The inner world of a prostitute

[TSwizzle]

But I’m evidently a misogynist moralist for pointing out that not every prostitute thinks it’s all a carefree, adult, sexually liberating bed of roses.

I hardly think so. I'm quite sure everyone in this discussion has acknowledged there is a dark, ugly side to prostitution. I think the number of women who get into this line of work willingly and are successful at it are few and far between. The girl (or girls) at the Bunny Ranch are exceptions I would think and even then, the Ranch appears to be taking a 50% cut of their fees which seems excessive.

 

[Derec]

I hardly think so. I'm quite sure everyone in this discussion has acknowledged there is a dark, ugly side to prostitution.

So far so good. But then, any industry has a dark side.

I think the number of women who get into this line of work willingly and are successful at it are few and far between.

I don't think so. I think vast majority are doing it willingly. There is a huge difference between doing it willingly and really enjoying it as a profession. I think the latter are a relatively small minority, but certainly not the former.

The girl (or girls) at the Bunny Ranch are exceptions I would think and even then, the Ranch appears to be taking a 50% cut of their fees which seems excessive.

I guess it does, but to blame is the Nevada law. I think the law should allow for both independent providers and brothels. Then any sex worker can decide for herself and the fair cut for brothels (benefits of which are safe work environment and getting clients) would be established by the market.

 

[Derec]

That’s one anecdote. Here are some others:

Are you aware that "Space International" is an anti-sex work pressure group? Working toward banning sex work?
In any case, it's probably not too difficult to get a handful of testimonials from women who disliked sex work when they did it or who had bad experiences when you get testimonials from all over the world.
Not that I would put it past them to simply invent testimonials, of course.

But I’m evidently a misogynist moralist for pointing out that not every prostitute thinks it’s all a carefree, adult, sexually liberating bed of roses.

No, but you are a bore because everybody knows that already.
But where do you get the idea that every prostitute must think "it’s all a carefree, adult, sexually liberating bed of roses" for women and men to be allowed to pursue sex work as either providers or customers?

Some sex workers might think it's a sexually liberating profession and love their work.
Others might think it's ok work better than many other jobs.
Yet others may dislike it, even a lot, but stick with it for a while until they can get a better job because working as a cashier or something pays a lot less.
And then there are women who may be forced into it. They should be freed, of course and those responsible arrested.

 

[Derec]

Potential good news out of New York:

Sex Work Would Be Broadly Legal in New York Under New Bill Introduced Monday

Although this article does not go into detail as to what the circumstances would be in which sex work would be legal, it is a somewhat encouraging development.
But of course it would have to pass the legislature and get signed into law by the governor and they even failed with pot, so it might be a doomed bill. Too many purtian moralist killjoys on both sides of the aisle

 

[Toni]

So far so good. But then, any industry has a dark side.

I don't think so. I think vast majority are doing it willingly. There is a huge difference between doing it willingly and really enjoying it as a profession. I think the latter are a relatively small minority, but certainly not the former.

The girl (or girls) at the Bunny Ranch are exceptions I would think and even then, the Ranch appears to be taking a 50% cut of their fees which seems excessive.

I guess it does, but to blame is the Nevada law. I think the law should allow for both independent providers and brothels. Then any sex worker can decide for herself and the fair cut for brothels (benefits of which are safe work environment and getting clients) would be established by the market.

Define willingly.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

That’s one anecdote. Here are some others:

Are you aware that "Space International" is an anti-sex work pressure group?

You mean a consortium of ex-sex workers who know what they're talking about while you--a frequent "John"--do not?

In any case, it's probably not too difficult to get a handful of testimonials from women who disliked sex work when they did it or who had bad experiences when you get testimonials from all over the world.

Not difficult in the slightest. Which is, rather, the point.

Not that I would put it past them to simply invent testimonials, of course.

