"Not Ever" - A Campaign Against Blaming Rape Victims

[Furcifer]

Any statistics on the proportion of rapes that occur in this manner?
It iseems to me that you are trying to cover ground in a very narrow field.

I believe this is supported by the known statistics; a girl has friend she comes to trust, girl gets drunk, they end up at his or her place, guy takes advantage of her.

It was intended to be narrow, Morrigan had asked what are high risk behaviours. Women from about 15-22 were the most at risk group.

The anecdote was not to address the number of assaults, but to address the perception that females should not trust a situation where they will be alone with a male.

I know, and I'm just saying I think you will find as you get older "acquaintances" drop off and you are left with more and more true friends.
True friends that you can trust.

From the time I entered high school to the time I started University I probably had more than 1000 "acquaintances". A few hundred at my school and hundreds at several other schools in the area. Kids that knew me or that I knew from school sports and parties. By the time I entered University it fell to maybe 100 people that I saw on a regular basis. These days there's maybe 20 people I really know and hang out with.

Of course by now I know the people I hang around with pretty well. I don't think anyone has to worry about a guy in this group trying to take advantage of a woman he's alone with.

I doubt that was the case back in high school or University. The quality of my "acquaintances" has changed dramatically over the years, as has everyone I've known. Trying to relate what I do now to what I did then is useless, even though the core group of friends has pretty much stayed the same since high school.

 

[bookitty]

I find this very hard to believe. At what rate is assault under-reported? How about tresspassing?
Honestly, I'm wondering where you got accurate statistics for under-reporting at all.

I'm curious as to why you would think this crime is not under-reported. As we've seen from this thread, there is social stigma attached to being raped, the fact that very few rape reports lead to a conviction is widely known, and the majority of rapes are between people who know each other so there would be some fear of reprisal or the potential to be ostracized.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

And just about every woman I know says the exact same thing "I don't get along well with girls, girls are catty, I have more guy friends than girls".

Which is probably another thread itself, but I think it speaks well to the present topic. I think some girls expect to have guy friends and expect them to not have feelings for them.

I think this confuses guys, especially younger guys, in this high risk age group. They bide their time as friends hoping that eventually things will change and the girls will develop feeling for them.

Things don't progress as far as a relationship goes but a trust builds. Then frustration.

Then along comes alcohol and with it opportunity and happy accidents. Or maybe not. Maybe it isn't an accident at all,maybe it's something much worse.

In the last several threads on the topic of rape and sexual assault I was somewhat surprised, but not entirely shocked at the number of women victimized at some point in their lives. In all the discussions however nobody has really accounted for all those assaults, reported and unreported.

I think the above scenario is a very good example of how an unreported rape happens. A girl is victimized by a friend or acquaintance that she trusts enough to to be alone and intoxicated with.

So you guys can tell anecdote after anecdote about how you have guy friends you "hang around" with and nothing happens, but you're just making it harder to explain the number of assaults we know occur.

Do you see how this simply doesn't add up? Morrigan tried to explain it away as "tiny" but we know for a fact that isn't the case. It can't be.

Unless you come up with a viable explanation, I'm still inclined to believe a majority of these assaults occur because older men encourage younger girls to do things they wouldn't otherwise do, young girls are foolishly going home with or taking home a guy they think is a friend, and drinking so much they're easily coerced into the above or worse yet pass out.

Say what you want about me, I think it amounts to neglect for parents not to start instilling this information in young girls starting around the age of 14 so by the age of 18 it's something they can carry on for themselves into their mid twenties.

There's nothing in this that precludes a girl from having guy friends or even being alone with a guy. It's just information that keeps them from forgetting that being alone with a guy shouldn't be taken lightly. Especially if you've been drinking.

Feel free to actually show how this is misguided or how exactly it "blames the victim".

Well I can say that in my case, where I was almost raped by a friend, I was not drunk. And it was someone I had known for years, not someone who was a recently met friend.

When it comes to other women I have spoken with when they have been assaulted by a friend or acquaintance, in all but a couple cases, the girl being drunk was not the issue. She was not drunk, and this still happened to her.


I really don't know what the statistics are in this, that is, if women are overall more likely to be raped by a friend IF she is drunk. But let's say that in a majority of cases- or at least, a significant minority, women raped by friends were NOT drinking at the time...would you then further advise that women should not be friends with men?

