actions are hard to deter, they should be strongly punished because strong punishment deter people from engaging inaction. They believe they can get away with. The punishment should fit the crime. However, removal of dangerous people from society in one way or the other; can it really help prevent fresh acts of aggression against others?
The existing evidence is relatively clear: punishment can reduce aggression, but only if it meets four basic requirements (i) it must be prompt (ii) it must be certain to occur, (iii) it must be strong and (iv) it must be perceived by recipients as justified or deserved. Unfortunately these conditions are not satisfied in criminal justice system in our country. Delivery of punishment for the aggressive acts like the one referred herein above, get delayed for years together. Many criminals are able to escape arrest and conviction. So the determent of punishment is low. Even severe punishment like capital punishment will not be effective in deterring violent crime in such a scenario.
Therefore, the common belief that the severe punishment will successfully deter such behavior may be optimistic, however, can work in conditions enumerated above. In the given situation, we have to think beyond capital punishment additionally to prevent such acts of aggression against the citizens.
(The author is an Advocate)

Follow our WhatsApp channel