Says the demonstrated misogynist "John." I wonder what anecdotes the sex-workers that you frequent would relate. I know what the one I went to in Amsterdam would say, assuming she would even remember me. Something along the lines of my being just another pussy American kid, drunk and stoned and thinking I was in a John Hughes movie as she shut her eyes and just waited for me to cum and be done with it.

But I’m evidently a misogynist moralist for pointing out that not every prostitute thinks it’s all a carefree, adult, sexually liberating bed of roses.

No, but you are a bore because everybody knows that already.
But where do you get the idea that every prostitute must think

Speaking of bores, stuff some more straw. Or be even more boring and post shit like this:

Some sex workers might think it's a sexually liberating profession and love their work.
Others might think it's ok work better than many other jobs.
Yet others may dislike it, even a lot, but stick with it for a while until they can get a better job because working as a cashier or something pays a lot less.
And then there are women who may be forced into it. They should be freed, of course and those responsible arrested

No shit? Ya think? So how exactly is that to be determined is the constant and unaddressed question itt? Particularly when "Johns" like you try to dismiss the concerns of ex-sex workers by saying they're a "pressure group" that would willingly lie just to ruin your innocent fun, or when someone like me raises this exact same point I get called a "misogynist moralist" and a "bore"?

Here's an easy experiment for you to do so as not to be so boring. Go to one of your regular prostitutes and tell her you can no longer pay her, but could she just this one time fuck you? See how fast she tells you to go fuck yourself.

Now think of whatever it is that you do for a living. Since I don't know what that is, let's just assume it's IT and you're, say, at a Starbucks with your laptop reading this right now. And some stranger turns to you and says, "Excuse me, I think my computer just crashed, would you mind taking a look? I can't pay you."

If you truly loved your work and/or felt it was "ok work better than many other jobs" and even "disliked it, even a lot" but you are sticking with it for a while until you can get a better job "because working as a cashier or something pays a lot less," and, you know, you're just a half-way decent human being, you probably wouldn't mind at all to apply your working skill set to seeing if you can get this stranger's computer back up and running for them.

Iow, your skills are not necessarily tied to the job title that you may currently have, yes? So being able to apply those skills to someone in need that nevertheless can't pay you in money would more than likely not be that big of a deal to you (again assuming you're even a half-way decent human being).

Now apply that same scenario to the average sex-worker. I'm not taking about giving a regular paying client a free handie every now and again in order to keep them coming back, I'm talking about someone who loves/likes what they're doing as a job--and has a particular skill set that they regularly apply in the function of that job--and that person then applying that skill set without pay, but still in a professional manner (i.e., not just helping out a friend for friendship's sake).

Pro-bono work, if you will.

I'm sure there are those sex-workers out there who truly do have this exact mindset and would in fact be so empathetic as to work pro-bono with someone (these are typically called "sex-therapists" and they're of a different order and get paid a much much higher rate as therapists), but I'm equally sure that a very large percentage of sex-workers who are not trained therapists would absolutely unequivocally not even consider the above scenario regardless of how they may claim they love what they do and don't feel forced or trapped or otherwise without options.

So, again and for (I doubt) the last time, how the fuck do we regulate any of that? I'm NOT arguing that if we can't, we therefore shouldn't decriminalize or otherwise make it legal, I'm asking how the fuck do we regulate any of that? We ask them, "Would you do this work for free?" and if they say yes, that's all that's necessary, we give them their license?

The exact same harms/dangers that exist now in the illegal world of sex-work still exist in the legal world of sex-work. There is no similar industry to compare this to, other than, possibly the military. No one in the retail or service or administrative or manufacturing industries has like a 25% greater chance of being brutally raped or murdered every single minute they are on the job.

The best solution, of course, and one you obviously are strongly biased against, is for people like you (and me, freely admitted) to simply not go to prostitutes. But because it's a male dominated industry, that solution is rarely if ever seriously addressed. The operating assumption is just that boys will be boys and we have a "right" to fuck anything we want to fuck so long as we can pay enough money. It's free market capitalism after all, so, once again, it's the women that must just take all the risks for our pleasure.