Now I think that getting drunk to the point you are blacking out or completely unable to discern what is going on is a bad idea for EVERYONE, male, female, young, old, etc. I went to a big drinking school (though I was never a big drinker, as I get sick from alcohol very easily). I know plenty of people who got into really bad situations after drinking heavily, and most of those were not women who were raped. Most people I know who have gotten into major trouble when alcohol being involved got into these troubles with a person of the SAME SEX, and these troubles were not sexual in nature. Well actually, overwhelmingly the biggest trouble I have seen people get into due to alcohol was trouble they got THEMSELVES into that had nothing to do with another person (i.e. hey, I think showing of my awesome balancing skills and walking on the railing of this 4 story balcony is a great idea right now!)


I do think your advice goes too far, or at least, is too specific. If your blanket advice is simply, "Don't get so drunk that you can't take care of yourself" than I agree, but I do NOT feel this should be coached in terms of directing it to women who are alone with male friends because they might rape you. That just fosters a feeling of paranoia, IMO.

I just don't believe that male friends are inherently dangerous than female friends. In my life I've been betrayed by 3 people I thought were my friends. I have always had more male than female friends, yet two of these betrayels were by women and in both cases, the emotional hurt they caused me far surpassed that of the friend who tried to rape me, and I do believe that would remain true even if I had been successfully raped.

Also, from the way you phrase it, it sounds like you are teaching your daughter to actively not trust any male friend because they are a potential rapist, and I just feel that could really mess with her psychologically. Obviously if you won't be alone with someone in a vulnerable state, that means you do not trust them.

Now obviously it may turn out that someone you thought was your friend wasn't, as I have experienced myself. But why single out guys? Despite being a minority of my friends, I have personally found women to be more dangerous friends than men.

Also, I know FAR more guys who got physically assaulted by another man when alcohol was involved than I know women who got sexually assaulted by a man when alcohol was involved. So I don't see why you think your daughter needs this lesson more than a man would.

 

[bookitty]

In the rape statistics, approximately the same amount of men who raped admitted to being under the influence of alcohol as did female victims. So, theoretically, we should see the same amount of posts ranting against men drinking too much and raping, as we do posts about women drinking too much and being raped.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

I'm curious as to why you would think this crime is not under-reported. As we've seen from this thread, there is social stigma attached to being raped, the fact that very few rape reports lead to a conviction is widely known, and the majority of rapes are between people who know each other so there would be some fear of reprisal or the potential to be ostracized.

Well, he didn't say it WASN'T under reported, only that he doesn't believe it's the MOST under reported. And I have to say I agree. When I was a kid, every kid I knew cut through people's yards on the way home from school, going to a friend's house, etc. I do not know a single kid who was arrested for tresspassing.

Living in Boston, when the bars let out at 2am, you practically can't pass by an alley way without seeing someone peeing in it. And I have yet to see one of the many, many passerbys yell "Call the police! Public urination is a crime!" I also know that near 100% of men who live in the city who I know and plenty of women, myself included, have urinated in public at some point due to lack of other bathroom options, yet I know no one who has been arrested for public urination.

 

[AvalonXQ]

I'm curious as to why you would think this crime is not under-reported.

I believe that all crimes are very under-reported, because most people don't choose to go to the police for most things that go wrong in their lives. What I don't believe without good evidence is that rape is more under-reported then, say, assault; in areas where fistfights are pretty common but police reports are pretty rare, assaults are going to be ubiquitous and consistently ignored in terms of police action.
Crimes may not be reported because:
1) The victim doesn't recognize the event as a crime,
2) The victim is concerned about the social / emotional costs of the justice process,
3) The victim doesn't believe that reporting the crime will result in a satisfactory outcome.
All of these factors apply to rape, although (1) has been mentioned less than (2) and (3) in this thread. However, all these factors also apply if somebody hits you in a barfight, or if kids TP your front yard. In the absence of evidence it doesn't seem reasonable to conclude that any property of rape is completely unbalancing in this regard.

 

[AvalonXQ]

In the rape statistics, approximately the same amount of men who raped admitted to being under the influence of alcohol as did female victims. So, theoretically, we should see the same amount of posts ranting against men drinking too much and raping, as we do posts about women drinking too much and being raped.

It's already been explained why people don't give specific justifications for the assailant's behavior -- we don't want to give her any out; we're not interested in "defending" what she did by explaining risk factors. We want to villify the rapist.
In contrast, we want to know what the victim could have done differently to avoid what happened to her.

