Rape is of course a social evil in the sense that it is symptomatic of something deeply wrong with our society. Our male-dominated society promotes attitudes that serve to condone and normalise rape and other forms of sexual violence while blaming the victims of it. Rape is much more common than many people think and is not just carried out by a few crazed maniacs who jump out of bushes at night.
As a utilitarian seeking to maximize happiness of society, the trauma and damage that rape imparts on its victim greatly exceeds any possible benefit. I'd guess we'll see a VAST majority of people agree. I'd be very interested to hear an argument to the contrary - the questions with seemingly obvious answers can often lead to interesting points being raised.
Rape is a an evil. Because, raping means to have sequel intercourse forcibly without acceptance of both man and woman. Whereas prostitution is not an evil as it is sex appeal accepted both by man and woman. That's why prostitution is considered legal in Germany and other countries. There rapists must be punished but not the ones who haven't raped that is had sex by prostitution. Support me to stop rapes in India! Join me: www.facebook.com/helloorganism
Few argue the immoral motivation behind rape. It is a hurtful crime that often leaves victims scarred for lives. The term "evil", however, is subjective. Evil implies that it is inherent. People are not born to commit rape, however. They choose to commit rape, which means that by definition it cannot be an "evil." Rather, it is a very unfortunate, harmful crime.
If rape is the sexual violation of a woman (without her consent, although this is what the word violation implies), it does not need a particular society to explain or account for it. It would hold true for any sexual intercourse of this kind, whether it had to do with the last male and female standing on Earth or with one in any given society.
Does the term "social" mean that society "creates" rapists? Society may accept the practice (hyper male-controlled society), although it is hypothetically accurate to assume that a male can also be raped by another male, or a female.
For example a King had the right to sleep with every woman in the kingdom, but no one would dream of calling it rape. But not "calling it a rape" does not negate the fact that it took place (according to the definition of rape) Moreover rape can not be taken as something social or customary having its roots in the society that one lives in. It is something that people either accept as taking place or not. A person can justify himself by saying "That's what everyone is doing", but this does not change the fact that he committed rape, it only provides an excuse or justification for his action.
Accepting that rape didn't take place a social evil.
Rape is undoubtedly terrible, and I think that in most cases rapists could justifiably be considered evil (at least in a loose definition of the word). However, the phrase "social evil" means something different. A "social evil" is something "evil" that is created or exacerbated by society. An example was child labor when it was legal. Society created the need for children to work long hours in factories, and I believe that social reformers were entirely correct in considering child labor a social evil, and demanding that society take steps to end it. Rape is different. I do not think, as the cover picture for this topic suggests, that the western world has a "rape culture", and therefore, I would not consider rape a "social evil" because it is not engendered by society.
In the context your saying it..It absolutely is evil!..But in the religious sense of the word, I can't help but associate the word "evil"with hell..Evil seems to imply some sort of ominous transcendent force at work.IMO such things don't exsist.I think abhorrent is a more applicable word for malicious behavior..I'm just technically speaking of course..It doesn't bother me though, I have no qualms with someone referring to a rapist as a "evil son of a b***h"