Again, no other industry does this. The legal consequences of using a product for harm is always on the buyer, not the seller. In this case, the seller is the product. So you can say, "Well, we need to obviously protect the women" but how? Put cops in every brothel? Cops cause many of the harms. Rely on the sex-workers to report abuse to their HR person or Union rep, like in a normal workplace situation? What defines "abuse" in a situation where you're being paid to get raped, basically? Security cameras in every brothel/bedroom?

The only way I can think of regulating such an industry is to shift focus entirely onto the buyers. Every "John" must register with the State and receive a license just like medical marijuana or a driver's license. Better yet, they get a special licensed FSA style debit card that they must use to pay for their visits. Every sex-worker then scans that card like they would a credit card and the information is immediately sent to the police so that they are alerted to exactly who is where. Maybe have every brothel required to have a compliance officer of sorts on site to photograph the "Johns" and the sex-worker before entering a room and then immediately after exiting (since video cameras in the rooms would likely prove problematic, just as we don't allow department stores to place them in dressing rooms).

The point being, of course, that these are at least actual measures that can be taken in order to put the focus on the ones that are actually causing the harms in the first place; the "Johns" and the Pimps. And as I pointed out previously, if we're really talking about destigmatizing the industry, this is the way to do it. Out in the open and under basic commensurate regulatory oversight the way we would for any other like industry where severe harms are not just likely, but are regular occurrences.

It's not the old west after all, where you can just do whatever the fuck you want to do. Because cars are dangerous, we require you to be licensed and to carry that license with you at all times and to show that card any time police officers--or other authority figures--ask for it. Same with prescription drugs and medical marijuana and gun ownership, etc. Hell, just to go on certain roller coasters, you have to pass a height requirement.

So, as a frequent "John" yourself, what are your regulatory solutions to make it safe so that people like you--who just, for whatever reason, won't or feel like they can't take normal social steps toward achieving consensual sex--don't get unduly lumped in with abusers, rapists and murderers who view sex-workers in an entirely different way than you do?

We know you want anyone "forced" into prostitution "freed" and those responsible arrested. So HOW exactly do we do that? Try not to be boring.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

You could take the extreme opposite direction and set up government run brothels. Theres a unique idea for you. No scams. No abusive sex trafficking pimps, bit government as facilitator, with police as security. That would be an entirely different approach than anything anybody has tried.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Trump in a pimp hat, purple sable coat, tons of bling...that's the look!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You could take the extreme opposite direction and set up government run brothels. Theres a unique idea for you. No scams. No abusive sex trafficking pimps, bit government as facilitator, with police as security. That would be an entirely different approach than anything anybody has tried.

You trust them to do it correctly?! Anything government does suffers the problem of having the same organization both doing and saying whether that doing is being done correctly.

 

[steve_bank]

Germany normalized it. Pay taxes and get health care. France was a failure in trying to ban it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Europe


Germany[edit]

Prostitution in Germany is legal, as are all aspects of the sex industry, including brothels, advertisement, and job offers through HR companies. Full-service sex work is widespread and regulated by the German government, which levies taxes on it.[164] In 2002, the government changed the law in an effort to improve the legal situation of sex workers. However, the social stigmatization of sex work persists and many workers continue to lead a double life.[165] Human rights organizations consider the resulting common exploitation of women from Eastern and Southeastern Europe to be the main problem associated with the profession.

France[edit]


Prostitution in France (the exchange of sexual acts for money) was legal until April 2016, but several surrounding activities were illegal, like operating a brothel, living off the avails (pimping), and paying for sex with someone under the age of 18 (the age of consent for sex is 15).[160] On 6 April 2016, the French National Assembly voted to punish customers of prostitutes by a fine of €1500.[161] The law has been evaluated as a failure, putting sex workers in danger, reducing prices, and decreasing condom use among their clients.[162]

In the Napoleonic era, France became the model for the regulatory approach to prostitution. In the 20th century, however, a policy shift became apparent. Brothels became illegal in 1946, and France signed the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others in 1960. France thus became a major supporter of the international abolitionist movement for the eradication of prostitution.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

You could take the extreme opposite direction and set up government run brothels. Theres a unique idea for you. No scams. No abusive sex trafficking pimps, bit government as facilitator, with police as security. That would be an entirely different approach than anything anybody has tried.