 

[Uncayimmy]

First off, you misread or purposefully misinterpreted "or" for "and."

You mean the part about physical contact? I don't think it makes a hill of beans in terms of my argument whether it was and, or or and/or.

Secondly, in this case I wasn't talking about the court system. I said "under-reported" which, again, you ignored. Rape is the most under-reported crime. If a crime is not reported it doesn't go to court. If it doesn't go to court, there is no way that the rapist can be punished. He is free to rape again.

Your inability to make the connection does not mean I ignored anything. Perhaps upon reflection you'll understand.

So, to repeat, if a woman has done any ONE of those things, she is less likely report the crime. Why? Because she's heard mile-long lecture like yours a thousand times. So, even if it is not "blaming" victims, it's failing to protect them.

In what way is it failing to protect them?

You know what, maybe that is wrong. Maybe women do need to "take more responsibility" or whatever you think it is. But the reality is that rape is not being reported enough, it is not being prosecuted enough, not enough rapists are being punished, and rape is happening too often. Something in this system of saying "she should/shouldn't have done X" is not working.

What changes would you propose?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

do you think that someone who leaves their keys in the car does it becuse they have no idea this could lead to theft? Or are there a multitude of other reasons that simply saying 'don't do that' fail to address?

I think you are straining the metaphor past the point at which it becomes useless, because the reasons people engage in risky drug and alcohol use aren't the same reasons that people leave their keys in the car, and "simply saying 'don't do that'" is your straw man - I'm open to whatever educational strategy turns out to work to reduce risky behaviour. What I'm not open to without evidence is the implied claim that nothing can be done to reduce risky behaviour so it's politically incorrect to even mention the issue.

I'm sorry if my posts are coming off like that, but they are a product of years of frustration with this same conversation. ThiS was brought to the surface by seeing 10 pages of posts where womens risky behaviour was being discussed as though stoping this kind of behaviour is all women can do. And there is an attitude that implies that those who do engage in these behaviours do it because they don't know the risks, and simply telling them 'don't do this' is the answer.

I think you are seeing what you want to see, or possibly ranting about things that have frustrated you in the past whether or not anything here deserves ranting at.

Rapes by strangers leaping out of the bushes have been discussed, and rapes by husbands and boyfriends have been discussed. This thread has focused on the subset of rapes committed by acquaintances primarily because Bookitty, Big Boss and various others have been telling us that we are bad people if we discuss that particular issue, and as skeptics we've been pulling that issue apart to see what's going on. This thread has been to a large extent about how we should talk about rape prevention, and only to a minor extent about actual rape prevention strategies.

yes, I spoke to girls who had been raped in conjunction with, sometimes as a result of, drug and alchohol use. Not one of them ever implied, in any way, that they didn't realize they were engaging in a risky behaviour... That if they had just been told a few more times not to get too drunk this wouldn't have happened. They all knew they had done something risky.

Firstly, given the time at which you were talking to them, I think it's safe to say that the downside risk of their earlier behaviour would have been apparent to them at that point, possibly more so than the night before. Secondly, this again seems to assume that we are arguing for some "simply don't do it" straw man campaign, rather than arguing about whether it's okay to discuss the underlying problem in the first place.

For many of them this translated to 'knowing' they had done something 'wrong'... If we want to reduce the number of incidents like this, we are talking about undermining an entire culture at universities, and in society at large. We've been trying the 'just tell them it's wrong' approach for a long time, and it's not working. If you want a campaign against the binge drinking culture that leads to girls getting pass out drunk, I am right there with you. But don't minimalize them, or the issue, by blaming it on a basic lack of understanding of the risks involved. If you want to talk about what we can teach our girls to keep them safe, we need to go light years beyond just telling girls to avoiding risky behaviour.

It still seems to me that you aren't focused on solving the problem yourself here. You're focused on attacking people who discuss the problem in a politically incorrect way and positioning yourself as self-appointed authority over how we may talk, if we want to talk about these issues.

To my mind saying "Every single woman is as educated as she needs to be about the risk of rape by acquaintances, so you are a bad person if you bring the issue up" is as nonsensical as saying "Every single man knows that it's never okay to rape a woman, so you are a bad person if you bring the issue up", especially if your source of data is just your own collection of anecdotes.