You trust them to do it correctly?! Anything government does suffers the problem of having the same organization both doing and saying whether that doing is being done correctly.

Sure, why not give it a try. You would at least have people to hold accountable. You'd get regulations up and effective. You could usher in universal sex care too and get the losers who become social problems laid. It may even decrease rape numbers.

Who knows. It could work.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

It may even decrease rape numbers.

Rape is a crime of violence, not sex. That's just the weapon.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It may even decrease rape numbers.

Rape is a crime of violence, not sex. That's just the weapon.

Rape is a crime of both, and is motivated by either or both.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

It may even decrease rape numbers.

Rape is a crime of violence, not sex. That's just the weapon.

Rape is a crime of both, and is motivated by either or both.

Great. Pointless gainsaying.

No, it isn't. It's an act of power/dominance. No one has ever raped someone because they wanted to have sex, as sex is a consensual act. They rape because they want to force someone else to do something that that person doesn't want to do. Power/dominance.

Is this JP is a fuckhead day? Because it's sure as shit is adding up that way little troll.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Nothing you wrote addressed or disagreed with what I wrote, genius.

Rape is a crime of violence and of sex. And either or both can motivate it. There are men who vastly prefer consensual sex, but want the sex so much that they become willing to force it without consent. That's true of many cases or sexual assault. It doesn't always stem from a motivation of power and victimization. Sometimes the guy is just horny and fails to control himself or doesn't care the harm he is doing (without that harm being his motivation).

Same could be said of theft. Sometimes people steal just for the perverse thrill they get from stealing. Other times, it's about the money and they wouldn't steal it if they could otherwise easily get it without doing so.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Nothing you wrote addressed or disagreed with what I wrote, genius.

Pretty sure this directly addressed and "disagreed" with it:

It's an act of power/dominance. No one has ever raped someone because they wanted to have sex, as sex is a consensual act. They rape because they want to force someone else to do something that that person doesn't want to do. Power/dominance.

You make the same mistake twice:

Rape is a crime of violence and of sex.

No, it is not a "crime of sex."

There are men who vastly prefer consensual sex, but want the sex so much that they become willing to force it without consent.

False. A common misconception, but false nonetheless. Regardless, wanting something so much that you are "willing to force it without consent" is straight-up rape; the reason the person acts is because they are incensed at being denied what it is they want. Aka, power struggle/dominance struggle.

So, yes, I am directly "disagreeing" with what you are arguing. You simply aren't digging deep enough into the psychology involved.

That's true of many cases or sexual assault.

Evidence? Or is that just your armchair observation, because the vast majority of clinical research in the matter supports the fact that it's motivated out of power/dominance and not just really really wanting it (which, again, is also a power/dominance matter).

World Health Organization:

Sexual assault is an aggressive act motivated by power and control.

From the Encyclopedia of Forensic and Legal Medicine:

Rape is experienced as an act of violence and a profound violation of one’s inner self, as illustrated in the following quote: Rape is like being murdered but still being alive. (Home Office, 2010 – cited in Stern Review 2010)

Just straight up mainstream, like from Psychology Today:

Despite its name, sexual abuse is more about power than it is about sex. Although the touch may be sexual, the words seductive or intimidating, and the violation physical, when someone rapes, assaults, or harasses, the motivation stems from the perpetrator’s need for dominance and control.

Here's a horrific, but excellent study on rapists themselves. In regard to the notion that there is some sort of power of Christ uncontrollable force that compels them:

Two assumptions are at the core of the psychopathological model; that rape is the result of idiosyncratic mental disease and that it often includes an uncontrollable sexual impulse (Scully and Marolla, 1985). For example, the presumption of psychopathology is evident in the often cited work of Nicholas Groth (1979). While Groth emphasizes the nonsexual nature of rape (power, anger, sadism), he also concludes, "Rape is always a symptom of some psychological dysfunction, either temporary and transient or chronic and repetitive" (Groth, 1979:5). Thus, in the psychopathological view, rapists lack the ability to control their behavior; they are "sick" individuals from the "lunatic fringe" of society.

In contradiction to this model, empirical research has repeatedly failed to find a consistent pattern of personality type or character disorder that reliably discriminates rapists from other groups of men (Fisher and Rivlin, 1971; Hammer and Jacks, 1955; Rada, 1978). Indeed, other research has found that fewer than 5 percent of men were psychotic when they raped (Abel et al.,1980). Evidence indicates that rape is not a behavior confined to a few "sick" men but many men have the attitudes and beliefs necessary to commit a sexually aggressive act.
...
In this paper, we address this question using data from interviews conducted with 114 convicted, incarcerated rapists. Elsewhere, we discussed the vocabulary of motive, consisting of excuses and justifications, that these convicted rapists used to explain themselves and their crime (Scully and Marolla, 1984)." The use of these culturally derived excuses and justifications allowed them to view their behavior as either idiosyncratic or situationally appropriate and thus it reduced their sense of moral responsibility for their actions. Having disavowed deviance, these men revealed how they had used rape to achieve a number of objectives. We find that some men used rape for revenge or punishment while, for others, it was an "added bonus"—a last minute decision made while committing another crime. In still other cases, rape was used to gain sexual access to women who were unwilling or unavailable, and for some it was a source of power and sex without any personal feelings. Rape was also a form of recreation, a diversion or an adventure and, finally, it was something that made these men "feel good."
...
During 1980 and 1981 we interviewed 114 convicted rapists. All of the men had been convicted of the rape or attempted rape of an adult woman and subsequently incarcerated in a Virginia prison.
...
In all prison research, validity is a special methodological concern because of the reputation inmates have for "conning." Although one goal of this research was to understand rape from the perspective of men who have raped, it was also necessary to establish the extent to which rapists' perceptions deviated from other descriptions of their crime. The technique we used was the same others have used in prison research; comparing factual information obtained in the interviews, including details of the crime, with reports on file at the prison (Athens, 1977; Luckenbill, 1977; Queen's Bench Foundation, 1976). In general, we found that rapists' accounts of their crime had changed very little since their trials. However, there was a tendency to understate the amount of violence they had used and, especially among certain rapists, to place blame on their victims.
...
As noted earlier, Black's (1983) perspective suggests that a rapist might see his act as a legitimized form of revenge or punishment. Additionally, he asserts that the idea of "collective liability" accounts for much seemingly random violence. "Collective liability" suggests that all people in a particular category are held accountable for the conduct of each of their counterparts. Thus, the victim of a violent act may merely represent the category of individual being punished. These factors — revenge, punishment, and the collective liability of women—can be used to explain a number of rapes in our research. Several cases will illustrate the ways in which these factors combined in various types of rape. Revenge-rapes were among the most brutal and often included beatings, serious injuries and, even murder.
...
Typically, revenge-rapes included the element of collective liability. This is, from the rapist's perspective, the victim was a substitute for the woman they wanted to avenge. As explained elsewhere, (Scully and Marolla, 1984), an upsetting event, involving a woman, preceded a significant number of rapes. When they raped, these men were angry because of a perceived indiscretion, typically related to a rigid, moralistic standard of sexual conduct, which they required from "their woman" but, in most cases, did not abide by themselves. Over and over these rapists talked about using rape "to get even" with their wives or other significant woman.