And why not? We have seen so many examples in this thread of how the attitude, actions, and choices of a woman can lead to rape. Where are the posts and posts about the attacker? How is it that a man will decide to rape? How does he cover his tracks if there have been previous rapes? What does he do to gain her trust? How does he choose a victim? What is it about his upbringing that allows him to think this is acceptable? Are there men out there who have forced sex on a woman and don't consider it rape? If so, are there social rewards for manipulating women into unwanted sexual attack? Is there a "rape culture" that allows some men to think that opportunity equals consent?

I suggest starting your own thread rather than ranting about the unfairness of the fact that this thread has not been derailed.

In the rape statistics, approximately the same amount of men who raped admitted to being under the influence of alcohol as did female victims. So, theoretically, we should see the same amount of posts ranting against men drinking too much and raping, as we do posts about women drinking too much and being raped.

Can you point to anybody being attacked for saying that it might not be a good thing for men to get drunk and rape? I don't think you will be able to.

What you are doing is quite consistent, really. The topic of discussion was attempts to control the conversation about rape by dictating what people could and could not say. Now you're trying to control that conversation as well.

You don't want us to talk about it, and you don't want us to talk about the fact that we aren't allowed to talk about it, so you are trying to change the subject.

 

[bookitty]

I believe that all crimes are very under-reported, because most people don't choose to go to the police for most things that go wrong in their lives. What I don't believe without good evidence is that rape is more under-reported then, say, assault; in areas where fistfights are pretty common but police reports are pretty rare, assaults are going to be ubiquitous and consistently ignored in terms of police action.
Crimes may not be reported because:
1) The victim doesn't recognize the event as a crime,
2) The victim is concerned about the social / emotional costs of the justice process,
3) The victim doesn't believe that reporting the crime will result in a satisfactory outcome.
All of these factors apply to rape, although (1) has been mentioned less than (2) and (3) in this thread. However, all these factors also apply if somebody hits you in a barfight, or if kids TP your front yard. In the absence of evidence it doesn't seem reasonable to conclude that any property of rape is completely unbalancing in this regard.

Yep, I completely goofed and left out the word "violent" as in "rape is the most under-reported violent crime." Huge difference and completely my fault. I apologize for causing for any confusion.

 

[bookitty]

I suggest starting your own thread rather than ranting about the unfairness of the fact that this thread has not been derailed.

Not been derailed? The OP is about a campaign to place the blame on rapists and not women. How is a discussion about the actions and motivations of the rapist a derail?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Not been derailed? The OP is about a campaign to place the blame on rapists and not women. How is a discussion about the actions and motivations of the rapist a derail?

That would be perfectly relevant. I encourage you to post on that topic.

Demanding an explanation for why it has not already been posted by someone else, on the other hand, seems like a derail to me.

 

[myowninvention]

I think you are straining the metaphor past the point at which it becomes useless, because the reasons people engage in risky drug and alcohol use aren't the same reasons that people leave their keys in the car, and "simply saying 'don't do that'" is your straw man - I'm open to whatever educational strategy turns out to work to reduce risky behaviour. What I'm not open to without evidence is the implied claim that nothing can be done to reduce risky behaviour so it's politically incorrect to even mention the issue.

I think you are seeing what you want to see, or possibly ranting about things that have frustrated you in the past whether or not anything here deserves ranting at.

I did not intend, ever, to claim that nothing can be done to reduce risky behaviour, nor to imply that it should not be discussed. It is the immediacy and the length to which it was discussed, without any mention of constructive strategies for addressing these types of behaviour, other then education, that triggered my, admittedly emotionally based, responses. I over simplified the argument around risky behaviour to make a point, not meaning to imply that anyone here was actually saying exactly that.

Rapes by strangers leaping out of the bushes have been discussed, and rapes by husbands and boyfriends have been discussed. This thread has focused on the subset of rapes committed by acquaintances primarily because Bookitty, Big Boss and various others have been telling us that we are bad people if we discuss that particular issue, and as skeptics we've been pulling that issue apart to see what's going on. This thread has been to a large extent about how we should talk about rape prevention, and only to a minor extent about actual rape prevention strategies.

Yes those were discussed, but not much in the context of prevention: there wasn't much said about what could be done to prevent these kinds of attacks. And if you want to talk about how to talk about rape prevention without actually talking about rape prevention. . .well, ok. I say, the issue of high risk behaviour is only one of many that should be being discussed, and I don't want to stop that discussion, but I think it needs to be given it's proper place in the overall discussion of rape prevention, or you risk implying to the large percentage of rape victims who did nothing of the sort that the only thing they could have done differently is to not behave in a risky manner, when in fact there is more practical advice we could be giving, and that sort of advice implies that people think they did something risky (read wrong) and were therefore raped.