Typical is a young man who, prior to the rape, had a violent argument with his wife over what eventually proved to be her misdiagnosed case of venereal disease. She assumed the disease had been contracted through him, an accusation that infuriated him. After fighting with his wife, he explained that he drove around "thinking about hurting someone." He encountered his victim, a stranger, on the road where her car had broken down. It appears she accepted his offered ride because her car was out of commission. When she realized that rape was pending, she called him "a son of a bitch," and attempted to resist. He reported flying into a rage and beating her, and he confided,

I have never felt that much anger before. If she had resisted, I would have killed her . . . The rape was for
revenge. I didn't have an orgasm. She was there to get my hostile feelings off on.​

...
Although not the most common form of revenge rape, sexual assault continues to be used in retaliation against the victim's male partner. In one such case, the offender, angry because the victim's husband owed him money, went to the victim's home to collect. He confided, "I was going to get it one way or another." Finding the victim alone, he explained, they started to argue about the
money and,

I grabbed her and started beating the hell out of her. Then I committed the act, I knew what I was doing.
I was mad. I could have stopped but I didn't. I did it to get even with her and her husband.​

...
Finally, in some rapes, both revenge and punishment were directed at victims because they represented women whom these offenders perceived as collectively responsible and liable for their problems. Rape was used "to put women in their place" and as a method of proving their "manhood" by displaying dominance over a female. For example, one multiple rapist believed his actions were related to the feeling that women thought they were better than he was.

Rape was a feeling of total dominance. Before the rapes, I would always get a feeling of power and anger.
I would degrade women so 1 could feel there was a person of less worth than me.​

I could, of course, go on, but I sense you booting up the "date rape" dodge, so let's go to that chestnut directly. This is from an excellent study called: Understanding the Predatory Nature of Sexual Violence. Many snippets:

Terms such as “acquaintance rape” and “date rape” emerged and took hold. Unfortunately, these new terms have created a new mythology about rape. The term “date rape,” which has become woven into the fabric of public discourse about sexual violence, carries with it the connotation of “rape lite.” Victims of date rape are typically viewed as less harmed than victims of stranger rape; and “date rapists” are typically viewed as less serious offenders, and frankly less culpable than stranger rapists. Date rape is often viewed more in traditionally civil than in traditionally criminal terms: as an unfortunate encounter in which the two parties share culpability because of too much alcohol and too little clear communication.

One of the consequences of this new mythology of date rape is that there has been very little, if any, cross-communication between the study of date rape – a literature typically based in, and focused on college campuses – and the long established literature on sex offenders and sexual predators. In fact, in the author’s personal experience, there is typically considerable resistance within civilian universities to the use of the term “sex offender” when referring to the students who perpetrate acts of sexual violence on campuses. This resistance is one of the legacies of the term, “date rape,” and it has served to obscure one of the unpleasant facts about sexual violence in the college environment: that just as in the larger community, the majority of this violence is committed by predatory individuals who tend to be serial and multi-faceted offenders.
...
Research on sex offenders spans many decades and has contributed much to our understanding of the behavior and characteristics of rapists, their underlying motivations, and the developmental antecedents of sex offending. Historically, one of the failings of this research literature is that it has been based exclusively on the study of captured, and typically incarcerated offenders. This is understandable – it is difficult to study sex offenders who have not been identified by the criminal justice system – but it carries with it potentially significant limitations. Since the vast majority of rapes are never reported, and the majority of rapists are never prosecuted, the largest population of rapists – those responsible for the vast majority of rape – were historically left out of the research literature. This limitation of the literature has been partially corrected in recent years with the study of “non-incarcerated” rapists (see below), which tends to show a convergence of findings with the older literature on incarcerated offenders. The study of incarcerated rapists has produced notable and enduring findings about the perpetrators of sexual violence.

One of the most important contributions made by the study of incarcerated sex offenders was the clarification of the role of sexuality in the perpetration of rape. Since rape involves sexual behavior, it was long believed to be primarily motivated by sexual impulse; deviant sexual impulse, but sexual impulse nonetheless. This confusion of context with motivation was clarified mainly by the work of Nicholas Groth, who published a typology of rapists in the 1970’s. Groth labeled each type based on the principle motivation manifested by the rapists in that group.

The two primary and numerically largest types identified by Groth were the “power” rapist and the “anger” rapist. The power rapist was motivated by his need to control and dominate his victim, and inversely, to avoid being controlled by her. The anger rapist was motivated by resentment and a general hostility towards women, and was more prone to inflicting gratuitous violence in the course of a rape. Not surprisingly, these types were rarely found in pure form. Most rapists were actually blends of power and anger motivations; however, a predominance of one or the other was often discernible.

The third and (thankfully) numerically far smaller type was the sadistic rapist. This rapist was motivated by the sexual gratification he experienced when he inflicted pain on his victim. The sadistic rapist has become a staple of the American media, but these, once again, extremely rare cases.
...
Perhaps the most sobering data that have emerged from the study of incarcerated rapists are the sheer numbers of victims attacked by the average rapist. Most rapists who are prosecuted are convicted on a single count of rape. However, when researchers have granted immunity to offenders in exchange fora truthful accounting of their sex offending history the reality of rape emerges. In one study, the average number of victims for each rapist was seven, and in another study it was 11. A similar picture has emerged from research emanating from intensive sex offender management programs. Offenders tend to have very lengthy offending careers, beginning in adolescence and often spanning several decades. By the time they are captured – if they are captured – they have often victimized scores or even hundred’s of individuals.
...
In the realm of adult sexual violence, these revelations spawned new, and ultimately unfortunate terms, such as “date rape.” Much of this research was focused on college populations, not only because of their convenience, but because college students fall within the age range of maximum vulnerability to sexual violence – 18 to 24 years. 9

As this new generation of victimization research was disseminated, it revealed with increasing clarity an enormous gap in the research on sex offenders. There were studies of incarcerated rapists, but there was almost no research on the men who were actually committing the vast majority of rape – non-stranger rapists whose victims rarely report, and who were almost never
subject to prosecution.

This gap began to close with research that began in the mid-1980’s, and that focused on non-incarcerated rapists. Researchers discovered that it was possible to gather accurate data from these men because they did not view themselves as rapists. They shared the very widespread belief that rapists were knife-wielding men in ski masks who attacked strangers; since they did not fit that description, they were not rapists and their behavior was not rape. This has allowed researchers to study the motivations, behaviors and background characteristics of these so-called “undetected rapists.”

Motivations and Characteristics

Many of the motivational factors that were identified in incarcerated rapists have been shown to apply equally to undetected rapists. When compared to men who do not rape, these undetected rapists are measurably more angry at women, more motivated by the need to dominate and control women, more impulsive and disinhibited in their behavior, more hyper-masculine in their beliefs and attitudes, less empathic and more antisocial.

In the course of 20 years of interviewing these undetected rapists, in both research and forensic settings, it has been possible for me to distill some of the common characteristics of the modus operandi of these sex offenders. These undetected rapists:

• are extremely adept at identifying “likely” victims, and testing prospective victims’ boundaries;
• plan and premeditate their attacks, using sophisticated strategies to groom their victims for attack, and to isolate them physically;
• use “instrumental” not gratuitous violence; they exhibit strong impulse control and use only as much violence as is needed to terrify and coerce their victims into submission;
• use psychological weapons – power, control, manipulation, and threats – backed up by physical force, and almost never resort to weapons such as knives or guns;
• use alcohol deliberately to render victims more vulnerable to attack, or completely unconscious.​

There's much much more, of course, but back to your sophistry:

Sometimes the guy is just horny and fails to control himself or doesn't care the harm he is doing (without that harm being his motivation).

Read what you just wrote. You are literally arguing that "horniness" is some sort of impossible to resist force that just takes over and makes the rapist act without control. So it's really the rapist that is being raped, is that it? By "horniness"?

See above about psychopathological control debunking.

Same could be said of theft. Sometimes people steal just for the perverse thrill they get from stealing.

Dig deeper. What is causing the "perverse thrill" they get from stealing? What is it about the act that is giving them a "perverse thrill"?

Nevermind. Just consider it rhetorical.