Firstly, given the time at which you were talking to them, I think it's safe to say that the downside risk of their earlier behaviour would have been apparent to them at that point, possibly more so than the night before. Secondly, this again seems to assume that we are arguing for some "simply don't do it" straw man campaign, rather than arguing about whether it's okay to discuss the underlying problem in the first place.

To my mind saying "Every single woman is as educated as she needs to be about the risk of rape by acquaintances, so you are a bad person if you bring the issue up" is as nonsensical as saying "Every single man knows that it's never okay to rape a woman, so you are a bad person if you bring the issue up", especially if your source of data is just your own collection of anecdotes.

I don't mean to imply that 'every single women is as educated as she needs to be'. . .etc. I'm truly sorry that it came off that way. just to reiterate: I think that it is invaluable to teach people about risky behaviour and possible consequences of their actions. I also think that this is already being done. I simply find that it gets a disproportionate emphasis in the context of rape prevention, at the expense of other strategies, and the implications of this can be extremely upsetting, and can lead victims of rape to feel as though they are being judged and blamed for engaging in risky behaviour, when a large percentage of them did no such thing. My anecdotal evidence lines up with what I see in larger scale studies. I by no means think it is the end all be all of data collection on the subject, but I think it is valid to draw from my experiences when forming an opinion.

If you want links to some statistics, http://azrapeprevention.org/statistics is a good place to start.

 

[bookitty]

That would be perfectly relevant. I encourage you to post on that topic.

Demanding an explanation for why it has not already been posted by someone else, on the other hand, seems like a derail to me.

Fair enough.

Can we please discuss these issues. How is it that a man will decide to rape? How does he cover his tracks if there have been previous rapes? What does he do to gain her trust? How does he choose a victim? What is it about his upbringing that allows him to think this is acceptable? Are there men out there who have forced sex on a woman and don't consider it rape? If so, are there social rewards for manipulating women into unwanted sexual attack? Is there a "rape culture" that allows some men to think that opportunity equals consent?

 

[tyr_13]

Fair enough.

Can we please discuss these issues. How is it that a man will decide to rape? How does he cover his tracks if there have been previous rapes? What does he do to gain her trust? How does he choose a victim? What is it about his upbringing that allows him to think this is acceptable? Are there men out there who have forced sex on a woman and don't consider it rape? If so, are there social rewards for manipulating women into unwanted sexual attack? Is there a "rape culture" that allows some men to think that opportunity equals consent?

And do these differ from women who rape? I'm just always annoyed in these threads where it's assumed that 'rapist = man' and 'victim = woman'.

 

[Meed]

I'd be curious to know more about what motivates rape, what cultural factors make people more or less likely to rape, what personality profiles are more likely to do it, etc. If I find anything interesting I'll share.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Fair enough.

Can we please discuss these issues. How is it that a man will decide to rape? How does he cover his tracks if there have been previous rapes? What does he do to gain her trust? How does he choose a victim? What is it about his upbringing that allows him to think this is acceptable? Are there men out there who have forced sex on a woman and don't consider it rape? If so, are there social rewards for manipulating women into unwanted sexual attack? Is there a "rape culture" that allows some men to think that opportunity equals consent?

Excellent questions. Do you have any answers to any of them? I ask mostly because if you don't, I'm not sure it's fair to criticise others for not having already provided them.

 

[Furcifer]

I really don't know what the statistics are in this, that is, if women are overall more likely to be raped by a friend IF she is drunk.

The stat just cites if alcohol was involved, it doesn't give a breakdown by age group or to what extent just the fact that alcohol was involved. Which is about half. Now consider the fact that something like 35% are well under the age to even consider drinking. (the age groups over lap, but we can assume girls as young as 14 or 15 are drinking). It's safe to say that about 75%, probably more, of the assaults on girls from the age of 15-22 involve alcohol.
As it happens, I know a few girls that were assaulted and all of them involved alcohol and at least 1 LSD. On a side note Colt 45 Malt Liquor got in big trouble a couple years ago with a bollboard that read "Colt 45, works every time". I mean if ad companies know, and are that brazen about it it's prevalent.

I do think your advice goes too far, or at least, is too specific. If your blanket advice is simply, "Don't get so drunk that you can't take care of yourself" than I agree, but I do NOT feel this should be coached in terms of directing it to women who are alone with male friends because they might rape you. That just fosters a feeling of paranoia, IMO.

I disagree. After the big "Schrodinger's Rapist" thread I came to agree some amount of caution is necessary. Not talking to a guy on a bus because he's a potential rapist no, but an underage girl drinking and being alone with a male, that she knows yes. YMMV.

I just don't believe that male friends are inherently dangerous than female friends.

We're talking about rape mind you.

Also, from the way you phrase it, it sounds like you are teaching your daughter to actively not trust any male friend because they are a potential rapist, and I just feel that could really mess with her psychologically.

Just a note: this was hypothetical and a ways down the road. Planning for the future.

Also, I know FAR more guys who got physically assaulted by another man when alcohol was involved than I know women who got sexually assaulted by a man when alcohol was involved.

Yes, but I've seen two guys put each other in the hospital and then walk out together arm in arm.

 

[myowninvention]

And do these differ from women who rape? I'm just always annoyed in these threads where it's assumed that 'rapist = man' and 'victim = woman'.

That's because that's the largest pool of evidence we have to draw from. Of reported rapes, only 1% are perpitrated by women. ( http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics?wasRedirected=true )Of course there is no doubt a number that are not reported, but both statistically, and anecdotally, there is close to nothing to work with. Discussion, therefore, remains rooted largely in the hypothetical. Male victims, however, are coming forward more frequently now, and should not be overlooked.

 

[Uncayimmy]

How is it that a man will decide to rape?

Define your terms. Rape can range from abducting a stranger at gunpoint to a wife waking up with her drunk husband on top of her and deciding that since the husband is a mean drunk that compliance is a prudent course of action. And there's lots in between.

Second, what do you mean by decide? When it comes to murder, we recognize varying degrees. We view premeditated murder with planning and/or lying in wait as different than a spontaneous act. Even when it comes to a cheating spouse most people I would think view an escalating relationship with a friend that led to sex differently than (say) a business trip where the spouse got a little drunk and tumbled into bed with a stranger. Thus "deciding" is a vague term.

How does he cover his tracks if there have been previous rapes?

It depends on the type of rape. A violent rapist may resort to threats to keep the victim quiet. He might wear a mask, and unless his DNA is on record, the best the police might be able to do is say it was the same person.

What does he do to gain her trust?

You're assuming premeditation. You're also assuming trust. The sad reality is that many victims of rape and other violence suffer multiple times from the same partner. I think the simple answer is that we want to trust people and do stupid things out of love.

How does he choose a victim?

Again, this assumes premeditation. It's going to vary by type of rape.

What is it about his upbringing that allows him to think this is acceptable?

You're assuming he thinks it is acceptable. He may not, which is why he hides his tracks, right? In the contrived example of the drunk husband on the wife, he may not think he's doing anything wrong at all, especially if she never says anything to him about it. Or maybe he figures it's his right or something. Or maybe he chooses to believe her actions (she let him) rather than her words (don't do that!).

Are there men out there who have forced sex on a woman and don't consider it rape?

I think the better question is whether men and women disagree on what constitutes force considering we use the word in contexts where it doesn't mean physically overpowering somebody or threatening them with harm.

If so, are there social rewards for manipulating women into unwanted sexual attack?

You've just switched from force to manipulation. The reality is that in general most men from their teens through their 30s would be happy to have sex on any given evening. Granted, not every evening, but let's consider our hypothetical man as being single and not getting any steady action. He goes out on a Saturday night to some social event like a party or just to a bar. Not to put too fine a point on it, chances are pretty good he's hoping to get laid, and he's not going to be too picky.

By contrast, I think it's fair to say that the female counterparts are simply not interested in just getting laid. Sure, some might be, but the reality is that a reasonably attractive girl making her intentions known would have little trouble bringing a man home on a given Saturday night whereas men are far more likely to be buying a copy of Swank along with a Slurpee after the bars close.

So, in that sense, there is a "social reward" for getting laid in that the next day he will say to his male friends, "I got me some last night!" and receive some high-fives along with requests for details. How he managed this feat is irrelevant to the story (at least in my experience).

Is there a "rape culture" that allows some men to think that opportunity equals consent?

No, but I believe that questions like that greatly oversimplify an incredibly complex topic.